The creators of the world were closer to men than to gods according to John
Gribbin. (astrophysicist)
The following if from an article on the LHC, or Large Hadron Collider.
The argument over whether the universe has a creator, and who that
might be, is among the oldest in human history. But amid the raging arguments
between believers and skeptics, one possibility has been almost ignored, the
idea that the universe around us was created by people very much like
ourselves, using devices not too dissimilar to those available to scientists
today.
As with much else
in modern physics, the idea involves particle acceleration, the kind of thing
that goes on in the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland
However, to create a new universe would require a machine only slightly
more powerful than the LHC and there is every chance that our own universe may
have been manufactured in this way.
This is possible for two reasons. First, black holes may as science
fiction aficionados will be well aware act as gateways to other regions of
space and time. Second, because of the curious fact that gravity has negative
energy, it takes no energy to make a universe. Despite the colossal amount of
energy contained in every atom of matter, it is precisely balanced by the
negativity of gravity.
Black holes, moreover, are relatively easy to make. For any object,
there is a critical radius, called the Schwarzschild radius, at which its mass
will form a black hole. The Schwarzschild radius for the Sun is about two
miles, 1/200,000th of its current width; for the Earth to become a black hole,
it would have to be squeezed into a ball with a radius of one centimeter.
The black holes that could be created in a particle accelerator would be
far smaller: tiny masses squeezed into incredibly tiny volumes. But because of
gravity's negative energy, it doesn't matter how small such holes are: they
still have the potential to inflate and expand in their own dimensions (rather
than gobbling up our own).
Such expansion was precisely what our universe did
in the Big Bang, when it suddenly exploded from a tiny clump of matter into a
fully-fledged cosmos.
Alan Guth of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
first proposed the now widely accepted idea of cosmic inflation that the
starting point of the Big Bang was far smaller, and its expansion far more
rapid, than had been assumed. He has investigated the technicalities of
"the creation of universes in the laboratory", and concluded that the
laws of physics do, in principle, make it possible.
The big question is whether that has already happened, is our universe a
designer universe? By this, I do not mean a God figure, an "intelligent
designer" monitoring and shaping all aspects of life. Evolution by natural
selection, and all the other processes that produced our planet and the life on
it, are sufficient to explain how we got to be the way we are, given the laws
of physics that operate in our universe.
However, there is still scope for an intelligent designer of universes
as a whole. Modern physics suggests that our universe is one of many, part of a
"multiverse" where different regions of space and time may have
different properties (the strength of gravity may be stronger in some and
weaker in others). If our universe was made by a technologically advanced
civilization in another part of the multiverse, the designer may have been
responsible for the Big Bang, but nothing more.
If such designers make universes by manufacturing black holes, the only
way to do it that we are aware of there are three levels at which they might
operate. The first is just to manufacture black holes, without influencing the
laws of physics in the new universe. Humanity is nearly at this level, which
Gregory Benford's novel Cosm puts in an entertaining context: an American
researcher finds herself, after an explosion in a particle accelerator, with a
new universe on her hands, the size of a baseball.
The second level, for a slightly more advanced civilization, would
involve nudging the properties of the baby universes in a certain direction. It
might be possible to tweak the black holes in such a way that the force of
gravity was a little stronger than in the parent universe, without the
designers being able to say exactly how much stronger.
The third level, for a very advanced civilization, would involve the
ability to set precise parameters, thereby designing it in detail. An analogy
would be with designer babies - instead of tinkering with DNA to get a perfect
child, a scientists might tinker with the laws of physics to get a perfect
universe. Crucially, though, it would not be possible in any of these cases -
even at the most advanced level - for the designers to interfere with the baby
universes once they had formed. From the moment of its own Big Bang, each
universe would be on its own.
This might sound far-fetched, but the startling thing about this theory
is how likely it is to happen and to have happened already. All that is
required is that evolution occurs naturally in the multiverse until, in at
least one universe, intelligence reaches roughly our level. From that seed
point, intelligent designers create enough universes suitable for evolution,
which bud off their own universes, that universes like our own (in other words,
suitable for intelligent life) proliferate rapidly, with
"unintelligent" universes coming to represent a tiny fraction of the
whole multiverse. It therefore becomes overwhelmingly likely that any given
universe, our own included, would be designed rather than "natural".
While the intelligence required to do the job may be (slightly) superior
to ours, it is of a kind that is recognizably similar to our own, rather than
that of an infinite and incomprehensible God. And the most likely reason for
such an intelligence to make universes is the same for doing things like
climbing mountains, or studying the nature of subatomic particles because we
can. A civilization that has the technology to make baby universes would surely
find the temptation irresistible. And if the intelligences are anything like
our own, there would be an overwhelming temptation at the higher levels of
universe design to improve upon the results.
This idea provides the best resolution yet to the puzzle Albert Einstein
used to raise, that "the most incomprehensible thing about the Universe is
that it is comprehensible". The universe is comprehensible to the human
mind because it was designed, at least to some extent, by intelligent beings
with minds similar to our own.
The great British astronomer Fred Hoyle suggested that the laws of
physics were so uniquely conducive to human existence that the universe must be
"a put-up job". I believe he was right: the universe was indeed set
up to provide a home for life, even if it evolved through a process of natural
selection, with no need for outside interference. It isn't that man was created
in God's image - rather that our universe was created, more or less, in the image
of its designers.
Well, that said,
there is but one question, in what universe did the designers live before they
created our universe in a “collider”. That is one question that will never be
answered and so we populate our thinking with God like entities, at least until
we find the answer to that question. We do not have the intellectual capacity
to make the determination of in what did everything reside, which petri dish,
which test tube and where. Perhaps the theory of time not being linear but circular
is the answer. (we created ourselves) Perhaps the theory of a God like creature
is the answer. Perhaps we are to never know. Either way, man’s religions are a
point of extreme division and fighting over it, or refusing to see beyond what
a particular secular body says, is being narrow minded, gullible, and
manipulated by those who wish to be important.