Sunday, September 28, 2014

Reforming the World — We Must Try

'Kids these days! Nobody takes responsibility! Back in my day, nobody tried blaming the other guy!'

I've been hearing variations on that complaint for more than a half-century now. I started wondering if it was true in my teens. By now, I'm pretty sure that it's not: partly because now I remember the 'good old days:' and like I've said before, they weren't.

One of 'Those Crazy Kids:' Five Decades Later

I was one of "those kids" in the late '60s and early '70s.

Some of us were lazy bums, and others were only too eager to blame our parents, the government, or anyone else, for our problems.

But others were "irresponsible" only in the sense that we wouldn't accept the status quo.

That attitude didn't appeal to folks who believed in buying stuff they didn't need, with money they didn't have, to impress people they didn't like.

We thought we could reform the world: and certain that we had to try.

Five decades later, some of our reforms succeeded. Others didn't turn out as I had hoped. Some of my generation are part of the new establishment.

Me? I still think we can reform the world. I am certain that we must try.

Social Justice

Folks have been thinking about justice, rights, and society, for a long time. Philosophers like Plato and Aristotle generally get credit for first discussing such things, about two dozen centuries back.

But more than a thousand years before Plato and Aristotle, leaders like Hammurabi started writing law codes.

Babylonian law was an effort to define justice: balancing the severity of an offense with an equally-severe punishment.

The Code of Hammurabi's death penalty for robbery (Law #22) seems harsh — partly, I think, because we've made some progress in the last 3,700 years toward building truly just societies.

And we have a great deal more work to do in that direction.

The phrase "social justice" apparently comes from Catholics like Luigi Taparelli — in the 1840s.

Taparelli's "Civiltà Cattolica" says that capitalist and socialist theories don't pay enough attention to ethics. I'm inclined to agree with him. (February 27, 2012; March 13, 2010)

After becoming a Catholic, I had a lot of catching up to do. Most of what I'd heard or read about the Church was either several centuries out of date: or simply wrong.

One of my happy surprises was discovering that social justice, Catholic style, makes sense. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1928-1942 is a pretty good place to start learning about the Church's social teachings. I put links to more resources at the end of this post.

'I Love Humanity...'

A sincere desire to make the world a better place can slip into an 'I love humanity, it's people I can't stand' attitude: and I've been over that before. (October 15, 2012)

The basic rules are simple:
This "love" can't be an abstract attitude of social concern. Luke 10:30-37 shows that we're supposed to do something about our beliefs.

That's where personal responsibility comes in.

'It's Not Fair!'

Today's reading from the Old Testament start with a familiar complaint:
"You say, 'The LORD'S way is not fair!' Hear now, house of Israel: Is it my way that is unfair, or rather, are not your ways unfair?
(Ezekiel 18:25)
That chapter of Ezekiel starts with a proverb about grapes and teeth:
"Thus the word of the LORD came to me: Son of man,

"1 what is the meaning of this proverb that you recite in the land of Israel: 'Fathers have eaten green grapes, thus their children's teeth are on edge'?

"As I live, says the Lord GOD: I swear that there shall no longer be anyone among you who will repeat this proverb in Israel."
(Ezekiel 18:1-3)
The footnote explains that the 'teeth on edge' proverb was used by folks claiming that they were being punished for something their ancestors had done: not their own wrongdoings. You'll see the same proverb mentioned in Jeremiah 31:29.

Looks like trying to shift responsibility goes back at least 26 centuries. Now that I think of it, Adam tried blaming his wife: and God. (August 29, 2014)

While I'm thinking of it — today's readings are Ezekiel 18:25-28, Philippians 2:1-11, and Matthew 21:28-32.

Faith, Works, and Perspective

The Gospel reading, Matthew 21:28-32, is the one about two sons: one who said "I will not," but later decided to do his job anyway; the other, who said "yes, sir," but didn't.

Jesus went on to remind the chief priests and the elders that "tax collectors and prostitutes" had listened to John and accepting what he said:
"25 When John came to you in the way of righteousness, you did not believe him; but tax collectors and prostitutes did. Yet even when you saw that, you did not later change your minds and believe him."(Matthew 21: 32)
I could cherry-pick that verse from Matthew, and a few others, and decide that all I have to do is 'really believe.' That would be a bad idea.

Faith is important, but "faith without works is dead." (James 2:14-26; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1815)
"You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.

"Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?

"You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works."
(James 2:19-22)
I can't 'work my way into Heaven.' My salvation depends on my Lord. But I can't 'believe' my way into Heaven, either.

Where I spend eternity depends on my faith and works. (Catechism, 1021, 1814-1816, 1987-1995)

Okay: I'm supposed to act as if my beliefs mean something; I can't shift responsibility to my parents, ancestors, society, whatever; and social justice is important.

What can I, as an individual, do to end world hunger, broker a lasting peace in the Middle East, and cure the common cold? I'm one man, living in central Minnesota, with a computer and an Internet connection: so the answer is — not much.

I can, however, do what is possible for someone in my position: acting as if God matters, and working at conforming my will to God's.

As a youth, I realized that reforming the world would take time: and that anything I did would be only a small part of the work. Since then, I've learned more about humanity's back-story.

I think we'll still be supporting what is good, and changing what is not, when the United Nations Charter seems as remote as the Code of Hammurabi does today.

I don't think we'll have a perfect society in the 57th century, but we do have a reasonable hope of building a better world. And that's another topic.

More of my take on faith, hope, and social justice:


Friday, September 26, 2014

Schrodinger's Cat(s); and Gravitational Waves, Revisited

Quantum mechanics makes more sense if the Many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is right, and we're still not sure whether BICEP 2 detected gravitational waves: or polarized dust.
  1. Who Killed Schrodinger's Cat?
  2. Fine-Tuning BICEP Results
  3. "Ashes From an Exploding Star"
If you've been here before, and know why I don't see a conflict between science and faith, feel free to skip straight to "Who Killed Schrodinger's Cat?" (No animals were harmed in the writing of this post)

Or click to something else online, go for a walk, take a coffee break, whatever.

Getting a Grip About Truth

Basically, I don't think we have to choose between either believing that God conforms to Ussher's chronology or that religion is stupid. (September 21, 2014; July 15, 2014)

Since I'm a Catholic, I believe that God created, and is creating, everything. Since I also believe that God isn't a liar, and that truth cannot contradict truth: honest research cannot hurt faith. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 144, 159)

Sometimes what we learn upsets just about everything we thought we knew about how the universe works. That's been happening a lot lately.


We may not live in the only space-time continuum. Some of what we're learning makes more sense if reality includes more than one "universe."

This isn't the sort of 'parallel universe' scenario in "Invasion from an Alternate Dimension!..." or "Prisoners of the Lost Universe." I've enjoyed stories like "In a Mirror, Darkly:" but reality is probably much stranger. (April 2, 2013)

This week's first item is about a branching multiverse, or many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. It's one of the more pedestrian multiple-universe hypotheses, since each new branch is simply a continuation of its 'root.'

One of my favorites is the Mathematical universe hypothesis, or "Ultimate Ensemble," where every possible variation on reality actually exists.

I think scientists and mathematicians who found objections to Max Tegmark's hypothesis make good points. If nothing else, it'd probably be difficult or impossible to confirm that such an Ensemble exists.

On the other hand, I suspect that Tegmark may be right: or at least close to the truth. For example, physical "constants" like the speed of light in a vacuum and the elementary charge seem to be arbitrary. (April 2, 2013)

Theoretical physicists, cosmologists, and mathematicians have worked out internally-consistent continua more-or-less like the familiar three-dimensions-plus-time one we live in — with more or fewer physical dimensions, and different physical constants.

For us, universe-building is a strictly 'paper and pencil' exercise. We can't actually make another universe. God? Well: "...whatever God wills is done." (Psalms 115:3)

26 Centuries in 119 Words

Two dozen centuries back, Anaximander's celestial spheres agreed pretty well with what we can see of the universe.

The Pythagorean astronomical system was a little close to how things really work. By the 1st century AD, most natural philosophers had agreed that Earth was a sphere.

The Copernican model wasn't exactly a new idea in the 1500s. I'll get back to Aristotle, God, and getting a grip in a bit.

Johannes Kepler's math provided Isaac Newton with a foundation for his theory of universal gravitation.

By the end of the 19th century, other scientists noticed that light from some "nebulae" resembled starlight.

A little less than a century ago, astronomers identified "nebulae" like the M81 as other "island universes." (September 19, 2014; July 15, 2014)

Unscrewing the Inscrutable

In physics, quantum mechanics describes how things act at an atomic a sub-atomic scale. Unlike the classical mechanics Newton described, quantum mechanics is anything but intuitive.

