No need for God with "Wonders of the Universe"

I felt awe, inspiration, reverence, humility. Not from a religious ritual, holy book, or spiritual sage -- from the first episode I've watched of a BBC science program, "Wonders of the Universe."

Youthful-looking physicist Brian Cox explained in Children of the Stars how the same 92 naturally occurring elements are found everywhere in the universe. So what we are, the universe is.

I've heard this before, many times.

But the way Cox put it seemed new and fresh. In the clip below he says that the building blocks of the universe -- protons and neutrons -- formed within the first few seconds after the big bang (which banged away 13.7 billion years ago).

Everything that's happened since has been a rearranging of those building blocks into increasingly complex structures, one of which is the human brain that now has achieved a good understanding of how it came to be able to understand.

Wow. Think about it. Marvel about it.

You, me, everything and everybody on Earth, the entirety of 100 billion galaxies each containing hundreds of billions of stars -- all of this came into being some 14 billion years ago.

The protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the atoms we're made of have been around that long. The atoms themselves are less old. The heavy elements (heavier than hydrogen and helium) are younger still, since they couldn't be formed until stars collapsed in upon themselves, forming additional elements through nuclear fusion.

BIgger the star, the more dramatic is the fusion process. The heaviest elements, like gold, are formed in super nova explosions where the temperature briefly reaches 100 billion degrees before the star dies in an amazingly powerful fashion.

Have a look at how Cox explains this.

I don't like the idea of dying. Yet as I watched Children of the Stars I felt more at peace about the notion of death. I saw that if stars hadn't died, Earth never would have formed. Nor would we humans exist.

Death and life are inseparable. Religions offer the promise of everlasting life, but this isn't the reality of the universe. Science can't disprove the hypothesis of eternal existence in some heavenly realm, yet neither is there any demonstrable evidence of this.

What we know, with near scientific certainty, are the truths presented by Brian Cox. We are made of stardust, heavy elements formed by exploding stars over the 14 billion year old age of the universe.

If there is a God, this is how God created us: as free-floating protons and neutrons which evolved over an immense span of time via the laws of nature into us Homo sapiens.

In a review of "Wonders of the Universe" I learned about what Cox says in another episode:

"Life as we know it," Professor Cox explained at one point, "is only possible for one thousandth of a billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth, billion billion billionth of a percent" of the lifespan of the universe. And of that barely conceivable fraction, a human life occupies only a tiny space.

Well, here we are. Amazingly. Yet also, utterly predictably.

The universe is what it is. We can't say about the universe as a whole, "what are the chances..." The chance is 100% that human beings came to occupy the planet we call Earth during the astoundingly small percentage of the lifespan of the universe that Cox says is suitable for life as we know it.

Gratitude.

This was perhaps the strongest emotion I felt after watching Children of the Stars. I wasn't grateful to a personal (or even impersonal) god, because I don't believe in the existence of such an entity.

Rather, I was filled with gratitude that out of all of the countless heavy element atoms in the cosmos, a bunch had come together into a form I call "me" that possessed the ability to be conscious.

Religions offer up unreasonable expectations, albeit appealing. Sure, I'd like to live forever. If the essence of my being was "eternal soul," "cosmic consciousness," or such, supposedly this could happen.

But reality teaches otherwise. As Cox explained, it's much more likely that the atoms which comprise my body will become part of other entities in the universe after I die. My consciousness will end when my brain does.

Bob, my brother-in-law, was a practical, mechanical, scientifically-minded person. We didn't talk philosophy a lot. Once though, he shared what he thought would happen after he died.

"I think that my atoms will go back into the universe," he told me. Pretty damn simple.

At the time, I was heavy into my true believing phase. I wanted to believe that my soul would survive my bodily death, that my consciousness not only would persist into an afterlife but expand.

Now, I've come to better appreciate the wisdom of Bob's reality-based view of life and death. It's better to see things as they are, not as we would wish them to be. And what we are is the universe. There's no difference between us and the cosmos. We are stardust; stardust is us.

