Is the answer to how did something come out of nothing that it is still nothing?
The atheist may argue in relation to how the universe came to be is that nothing
becomes something. He may even say that the universe still adds up to nothing or
something just a hair's breadth from nothing. The universe is virtually
still nothing. If that is true it would refute the idea of a creator as in
a loving God for nothing by default is meaningless. It is would be that
than which a more meaningless cannot be possible.
On Being, Peter Atkins, Oxford, New York, 2011 page 12
says, "The total electrical charge of the universe is zero, but there are
positively charged and negatively charged entities within it. We know that the
total charge is zero, for otherwise the enormous strength of the interaction
between unbalanced charges would have blasted it apart as soon as it had formed.
For charges to exist and for the overall charge to be zero, there must be an
equal number of positive and negative charges."
Page 17 tells us that "the initial endowment of energy at the creation was
exactly zero, and the total energy has remained fixed at that value for all
time...What we see around us is in fact nothing, but Nothing that has been
separated into opposites to give, thereby the appearance of something". Atkins
shows that the question, "Why is there something rather than nothing?"
contradicts physics. It should be, "Why is there the appearance of something
when there is nothing?" One thing is for sure, the answer cannot be God. An
honest God would not put us into the middle of all that false appearance. To
worship a deceiving God is to commit yourself to deception. There was no
creation - only a separation. That is the bottom line.
Religion may take comfort however in Atkins statement that, "No one knows
whether the total of all the contributions to the total energy of the universe
is in fact exactly zero, but the near cancellation of the positive contributions
by the negative (gravitational) contribution is highly suggestive" (page 16,
ibid). He means how the material things around us become 0 if they meet dark
matter. It is two opposite charges meeting and the result is 0 or non-existence.
But if it is not exactly zero but almost zero, does it really make much of a
difference? If something can come from almost nothing then surely it might come
from nothing too? To come from a nothing that is a something means that if
anything comes from it then it partly comes from nothing.
"Why is there something rather than nothing?" is a fundamentalist anti-science
and pro-theology question. It should be, "Why is there the appearance of
something when there is nothing?" The popularity of the something rather than
nothing question is a clear sign of how religion keeps people out of touch with
science and truth.
The question is fundamentalist for it is the wrong question. It opposes the fact
that science demonstrates that God is unnecessary as a physical explanation for
why things exist. It asks why there are physical things when there might have
been none of them to try and force a person into thinking there is a
non-physical explanation. But that assumes the non-physical can make the
physical and nobody knows that. The question at best promotes agnosticism. It's
use by religion to promote God is an abuse.
"Why is there something rather than nothing?" asks what the purpose of life is
and is guilty of assuming that there must be an overall purpose. It offends
against the scientific rule, "Question all things and doubt all things." The
universe developed its own purposes. But there is no overall purpose.
Atkins, P. On Being (Oxford, New York) 2011
Bibliography
Atkins, P. On Being (Oxford, New York) 2011
Griffiths, R. Ed. Hitchens vs Blair, Is Religion a Force for Good in the World?
(Black Swan, 2011)
McGrath, A. Bridge-Building (Inter-Varsity Press, 1954)
Newman, R. Questioning Evangelism (Kregel Publications, 2007)
Reid, A. Apologetics (Moore Theological College, 1996)
Stannard, R. Science & Belief, The Big Issues (Lion, 2012)
Vernon, M. The Big Questions, God (Quercus, 2012)
Warfield, B B, On the Antiquity and the Unity of the Human Race (The Princeton
Theological Review, 1911)