We're used to seeing and touching things that seem to be either energy or matter, waves or particles. For things big enough for us to see or touch, that's a pretty good model.

Scientists noticed that light acts like waves (1803) and particles (1877). Since then, we've learned that tiny bits of matter, like the parts of an atom, act like particles and waves.

Then there's the joke about the Quantum Motel: after staying there, you either loved or hated it. If you think that's funny — you may find stuff under Background at the end of this post interesting. Or not.

Quantum mechanics involves statements like "φ = h f0," and isn't something most folks need to know about. But if scientists hadn't been trying to unscrew the inscrutable of subatomic physics, we wouldn't have tech like transistors and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).

1. Who Killed Schrodinger's Cat?

(From Science Photo Library, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("Schrodinger's thought experiment was designed to illustrate problems with one interpretation of quantum physics"
(BBC News))
"Brian Cox: 'Multiverse' makes sense"
BBC News (September 23, 2014)

"The presenter and physicist Brian Cox says he supports the idea that many universes can exist at the same time.

"The idea may sound far-fetched but the 'many worlds' concept is the subject of serious debate among physicists.

"It is a particular interpretation of quantum mechanics - which describes the often counter-intuitive behaviour of energy and matter at small scales....

"...In a famous thought experiment devised by the Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger, a cat sealed inside a box can be both alive and dead at the same time. Or any combination of different probabilities of being both dead and alive.

"This is at odds with most common perceptions of the way the world is. And Schrodinger's experiment was designed to illustrate the problems presented by one version of quantum mechanics known as the Copenhagen interpretation.

"This proposes that when we observe a system, we force it to make a choice. So, for example, when you open the box with Schrodinger's cat inside, it emerges dead or alive, not both...."
By now, a music group may have called themselves the Quantum Mechanics: it sounds appropriate for techno. Or maybe not.

Turns out, Quantum Mechanix is "a Los Angeles-based creative studio and developer of screen-accurate replicas, collectibles, apparel, artwork, and digital apps and games inspired by entertainment's most beloved shows and movies."

That's what their website says, anyway. They're working on a Firefly-based online role playing game, that's quite enough name-dropping for one post, and that's another topic. Topics.

An Infinitely Branching Universe?

(From Christian Schirm, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
("The quantum-mechanical 'Schrödinger's cat' paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point; the cat is both alive and dead, even before the box is opened, but the 'alive' and 'dead' cats are in different branches of the universe, both of which are equally real, but which do not interact with each other."
(Bryce Seligman DeWitt, via Wikipedia))
"....'That there's an infinite number of universes sounds more complicated than there being one,' Prof Cox told the programme. [The Life Scientific, BBC Radio 4 (September 23, 2014)]

" 'But actually, it's a simpler version of quantum mechanics. It's quantum mechanics without wave function collapse... the idea that by observing something you force a system to make a choice.'

"Accepting the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics means also having to accept that things can exist in several states a the same time.

"But this leads to a another question: Why do we perceive only one world, not many?

"A single digital photograph can be made from many different images superimposed on one another. Perhaps the single reality that we perceive is also multi-layered...."
(BBC News)
In a way, it doesn't matter if there are an infinite number of universes — with a new one branching each time a subatomic particle anywhere changes its state: or doesn't.

The only one that matters to me is the one I'm in "now," since what happens in other branches can't affect the one I'm in.

That's assuming that the branching, or many-worlds interpretation, of quantum mechanics is accurate.

A century or so from now, scientists may have learned that the many worlds interpretation is an elegant, plausible, and basically correct, model of how reality works. Or they may have learned that it's as accurate as the phogiston theory of combustion.

I'd be more than a little surprised if we had all the answers about quantum mechanics today: particularly since it's been little more than a century since scientists confirmed that atoms and molecules exist. (Brownian motion, Wikipedia)

Predictably, the new ideas in quantum mechanics have upset quite a few folks.

Quantum Gears and Philosophical Implications

Under "Philosophical implications," the Wikipedia page about quantum mechanics says that "...the many counter-intuitive aspects and results of quantum mechanics have provoked strong philosophical debates...."

One of the big problems many folks, including scientists, had with quantum mechanics was probability.

When the basics of quantum mechanics started hitting the fan, Newtonian physics was about two centuries old.

