Dark Matter

[TK]

I was listening to a great interview yesterday with physics professor Michio Kaku- he is on The History Channel a lot when they have science or space related programs on.

The topic was dark matter which was absolutely fascinating. Summarizing greatly, and based upon what I remember, the great majority of mass the universe is composed of dark matter and dark energy, but we can’t see it. However, we know it is there because we can detect its gravity. Dr. Kaku said the Hubble telescope can actually map out where the dark matter is based on the gravity it produces. In fact, our galaxy is surrounded by a field of dark matter, without which our galaxy would have come undone long ago.

A prevailing theory of what dark matter is is that it is evidence of another dimension/universe, perhaps only a millimeter away from our own. The matter in that dimension/universe has mass and therefore exerts a gravitational field. That is the gravity we are detecting because gravity can pass between these dimensions. However, light cannot pass between them which is why dark matter is invisible.

I was just wondering if any of you have any insight of what this might mean or imply from a theological standpoint.

TK

[dwilkins]

I think there are a couple of theological points to be made. First, we should stop allowing ourselves to be bullied by scientists who declare theology to be void due to scientific discovery when they have no real idea how the universe is constructed. We can say that we have some idea of how the bigger things basically work (which is how we ended up with F-14's), but the devil is in the details when we are talking about the origin of the universe, and they have overplayed their hand. For those interested in this crisis you might want to read Behe or Dembski on Intelligent Design (this doesn't exactly require buying into a specific school of how creation was done, but they make very powerful arguments that nature couldn't have randomly formed itself). Second, our understanding of cosmology in this age is significantly different than it was in the age in the Reformers, and both are radically different than that of the age of the NT. This is important because our view of how things work affects what we assume into out theology without saying it (or realizing it), and the terminology in each generation drifts so that it's quite possible that we are talking about different things without realizing it.

There are two important examples of this that modern Evangelical theology has yet to deal with. First, in the Biblical times heaven was "up there", and space was basically like a black blanket stretched over the world where glorious entities we call stars lived (this definition drifted a bit over the years or from one civilization to the next, but it's basically how they looked at it). When someone important or good died they went "up there" and became one of the stars. This is the source of the phrase "morning star" and "Lucifer" (both actually the terms for Venus). This is also the source of vocabulary for the glorification of saints after death. We all know it's not literally true scientifically, but it's used to describe that dynamic in scripture. How would we have to change our description of this process considering our understanding of astronomy? Second, we use the English word spirit to translate the Greek word pneumas, but our science and philosophy is radically different now so it's hard for us to understand what the NT writers would have meant by the word. In the NT period they were living in a world dominated by a cosmology defined by Stoicism. Platonism, the dominant cosmology of the Greek world a few hundred years before Christ, and then ever since starting a few hundred years after Christ, is significantly different in the way it defined pneumas. In Stoicism, since all things were physical, pneumas was a real, physical substance. In Platonism, and hence the way we look at it today, pneumas is an immaterial, unreal concept. If you want to compare apples to apples in theology, you have to come at any analysis of pneumas (whether it's an indwelling pneumas, or a resurrection body made of pneumas) from the point of view of the cosmology of the people who were writing the scripture for us. That means an indwelling pneumas would be a physical injection of a substance such as God, and a body of pneumas would be your real, physical body, though it would by nature be invisible. As far as I can tell, very few theologians realize that this drift in cosmology is even an issue, and so almost none of our Evangelical theology takes any of this into account.

Doug

[TheEditor]

I used to listen to alot of Art Bell back in the day (no I don't wear tin-foil hats ). I found his guests interesting even when, or especially when, they sounded kooky and he was a great interviewer with a voice that only comes from years of smoking. But Kaku used to be on there alot and I found it fascinating. When I first heard of the dark matter/energy theories, it confirmed what I long suspected; that "heaven" is probably just a dimension, and it explains how God and His messengers can be "right there"; maybe they are right there, right now!

Regards, Brenden.

[Bryan]

The topic interests me though I'm not terribly educated in the finest points of astrophysics.
With that said, it seems like the claims of mass being mapped at a great distance being from a dimension only millimeters from us wouldn't make much sense.

The existence or non-existence of dark matter/energy (I have no problem either way) would still be an element of nature and would not impact theology any more significantly than the discovery of a black hole, a new particle, or specie of beetle.

On a side note, I was discussing such topics with an atheist friend some time ago. He was all but speechless when I asked why a creator was any harder to believe in than the 10 SPACIAL dimensions needed for string theory. (I'm not really against string theory, but if the math demands 10 spacial dimensions, I'd think that to be fatal flaw. 11 dimensions, no problem; 10 SPACIAL dimensions...that doesn't work.)

[TK]

Hey Brendan--

That is where I heard the interview-- on a "best of" art bell podcast.

I think kaku is one of the originators of string theory.

I wish I was smart enough to grasp it.

I agree that dark matter poses no problems from a theological standpoint (if it's there God created it) but was more wondering about if it might help explain certain things.

Your idea is interesting Brendan and may be true, if the spiritual realm has mass. That's a whole other can of worms.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheEditor]

Hi TK,

Yeah, I miss those old Art Bell shows. You could have an old transistor radio under your pillow and listen to his velvety voice interviewing proponants of the bizarre. Kinda fun. I have a hard time grasping it myself, but thought it might help explain how the spirit realm could effect the material realm we see with our eyes.

Regards, Brenden.

[MMathis]

While the subject of dark matter and Art Bell are not compatible, I always thought he was pretty good entertainment. He would listen to people tell these nutso stories and take it seriously.

I call Sid Roth the Art Bell of Christian broadcasting.

[TheEditor]

And you're right near him in "the High Desert" there.

[TK]

Who you callin nutso?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk