Universe since the Big Bang to God and Savior Jesus interview with John Barrow
The world needs us? John Barrow, 53, internationally renowned astrophysicist and professor at Cambridge, has only one answer: YES. And he justifies his idea with a physical theory that reconciles science and faith, the Big Bang and God
Barrowvuole find a scientific answer to the fundamental question that man has always been the place: "Why do we exist?" A question that up to now has found many answers, but only or materialistic (the Big Bang and randomness) or exclusively of faith (God the Creator).
For most of the scientists who are believers, religion and science can coexist, but separate, with no one to explain the reasons of the other. Barrow goes beyond this by living a "separate in-house, and has developed a scientific theory that justifies the presence of man in a universe governed only by physical laws, in which man has always played a marginal role, casual, certainly not essential. Instead, for the British scientist is not necessarily so.
And if we are not here by chance, someone must have wanted.
Barrow, author of over 400 scientific articles and 18 books for the general public translated into 27 languages, just for his research on the border between God and the Big Bang has just won the Templeton Prize, which awards each year 1.6 million dollars (the substantial premium to the world) who provides "outstanding contributions to the advancement of knowledge in the spiritual world and the relations between religion and science." A prize
seen, however, by many researchers with skepticism and irony, and attitudes that bear witness to the tension between science and religion, between faith and rational inquiry.
Barrow has never been disturbed by the reactions of his colleagues.
With its traditional English style, quiet, calm and determined, he continued his scientific research on the relationship between life, the universe and human knowledge.
This field was born on his fundamental work on the anthropic principle, a controversial theory that explains the deepest mysteries of the universe, connecting them to the very existence of man.
The latest cosmological research show that the characteristics that make our world fit life are in fact extremely unlikely to be realized. Such that no scientist ever would bet on the formation of a universe like ours.
Yet despite adverse odds, we are here.
So, says Barrow, in the study of the laws governing the universe and to understand why, of all possible universes, has developed our own, so particular, one can not ignore the fact that we exist. It could be a matter of pure luck, but this is just one of the possible answers. A second man
gives an active role in determining the laws of the universe .. The
says the same quantum physics, according to that every physical phenomenon takes place only if there is someone to observe it.
Or, again, may be valid, the religious response, and the man would be a really privileged to be placed at the center of a universe created in his measure.
Beyond the endless debate between faith and science, Barrow, with its anthropic principle, cosmology has launched the worldwide challenge: find a scientific reason for our presence in the cosmos.
Or, explain why, of all possible universes, we developed our own.
A challenge that rational science can not miss.
The anthropic principle and the faith of Barrow
Di Roberto Trotta, an astrophysicist University of Oxford Professor
Barrow, she is famous for his work on the anthropic principle. What is it exactly?
- Laws of Nature, as we know, allow the existence of many different universes, which are distinguished from each other for having started in conditions only slightly different.
According to this theory, called "eternal inflation" at any point in space could be born a new sub-universe. Each sub-universe is expanding very quickly and would be a bubble in which the constants of nature (for example, the constant of gravity or the speed of light, note) may be different from those of our universe.
The cosmos as we know it would indeed be one of these bubbles. But the generation of bubbles, and also of our universe, it looks random because that follows the laws of quantum physics. In quantum mechanics, in fact, the physical laws are probabilistic, and therefore tied to the case. They can only provide the probability and not certainty that a certain phenomenon to occur.
Among the possible universes, ours is unique because it is suitable for life. The anthropic principle is one way to interpret this extraordinary fact, and scientifically explain our existence in the universe.
How can a scientific theory to justify the presence of intelligent life in the cosmos?
- The question we must ask is: "How likely to exist has a universe that has certain properties, for example, the existence of life forms are able to observe it? "
Consider for example the cosmological constant, called Lambda, which indicates the density of dark energy in the universe and whose value has been determined only experimentally.
We can assume that there is a theory that can precisely determine the value of this constant. Unfortunately at the moment we do not have such a theory and, as far as I know, it may be that the amount of dark energy in our universe, equal to seventy percent of the universe itself, is simply the result of a random process.
But if Lambda had a value greater than that actually observed, then there could be no life as we know it.
The laws of physics used today to describe the cosmos, there are random elements.
Another example is for asymmetry between matter and antimatter. Our universe consists of matter and not antimatter. And this is the result of a random process, which could have a different outcome.
From statistical point of view, our universe made of matter, and where Lambda has the value that actually observe, has a low probability of existing.
Other universes, more likely, however, would be quite impossible to observe, for the simple fact that the conditions inside them would not allow the evolution of life at all.
The anthropic principle brings the certainty that we exist in probability of the existence of our universe.
According to many of his colleagues, the anthropic principle is just a shortcut to circumvent our ignorance of the fundamental laws of nature. As replies?
- still do not know how the various laws of nature have emerged from a common origin, that is, they were unified when the universe had beginning. And 'certain that we will do more steps along the path of their unification. And I think the anthropic principle is a fundamental and indispensable part of this process. You can not do without the principles of quantum physics, which only determine the probability that a phenomenon occurs. And quantum physics in the presence of an observer, that is, man, it is necessary to the determination of the physical laws, then the structure of the universe.
is not likely to slip into philosophy, with no possibility of scientific verification?
- Cosmology is unique among the sciences, because you can not do experiments, but only to collect observations and search for correlations between them. If, for example, a certain theory predicts that massive galaxies should be bluer, cosmologists can not try to do is observe a large number of galaxies, and whether in fact those are more massive than blue. This is a surrogate of the experimental method, which requires you to create purpose in the lab and see if a massive galaxy is actually blue.
What we clearly can not do that in practice!
The anthropic principle remains for me a fundamental part of our investigation of the cosmos, because it ties our existence, the limits of our scientific research, the characteristics that actually observe in the universe which we live.
I find it extraordinary that the universe is so simple that we are able to understand and interpret.
The universe is much simpler than the human brain, or even of human society "
The anthropic principle has a strong religious connotation. As a scientist, how do you reconcile the spiritual perspective to the rational investigation of the cosmos?
- Many of the recent developments in science have had a significant cultural impact and aroused great interest among theologians and philosophers. This is particularly true in the field of cosmology, because in a sense, this project deals with a superhuman.
cosmological events are proceeding very slowly and develop on enormous spatial and temporal scales, dimensions that make them physically untouchable, unassailable by the influence human beings.
In comparison, all of biology is an extremely complex process and much more disordered.
There is a long tradition of mutual inspiration between the religious thought and astronomical research.
When science comes to asking basic questions, such as the birth of the universe, it creates a deep resonance with religious thought.
What, in your opinion, the relationship between science and faith?
- I think a mature approach allows to recognize that both aspects are important. I am opposed to a materialization of science, of the type claimed for example, by the biologist Richard Dawkins. You slide in the ideology, which becomes crucial when it is most unsatisfactory, both in religion than in science.
She is a religious person?
- I would say that I am a person with a strong religious perspective, but it does not conflict with my work as a scientist.