Scientists had gotten used to the idea that the universe operated according to physical laws which, in principle, would allow someone to predict exactly what would happen next. The clockwork universe idea is, in its own way, comforting. But that doesn't mean that it's real. (June 8, 2009)

Oddly enough, quantum gears are real, or could be.

2. Fine-Tuning BICEP Results

(From NSF, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("BICEP's South Pole telescope targeted what the team hoped was a relatively clean part of the sky"
(BBC News))
"Cosmic inflation: BICEP 'underestimated' dust problem"
Jonathan Amos, BBC News (September 22, 2014)

"One of the biggest scientific claims of the year has received another set-back.

"In March, the US BICEP team said it had found a pattern on the sky left by the rapid expansion of space just fractions of a second after the Big Bang.

"The astonishing assertion was countered quickly by others who thought the group may have underestimated the confounding effects of dust in our own galaxy.

"That explanation has now been boosted by a new analysis from the European Space Agency's (Esa) Planck satellite.

"In a paper published on the arXiv pre-print server, Planck's researchers find that the part of the sky being observed by the BICEP team contained significantly more dust than it had assumed.

"This new information does not mean the original claim is now dead. Not immediately, anyway...."
We're pretty sure that this universe started very abruptly, some 13,798,000,000 years ago, give or take 37,000,000. (September 21, 2014)

Cosmic inflation apparently happened early in the first picosecond, after the strong force and electronuclear force separated, and before quarks and anti-quarks formed.

What scientists are learning about the first moments of this universe are similar, in a poetic sense, to God's actions in Genesis 1:3.

Since I'm a Christian, and a Catholic, I think folks who wrote medieval bestiaries had a point. God created, and is creating, everything: and this creation makes sense. (June 9, 2012)

But I don't assume that each creature has one particular symbolic meaning, apart from the sort of qualities we use for metaphors: 'dog-like loyalty,' for example. And that's yet another topic.

Where was I? Cosmic inflation, picoseconds, quarks. Right.

Retreating "Nebulae"

About a hundred years back, an astronomer noticed that some "nebulae" were moving away from us: fast. About a decade later, most astronomers agreed that spiral nebulae were "island universes:" vast groups of stars, like our Milky Way.

We call them "galaxies" now, they come in clusters, and the other clusters are all moving away from Earth.

That would make sense, if Aristotle was right about Earth being in the middle of everything.

But — the Ancient Greek's fan base notwithstanding — Aristotle wasn't right about everything. The Catholic Church told scholars remember that God's God and Aristotle's not in 1277. (February 23, 2014)

Using mathematical tools like the FLRW metric and Friedmann equations, scientists learned that this universe is expanding.

Once they figured out how fast its expanding, they could work back to when it started, more than 13 billion years ago.

Galaxies, Quantum Entanglement, and the White-Juday Warp Field Generator

That raised more questions. Lots more questions. For one thing, places that haven't been near each other for billions of years are all at pretty much the same (average) temperature.

That shouldn't be possible, since information, heat, energy, or anything else can't travel faster than light. Well, almost anything. Maybe.

Quantum field entanglement may be a naturally-occurring example of information traveling faster than light. (May 3, 2013; January 17, 2014)

Artificial faster-than-light effects apparently don't take nearly as much energy as the original Alcubierre equations said.

The last I heard, NASA still had funding for the White-Juday warp field generator. It's strictly a lab test.

Best-case warp field strength with today's tech would be barely measurable. Decades, or maybe centuries from now — that's still another topic.(May 24, 2013; May 17, 2013)

Phlogiston and Picoseconds

Cosmic inflation is a pretty good way of explaining why the universe has the same temperature and other physical properties all over.

But phlogiston was a pretty good way of explaining combustion in 1667.

Around the 1780s, new tech and analysis showed that some metals gain mass when they burn: instead of getting lighter as the "phlogiston" escapes. Scientists who liked the phlogiston theory said that phlogiston must have negative mass, or at least was lighter than air.

By the end of that century, only a few chemists still used the term "phlogiston." Joseph Priestley, the inventor of soda water, was one of the phlogiston diehards. He also tried to combine theism, materialism, and determinism: with — ah — interesting results. Despite the name, by the way, he wasn't Catholic. At all.

The point is that cosmic inflation may be a pretty good description for what happened in the first picosecond of this universe.