If it turns out that I'm more than this, my post-death experience will be a lot more interesting than I expect (after all, anything is more than zero). If not, I'm grateful that I live in an era when modern science can be explained so wonderfully by people like Brian Cox.

There are many wonders of the universe. Foremost, perhaps, is our ability to wonder at the wonders.

Comments

[David Lane]

Excellent!

[Alex]

May I introduce the philosophical/religious position which explores the religious depth (feelings of wonder, awe, inspiration, reverence, and humility; and contemplation of life and death) of the Universe as understood by science:

Religious Naturalism

More information:
http://faculty.uml.edu/rinnis/2000_stone_2_1.pdf
http://www.religiousnaturalism.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_naturalism

In my opinion, your article is a wonderful exposition of Religious Naturalism (if you don't mind being so described).

[Stan Klein]

I'm a scientist so naturally I agree with everthing that was said and Cox's 'Children of the Stars' sounds wonderful. It is a spirituality that we should all have. The only thing missing is religion. By religion I mean a connection of that naturalism spirituality with a community that is devoted to transforming this world to one that functions much better than it does at present. I don't think spirituality alone is enough.

[Roger]

Stan,

How are you separating Spirituality from naturalism spirituality? True, a particular community can form to transform something into something better. However, could this community find it's orgin from numerous beginnings? Thanks for your message, Roger

[Willie R]

Religious naturalism? By that you must mean finding solace in the discovery that there is actually no supernatural entity responsible for existence. Now, we no longer have to concern ourselves with whether our actions are "right" or "wrong" - there is just "whatever it is" doing "whatever it does".

Works for me!

[tAo]

Are you all ready for "The Quickening"??

you'd better watch this video:

http://awakeningasone.com

[Norge Ove]

Problem using words, is that the writer may mean something different from that read by the reader.
If we define that which is spiritual as that part of us that encapsulates our belief's (we all believe in something) then we are all spiritual.
It then becomes interesting to examine that which is not spiritual, ie that part of us that is not based upon belief, but certain knowledge or absolute truth.
Unless we assume axioms (self evident truths) are absolute truths, then I think we will find that we are all nothing more than spiritual beings !!

[cc]

The problem isn't belief in God but belief. If we can't help but believe stuff, it doesn't matter what we believe because we're stuffed with belief and our stuffing desensitizes, blinds us, to what actually IS.

We're too obsessed with possibilities to observe actualities.

[Norge Ove]

cc
Spot on, the interesting footage in another post about Richard Feynman explaining magnetism makes the point very well. We have to believe in something in order to explain anything!
We classically believe what we are taught when very young, (conditioning) for we respect our parents and teachers and what they taught us seems to make sense, it works. But in reality, when delving deep into any question, the answer can only be given within a framework, and that framework of reference is our belief system. God has very little to do with this, except as another belief!

[Roger]

Norge and cc,

Good points made. When we do observe actualities, we still are limited, as to what a thing actually is. Even when we delve deeply into that thing. We will never have an Absolute understanding. This is ok, and a good step beyond the standard belief systems.

[Mike Williams]

IT'S OFFICIAL ---- WE ARE NOT ALONE !!!

Last week the U.K. officially released thousands of pages of documented UFO reports
and acknowledged their existance. England also admitted they and the USA, have been
secretly witholding overwhelming evidence
for decades, so as not to panic people.

The Mexican goverment a few years ago came
on TV to officially admit they exist, with
dramatic footage from their military jets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dDqrbyUrm8

The former defense minister of Canada has been outspoken for years that the USA should now tell the people.

3 USA astronauts
that landed on the moon are now outspoken that they exist and they have seen them.

Now, we can worry about the collaspe of the
fiat currency system, along with little green men stealing the Budweiser from
our refrigerators.

[Mike Williams]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3WVBDCaLd4

crop circles

[Marina]

These 3 USA astronauts who are now outspoken that they have seen aliens and that they exist, are these astronauts the same ones who are shown in the moon walk hoax ‘footage’ dangling from wires?

Watch this 3 min footage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

AND

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlDDn7vA1XY&feature=related

Now a couple of things at least could be going on here.

1. They never went to the moon. (which may be hard for some people to swallow after decades of brainwashing)

2. They did go to the moon but someone forgot to turn the video camera on! Hence studio produced evidence.

This can happen very easily as I know.

While in Bali in January past, myself and my husband went to some water park where they had a zip line. I wasn’t nervous at all having parachuted for a couple of years but my husband was slightly nervous. During our zip, I was holding my camera with one hand taking a movie of his journey. Oh his face was priceless.

It was a double zip line, so the two of us went side by side. When we reached the other side and had gotton down, I looked to see the footage. There was nothing there. The camera was off! Shit, I had pressed the wrong button and turned the camera off.
We decided to go again so I could get the evidence and away we went back to queue up again, get kitted out under the blazing sun but anyway, we found ourselves in the same situation – sitting all prepared and about to go. I checked the camera and it was on, so all was ok. Away we went again, me careful not to press the off button again.
We landed the other side, again down we got and I looked for the footage. Jesus, it wasn’t there. I had it set to play so it was playing a movie instead of taking one!! Doh!

So I never did get the footage but I SWEAR I was there. :)

Now there is something funny going on. And then they bring aliens into it!

Marina

[tAo]

Marina,
the reason that they never released the real film footage showing the surface of the moon, was because the govt. did not want the public to see or know about the unusual artifical structures and artifacts that were seen upon the surface of the moon.

so they simply made a brief movie of a fake moon landing, in a film studio. thats why the flag is seen to be fluttering in the wind, even though there is no atmosphere or wind on the moon. also, the gravity is so minimal on the moon that they would have been jumping much higher up, than they jumped in the film. there are also other errors as well.

there are also all sorts of other things that have been discovered and done on the earth, that have been kept secret or lied about, never to be revealed to the public.

[Varadharajan]

nice article.

[Kevin]

Oooh no!! i wish that you were right! before you get to saying you are stardust and stardust is you. you need to appreciate the complexity of this stardust, "you" that you are talking about, I wish science was able to explain the origin of emotions, music e.t.c and how they came by chance...... how do you have intelligence designs as a result of undirected for random chances, if these highly complex systems and functions exhibited by almost every plant and animal has no intelligent creator or designer , the our reasoning power are staggered by the millions of coincidences that operate with infinite, undeniable precision to produce perfect beauty, function, and reproduction on the earth. Perhaps I may ask you, is chance precise and predictable?? if your answer is yes, u have it, if no, am afraid your are making the biggest mistake of your stardust life..... Please open your eyes and see!!!!

[Brian Hines]

Kevin, my eyes are indeed open. I've got a pretty good understanding of how evolution happens. The complexity of life on Earth doesn't require intelligent design or a designer. It just happened naturally. No need for God or a creator.

[formerly tucson, just call me 'formerly'.]

"It just happened naturally"

--But how? And if you don't know how, how do you know it happened naturally? I am not insinuating a Godly guiding hand, but how? Big Bang? Out of nothing, something? Sounds as preposterous as a God on a heavenly throne controlling everything.

Why is there anything at all? (Seems like maybe a few people have thought about that throughout human history.)

Or is there anything at all? That may be the key. There really isn't anything at all. No time. No objects. Niz tried to explain how that could be but I'm not sure he wasn't just a good BS'r who found a way of looking at things that got him through life, and a little attention.

Of course I haven't a clue about any of this. Absolutely no idea and I've given up trying. It's all just a meaningless absurdity to me. A beauty in that for sure...nature, apparent good and evil. All relative and ultimately meaningless except for just the plain being of it.

Until these questions are answered, nobody knows anything and anything is possible.

A Christian once posed to me that if a bicycle were completely disassembled into all its component parts and they were floating in the vastness of space, what are the chances of all those parts coming together into a cohesive bicycle without a guiding hand? Like God's. He was into the God theory.

Well, the Universe has plenty of time my Christian friend. Over the course of a million quadrillion eons of 100 trillion years each for starters, just the very first instant of eternity, there probably is a mathematical chance that the bicycle parts could meet together properly and form a functioning bike.