Too light for Naturalness


And this is the writing that was inscribed:Mene, Mene, Tekel, and Parsin. Dan 5:25

Physics for decades now wants to prove a characteristic of the universe: naturalness.

Naturalness is defined by the request that all free constants and parameters should have an order of 1. Let me explain this in more understandable terms—at least from my view point: The universe is not natural, if it seems as if free constants and parameters were fine-tuned for the universe to exist in a manner that allowed for example for life to form.

Our universe clearly does not seem to possess naturalness, based on our current knowledge.

The search for naturalness brought forth the theory of an additional particle that had to exist, named Higgs-Boson, such that all particles would gain mass. This would certainly help naturalness if not even bring forth a unified theory.

But now that the Higgs-Boson has been experimentally proven, it has also proven to be to light. Split, weighed, found too light.

Theory had been predicted to weigh orders of magnitude more than it does. This means that there is still some “weight” lacking for mass to evolve naturally. All you scientists, forgive my light use of words here.

There will be two ways to solve that problem, but first let’s establish some thought patterns.

Paul tells us that nobody has an excuse for not believing, as we can find God even looking at nature.

I conclude from this that natural sciences as our interpretation of nature will prove God in the end, even though for a few centuries science tried to model the universe leaving God out of the picture.

The problem we face: science, as I just said, is but our interpretation of nature. As much as our doctrine, theology, belief system—call it as you want—is but an interpretation of the Bible: our understanding of scripture. Both imprinted by culture, axioms and so much more.

God speaks many languages to show himself to us. Through the Bible, through the Spirit, in nature, to name a few. But obviously the Bible has pre-eminence. Whatever is spoken in another language has to conform to the Bible.

OK, now what are the two solutions to above problem?

  • Scientists could find some more particles to fill the gap. This would allow for naturalness again.
  • We forget naturalness and view this universe as part of a multiverse.

A multiverse consists of a large number—and I mean large—of universes that exist in parallel. Statistics and probability theory then tell us that the probability of a universe displaying our seemingly fine-tuned values for free parameters and constants is larger than zero and—given enough universes—will exist. We are therefore just lucky to exist in exactly this universe. (As if we could in any other? Maybe a few.)

Both theories again allow for an explanation of our universe without God.

But let me weigh in with  another possibility: maybe God is telling us that no matter how much we find out, naturalness will not be achieved as He Himself is holding together creation. There will always be a gap.

At first, this sounds like gap-theory, the age old religious approach to explain nature and its phenomenons. Whatever could not be explained naturally or scientifically was explained spiritually. But I come from the other side: I state the theorem that how ever much we are able to explain scientifically, we will never arrive at naturalness since God shows Himself in nature and holds it together.

Could God create a universe that sports naturalness? Sure. God is omnipotent. Yet He decided to create a universe that He has to be involved in and hold it together, as the Bible tells us. This gives God an inroad, a language to speak to His creation. As such, it is a sign for God’s desire for relationship.

Just as in the book of Daniel, there is a writing on the wall of physics: mene mene tekel upharsim. Split, weighed, found too light.