Or, like phlogiston, new facts may show that cosmic inflation was a good idea that didn't reflect reality. (January 17, 2014)

Either way, I'm quite sure that there's a great deal more to learn about this universe.

Excitement, Thought, and Pulsars

(From Planck Collaboration, via BBC News, used w/o permission.)
("Planck's Northern (L) and Southern (R) sky projections. Note the parts of the sky that are clearer of dust (dark blue). The black box in the Southern projection is where BICEP looked"
(BBC News))
"...The BICEP and Planck groups are currently working on a joint assessment of the implications, and this will probably be released towards the end of the year.

"However, if the contention is eventually shown to be unsupportable with the available data, it will prove to be a major disappointment, especially after all the initial excitement and talk of Nobel Prizes.

"What BICEP (also known as BICEP2) claimed to have done was find the long-sought evidence for 'cosmic inflation'....

"...'It's possible, but the error in our measurement is quite high,' Planck scientist Dr Cécile Renault told BBC News.

" 'The conclusion really is that we need to analyse the data together - BICEP and Planck - to get the right cosmological [versus] galactic signal. It's really too early to say.'

"The American group had already downgraded confidence in its own result when it finally published a paper on the inflation claim in Physical Review Letters in June...."
(Jonathan Amos, BBC News)
I think the key phrase here is "had ... downgraded confidence in its own result...."

Scientists are human, and get excited like anyone else. Since they're scientists, though, they generally think before jumping to conclusions. The discovery of pulsars is a pretty good example:
"...When observations with another telescope confirmed the emission, it eliminated any sort of instrumental effects. At this point, Burnell notes of herself and Hewish that 'we did not really believe that we had picked up signals from another civilization, but obviously the idea had crossed our minds and we had no proof that it was an entirely natural radio emission. It is an interesting problem—if one thinks one may have detected life elsewhere in the universe, how does one announce the results responsibly?'..."
(Pulsar, Wikipedia)
The first pulsar pulsed at 1.33-second intervals: so thinking that it might be an artificial signal made sense. At the time, in 1967, the only naturally-occurring objects to produce that much energy were stars: and all stars were quite simply too big to pulse that fast.

When scientists found another pulsar, in another part of the sky, the odds that pulsars were natural phenomena went up. On the other hand, the second pulsar's period was different. Then more pulsars turned up, all over the part of the galaxy we can see: each pulsing at a different rate.

Eventually, scientists found that pulsars are rapidly-spinning neutron stars. But before they collected enough data to show that the things act like natural phenomena — I think there was a niggling suspicion that we might be looking at navigation beacons set up by a galaxy-spanning civilization.

Spinning Dust Grains

Getting back to the BICEP findings and downgraded results, it looks like the problem is dust.

The BICEP team knew that there's dust in interstellar space: but they hadn't taken what happens when those dust grains spin.
"...The main source of this inconvenient 'noise' is spinning dust grains.

"These countless particles become trapped and aligned in the magnetic fields that thread through our galaxy.

"As a consequence, these grains also emit their light with a directional quality, and this is capable of swamping any primordial background signal...."
(Jonathan Amos, BBC News)
That "directional quality" is polarization. Knowing how polarization works gave us polarized sunglasses and liquid-crystal displays (LCDs). Not taking polarization fully into account in their pre-publication analysis means - - - I'll get to that next.

3. "Ashes From an Exploding Star"

(From New Scientist, used w/o permission.)
("This plot shows the patch of the sky that BICEP2 observed (multicolored patch) and the giant loops detected by radio telescopes (blue lines)."
(New Scientist))
"Star dust casts doubt on recent big bang wave result"
Maggie McKee, New Scientist (April 15, 2014)

"An imprint left on ancient cosmic light that was attributed to ripples in spacetime – and hailed by some as the discovery of the century – may have been caused by ashes from an exploding star.

"In the most extreme scenario, the finding could suggest that what looked like a groundbreaking result was only a false alarm. Another possibility is that the stellar ashes could help bring the result in line with other cosmic observations. We should know which it is later this year, when researchers report new results from the European Space Agency's Planck satellite.

"On 17 March, researchers led by John Kovac of Harvard University announced that gravitational waves from the early universe had been found by a telescope called BICEP2 at the South Pole.

"The waves were said to be the 'smoking gun' evidence for the theory of inflation, which suggests that space expanded faster than the speed of light in the first moments after the universe's birth. The announcement sent shock waves through the physics world. 'I was so excited,' recalls Philipp Mertsch of Stanford University in California.
This article showed up about a month after the first public announcement of the BICEP data that I saw. The "ashes from an exploding star" is the polarized dust discussed in the BBC article. It's a rather poetic — and accurate — way of telling where the dust comes from.

Later on in the New Scientist article, Maggie McKee describes what the BICEP 2 team did to minimize effects of interstellar dust. They pointed their telescope well away from the Milky Way's plane: so it was looking part of the sky that's well away from the local galactic 'horizon.'

The BICEP 2 folks also took dust that they knew was there into account. What Stanford's Philipp Mertsch says they didn't do was look for, and avoid, dust shells from supernova remnants.

Magnetic field lines passing through these shells should, he said, get compressed and lined up: which would affect dust particles containing iron.

The University of Copenhagen in Denmark's Hao Liu led a team, including Mertsch, that plotted positions of several nearby supernova remnant shells. One of them goes through the middle of the BICEP 2 field of view.

I'm a bit disappointed that the BICEP 2 data isn't as conclusive as it seemed at first: but not terribly surprised.

For one thing, the BICEP team knew about interstellar dust, but hadn't been focusing their attention on supernova remnants. Hao Liu's team apparently had: and they had to analyze their data to confirm that one of the shells ran though BICEP 2's field of view.

For another — things take time.

Gravitational Waves: 98 Years and Counting

We've known that gravitational waves should exist since 1916. Less than a century later, we've got indirect evidence that they exist: and more theoretical reasons for thinking that they do.

As a Wikipedia page said, "gravitational waves are not easily detectable."

I think that's a masterful understatement. The big problem is massive background noise in the low frequencies scientists predict for the phenomenon.

My guess is that using today's equipment, detecting gravitational waves is a bit like detecting someone's whisper over a jet engine's noise — using an old Hughes carbon microphone. It's not impossible: but will involve analyzing available data with great care — and, most likely, a very powerful computer.

Luminiferous Aether — or — There's More to Learn

I think it's noteworthy that nobody in the last almost-a-century has come up with either evidence that gravitational waves don't exist: or good theoretical reasons for thinking that they shouldn't.

The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Not definitely, anyway.

Besides, this sort of research takes time.

For example, Isaac Newton suggested a particle theory of light in 1704, but suggested that an "Aethereal Medium" accounted for diffraction. Augustin Fresnel's wave theory of light (1818) treated light as a transverse wave traveling in an aether. The Michelson—Morley experiment's failure to detect "ether wind" in 1887, 1902 to 1905, and the 1920s, was the first strong evidence that luminiferous aether doesn't exist.

Then, in the 20th century, scientists learned that at very small scales, matter and energy acts like particles and waves: and started working the bugs out of quantum mechanics.

As I've said before, "my guess is that we have a great deal more to learn about our universe: and maybe others." (March 21, 2014)


Sunday, September 21, 2014

Scientific Discoveries: an Invitation to "Even Greater Admiration"

ESO/INAF-VST/OmegaCAM, OmegaCen/Astro-WISE/Kapteyn Institute; via Wikimedia Commons; used w/o permission.This universe has been around for about 13,798,000,000 years, give or take 37,000,000. That's the current best estimate, from 2013.

It's big, too. The photo shows part of the Hercules Cluster of galaxies. Light from that bunch of galaxies traveled for about 500,000,000 years before reaching us.

What we see is the Hercules Cluster as it was around the middle of the Cambrian here, roughly when the first trilobite showed up.

Taking the universe 'as is' makes sense: for me, anyway. I would much rather learn more about this wonder-filled creation, than insist that the Almighty is limited to what folks knew a few centuries back.

Truth Cannot Contradict Truth

Since I believe that God made the universe and the things of faith, I must also believe that honest research cannot contradict faith. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 159)
"...God can not deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth...."
(Dei Filius, Vatican Council I, 248 (1870) (quoted in Catechism, 159))
Faith and reason, religion and science, get along fine: or should. (Catechism, 39, 159, 286)
"The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers"
(Catechism, 283) [emphasis mine]
Wondering how things began and where we're headed is part of being human. Learning about God's universe is what we're supposed to do. (Catechism, 282-289, 2293)

Sometimes we get surprised by what we learn. That's happened quite a bit in the last few centuries.

