Deus ex machina at CERN
Fortunately someone turned off Dad's new
flat-screen before I could draw my gun. I guess my family knows me well
enough to predict my reaction to the CNN headline about how "Science" might have found "proof of God" but my Colt Mustang .380 was safely locked out of reached in the car anyway.
If
you've read my rants long enough you probably know my frustration with
arguments that attempt to prove some concept of God since any of them,
even if they weren't fallacious, don't argue for any one of the
infinitely possible concepts of any deity over another, but of course,
CNN was just being coy so that the viewers wouldn't tune out during the
endless commercial breaks. If we had waited long enough we would have
found out that they were only speculating further about a possible July
4th announcement by CERN that they have observed a Higgs
Boson; that thing not one person in 10,000 is able to describe, but
nonetheless knows as the "God Particle." What must he weigh if he's
composed of such heavy particles?
I've often wondered why a incomprehensibly small yet
massive particle might have anything more or less to do with God than
another. God after all seems to exist in some massless
form; in some formless, ineffable state that can interact with matter
and energy, but is composed of some undefinable, self- negating,
insubstantial non particulate substance one calls "pure spirit" and is
therefore free from the constraints imposed by the universe on matter
and energy. Does not God also claim neutrinos and neutrons as well? If we create such particles artificially, aren't we creating gods, or at least "godstuff?"
The Higgs
particle, if it exists, is postulated to explain the property we call
mass in the classical model of physics. If gods have mass, it's hard to
allow them divine properties if the universe is consistent and it's
also hard to explain how some subatomic particle pertains exclusively to
Krishna rather than Yahweh or Puff the Magic Dragon and maybe harder to
explain why any god could not create a universe without inertia if he
wanted to. Can a boson be a trinity or a pantheistic infinity? Crank
up the accelerator because inquiring minds want to know.
If it were up to me, I'd have called it the ego particle but if it had been up to the Nobel Prize winner and Director of Fermilab, Leon Lederman who coined the regrettable term in his pop-Science book The God Particle and launched the meme that sunk a billion minds, it would have been called The Goddamn Particle but for his editor's objections. How I wish that editor had had more courage and that we'd been spared the endlessly dimwitted godbothering about some subatomic particle being "proof of God."
Of course those who are prematurely jubilating
today about how science proves God -- those disciples of those who have
been battling against science for centuries, aren't going to accept the
actual scientific proof of the age of "the world" or anything else that challenges their celebrated certainties and I doubt they'll feel remorse about the closing of Fermilab's
accelerator for lack of funds, giving the opportunity for divine
revelation to foreigners. If those those atheistic, socialistic geeks,
buried with their witches circle under the soil of Europe were the ones
to prove that the Bible and all our holy Christian beliefs in all their
wholly different forms are true, so much the better.
While I know how much you hate silly references that feed the ignorant masses more fodder for all their "God" complexes, I have always been under the impression that "God Particle" is NOT a scientific designation but a pop term coined by an author to sell books and then latched on to by the media. The Higgs boson is supposed to be an elementary particle that adds mass to spontaneous creation in nature or something like that. Rather than prove the exisitence of God it would prove the possiblity of evolution.
ReplyDeleteSo the science popularizers said, "Behold, let there be a Higgs Boson that shalt be called a 'God particle'" and thus, there was a God particle, and the science popularizers saw that the coinage was good. Then, the science popularizers said mass for the masses, and a new denomination was borne henceforth known as the 'Higgs Morons" (not to be confused with the religion of Mitt Rmoney!).
ReplyDeleteActually there are many quite intelligent people who believe in a supreme creator.
ReplyDeleteMost of them likely don't attend a church.
RN,
ReplyDeleteThere are indeed, but there are also people so desperate to prove the unprovable that they say some silly things. It's not so much in the idea of a purpose or a creator that they run off the tracks, but in the idea that it's absolutely certain that the cause of existence wears size 11 sandals and thinks a cheeseburger is an abomination -- and damn you if you disagree!
Agreed.
DeleteAnd by the way, I'm still surprised that nobody is claiming that the three valence quarks that make up, say, a Proton, proves that God is a trinity.
ReplyDeleteThree quarks for master mark -- what more proof can we ask for?
Well, I don't see what the Higgs boson has to do with the undeniable existence of the Dinosaur Gods who dwell in perpetual ease upon Sacred Mount Gondwana. Humans keep searching for the truth when it's been clear at least since the Devonion who's really in charge of Mother Earth. The Dinosaurs, that's who!
ReplyDeleteAs of a few moments ago, it's been reported that CERN has observed a particle that fits the description. I'm not ready to question my faith in M theory and actually I don't know if the Higgs thingy actually challenges it. Anyway, I'm more interested to know whether at last we'll be able to explain the mysterious "dark" matter clogging up the galaxy then anything else - or rather to shed some light on the matter, if you don't mind such carrion metaphors.
ReplyDeleteWe really can't get into theological proofs without locating Fogg's Bos'n and I've given him the week off.
Mister Higgs, he dead. A Hadron for the old Hadrosaur.