Living With Change

"Nothing endures but change."
(Heraclitus, Greek philosopher, 540 BC - 480 BC)
Two dozen centuries later, change is still very much a part of this creation. God made a universe that is being created: which is good, and which is moving toward perfection:
"Creation has its own goodness and proper perfection, but it did not spring forth complete from the hands of the Creator. The universe was created 'in a state of journeying' (in statu viae) toward an ultimate perfection yet to be attained, to which God has destined it. We call 'divine providence' the dispositions by which God guides his creation toward this perfection:
"By his providence God protects and governs all things which he has made, 'reaching mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and ordering all things well.' For 'all are open and laid bare to his eyes,' even those things which are yet to come into existence through the free action of creatures.161"
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 302)
I figure we've got a choice: accept the idea that we live in a changing creation; or not.

On the whole, I think it's prudent to accept reality.

Continental Drift and Personal Preference

(From NASA, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)
("Plate motion based on Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite data from NASA JPL. The vectors show direction and magnitude of motion."

A year or so back, I read a science textbook written with 'religious' people in mind. It was excruciatingly careful about explaining that continental drift was just a theory: and hadn't been 'proven.'

I sympathize with the authors, who probably wanted to provide adequate educational materials while not offending folks who don't want this creation to be particularly big or old.

Not liking the idea that continents move isn't limited to painfully pious folks. About four decades back, I had a geography/geology professor who loathed and despised continental drift. That attitude helped me decide on a major in history, and that's another topic.

King Cnut and the Limits of Executive Authority

The last I heard, we're still not sure about exactly what forces have been moving continents around, forming new ocean floors along mid-ocean ridges, and recycling old crust along subduction arcs.

That continents move, carried along on tectonic plates: by now, that's an observed phenomenon.

A person might prefer that Earth's crust stay put: but that preference has as much effect on reality as King Cnut's ordering the tide to stop.

Thanks in part to improved technology, like the satellite-based Global Positioning System, we're still getting surprises: like when a city in South America jumped westward by roughly 10 feet. That was a big earthquake. (Apathetic Lemming of the North (March 10, 2010))

About Cnut and the limits of executive authority, my guess is that his command was intended as a reality check for over-enthusiastic courtiers.

Psalms 115 and the Universe

As Psalms 115:3 says, "...whatever God wills is done." The Almighty could have created a timeless universe: complete, perfect, and unchanging: or one that was only a few thousand years old.

That's not what happened, though.

This universe apparently cooled for about 379,000 years before electrons and protons could combine, forming neutral hydrogen. That's when our universe became transparent, over 13,000,000,000 years ago.

I'd be impressed by God's power if the universe was only a few millennia old, and a few thousand miles across. As it is: I'm really impressed.
"4 Indeed, before you the whole universe is as a grain from a balance, or a drop of morning dew come down upon the earth.

"But you have mercy on all, because you can do all things; and you overlook the sins of men that they may repent.

"For you love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made; for what you hated, you would not have fashioned.

"And how could a thing remain, unless you willed it; or be preserved, had it not been called forth by you? "
(Wisdom 11:22-25)
The universe is big and old — but God is infinite and eternal, almighty and ineffable: beyond our power to describe or understand. (Catechism, 202, 230)

God is also very much in charge, and has something more than this universe in mind.
"Where can I hide from your spirit? From your presence, where can I flee?"
(Psalms 139:7)

"3 Raise your eyes to the heavens, and look at the earth below; Though the heavens grow thin like smoke, the earth wears out like a garment and its inhabitants die like flies, My salvation shall remain forever and my justice shall never be dismayed."
(Isaiah 51:6)

"and: 'At the beginning, O Lord, you established the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands.

"They will perish, but you remain; and they will all grow old like a garment.

"You will roll them up like a cloak, and like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.' "
(Hebrews 1:10-12)

"Then the sky was divided 13 like a torn scroll curling up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place."
(Revelation 6:14)
And that's yet another topic.

Somewhat-related posts:
More about King Cnut:

Like it? Share It:


Unique, innovative candles

Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America angels animals annulment anti-catholicism Antichrist apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climatology cloning common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression despair devotion discipline diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude guest post guilt Haiti Halloween hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth poverty prayer predestination pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom vacation Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Following "A Catholic CItizen in America:"

Blogroll/Catholic Links

Popular Posts

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news: