Showing posts with label Fundamentalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fundamentalism. Show all posts

21 November 2019

Children of Light, But With Limits


We are literally all the children of light. The protons, neutrons and electrons that make up all matter in the universe came into existence a small fraction of  second into the Big Bang a bit more than 13.7 billion years ago. That’s right, the components of every atom in your body, and indeed the atoms themselves came into existence In the Big Bang.  In the first moments of this event, the Bang that produced our universe,  huge amounts of high energy photons, that is to say, light came into existence. The collision of these photons produced all the protons, neutrons and electrons that exist today, including the atomic particles that comprise you and me.

This isn’t theory, but a fact that has been reproduced at CERN (Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire), at their high energy particle accelerator on the Franco-Swiss border near Geneva, and other high energy particle accelerators around the world.  Of course, it’s not all good news. The other name for the light composed of such high energy photons is gamma radiation, a form of light that is inimical to life. It’s just another of the wry gestures intrinsic to the universe after the Big Bang. Of course, people, especially those of a fundamentalist disposition, often ask “What was here before the Big Bang?” Expecting that the answer will be their notion of the author of the Bang, but such speculations are nonsensical, as time itself came into being in the Big Bang. There is no “before,” only after. But we are wired to seek causality, and as such, this answer is deeply dissatisfying, regardless of its truth.

Without knowing it, people asking that are posing a question that runs directly into Zeno’s paradox: Zeno, a Greek philosopher from 2500 years ago put it something like this.


Achilles [The great athlete mentioned by Homer in the Iliad as having been at the siege of Troy] races a tortoise, and as a generous hero type gives the tortoise a ten metre head start for their 100 metre race. As the race starts, the tortoise hurries along at 1/10th of a metre per second, while Achilles, not wanting the poor tortoise to be embarrassed, moves off at a stately 1 meter per second. Five seconds later Achilles reaches the halfway point to the tortoise’s starting position, but it is no longer halfway to the tortoise. As slow as he is, the tortoise has moved on. Achilles reaches the new halfway point, but again the tortoise has moved on, repeat ad nauseam. At some point poor Achilles must have realised that there are an infinite series of halfway points, thrown down his laurel ring sun shade and gone off for a nice bottle of Corcyraean Asyrtiko.

Mathematically, it actually makes sense that Achilles must reach each of an ever changing series of half way points. It’s a question whose logic is such as to have  an intrinsic appeal, even though we understand intuitively that this is not the way things work in the real world. So too, when we ask about events “before” the Big Bang we are asking a question that seems legitimate on its face, and by the standards of rhetorical logic can be asked, but which modern physics demonstrates is illegitimate.

We, as beings in time, cannot imagine timelessness, and thanks to the form of our evolved brain, and the limits of our sensory abilities can neither directly  perceive or understand. It’s not that we don’t try.  We speak of moments or events that are “timeless. The religious sometimes claim that their ecstatic experiences take them to an unmediated otherness “beyond time.” For all our poetic utterances of time flowing as a river,  when we make such  claims we speak metaphorically. Our perception of time may change, occasionally seeming to slow as our attention s either focussed or lost, but time exists whether we perceive it or not. It is an empirical phenomenon tied to the physical nature of space and the mass of stellar objects..

The difference between our perceptions and remembrances of time and time’s reality points to flaws in our ability to perceive and process the nature of the universe’s reality. We think and remember in moments, frozen images of events, or at best brief “film strip” like remembrances, while time is unforgivingly a continuum, whose expression is not tied to our interests, but to relations of the physics mass and distance we are incapable of directly perceiving or capturing as memories.

What is genuinely remarkable is that some of us can, through the language of mathematics understand the structure of time, in spite of the handicaps of the mammalian brain as evolved as Homo sapiens. But the physicist remembers the everyday experiences of time, not as it is or as she or he understands it, but just like the rest of us, as captured by memory and all the limitations that implies. Children of light we may well be, but we are neither gods nor, divorced from our animality, but creatures evolved to see and understand the universe as is needful. We evolved to see threat and opportunity in our environment, with a memory meant to capture patterns of threat and opportunity. We are built with the ability to form memories that represent time more as flash cards than films, and without the sensory capacity to directly perceive time in its physical reality.

D.H.H.


A Small Addendum on CERN.

The Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire is a European collaboration begun almost immediately after World War II ended. It was a response to the terrible bright nuclear flashes above Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where two bombs developed by the immense Anglo-American* Manhattan Project together killed or severely wounded more than 225,000 human lives, overwhelmingly civilians. CERN's avowed purpose was to increase the knowledge of physics for peace, a promise that has been kept in programs like the Large Hadron Collider, where immense energies are used to further humanity's understanding of the Cosmos.


A cutaway showing the packed magnets surrounding the slender red and clear tube where particles are accelerated.
Courtesy of CERN © 2014

The magnet structure in the photo -- the metal plates stacked horizontally in a U shape around the reddish central tube -- functions best at low superconductor temperatures of 455.8 degrees below zero (Fahrenheit), just under 4 degrees above absolute zero. At absolute zero the vibrations of atoms we understand as heat are at their theoretical minimum.

This incredibly cold temperature has to be maintained along the entire 17 mile length of the collider’s precisely circular track, enabling the magnets to carry up to a 12,000 ampere current. To put this in perspective, a typical home electrical circuit is rates at 10 or 15 amperes. At 10 amperes, it would take 1200 home circuits to feed the collider's magnetic field without "blowing the breakers." All this power produces a field capable of constraining and directing particles with a momentum of up to 14 TeV (trillion electronvolts), or 14,000,000,000,000 electronvolts. Including the energy required for cooling, instrumentation, computers, et alia, the CERN facility's power requirements are more than 200 megawatts, or roughly the same as that of the neighbouring city of Geneva.

A significant portion of this power bill is to supply CERN's computers. Every year for the last several, various projects at CERN have produced a combined total of more the 14 Petabytes of raw data. Even at a time when new personal computers often have a storage capacity of a terabyte or two, this is a remarkable volume of data. My somewhat complicated studio set up is still unusual for having 14 terabytes of internal and external storage, which at the moment is about 65% used. A Petabyte is 1015 bytes or 1000 terabytes, so this number looks like 14,000,000,000,000,000 bytes. Another way of thinking it is that they annually produce raw data 975 times that of accumulated works in the entire Library of Congress.  Now you know why CERN scientists (not a certain former Vice President) invented the internet. It was to share and shed data.


___________________

*British participation in the Manhattan Project is often forgotten or underestimated. British scientists, mathematicians  and engineers working both in the U.K. and the U.S. provided vital expertise to the project, though the U.S. provided virtually all the funding, and retained exclusive control over the weapons developed during the war. Fractious post-war politics initially undermined this cooperation, with the U.S. reneging on promises to share data and technology. Some information sharing was eventually restored, but only after it became clear that the U.K's native nuclear weapons endeavour was moving forward regardless of U.S. desires otherwise, and could be traded as part payment for American airforce basing rights on what American's sometimes referred to as the "aircraft carrier U.S.S. Britain."

10 December 2018

Religion of Peace

Since George Bush declared a war on terror, we Americans have been fighting among ourselves over who’s really got a religion of peace. Christians (especially those of a fundamentalist ilk,) have been making much of the Muslim terminology of jihad (Arabic for 'struggle'), while Muslims (mostly of the fundamentalist ilk) make much of the Christian language of "crusade." I'm not willing to talk about the nuances of either of these words, but I'll argue strenuously that anyone claiming Christianity is a religion of peace is not paying much attention to history.

In the 4th Century when the famous warrior emperor Constantine “got God” while butchering barbarians under a cross, the Jesus movement became the goto religion of the Roman Empire. Since then Christians have pretty much given up on their founder’s “turn the other cheek.” The Emperor wanted to link his rule to a religion with good rules, not start a slumber party for pacifists.

Faith based opposition to Imperial needs faded quickly. Helping out with slaughtering barbarians brought Imperial aid in snuffing out heretics and pagans, as well as Imperial support for church buildings and even some travel money for bishops, setting a pattern for a bright new church of the future: There would be crusades to fight, reformation wars to battle, slaves to be caught or bought, witches to burn, pogroms against Jews, scientists to imprison, physicians to murder, colonial peoples to proselytise, socialists to arrest, homosexuals to stone, etc. But for the average Joe & Mary it’s a religion of peace, right? Christianity is all about living with your neighbours sans violence, right? Well, maybe not.

What do you do if your neighbour’s a brute, or the king’s taxes are so high your kids will starve, or the local baron makes whoopee with your daughter or son, or the 1% send your job to and offers you retraining for an exciting career in fast food? Maybe it’s a small thing over and over — the dog that lets loose on your roses every morning. There’s got to be some justice, right? Are the Buddhists the only ones that can talk about bad karma?

The church has always made a lot of the idea of justice. Historically when the church speaks of justice, it's meant order. Just as Constantine wanted the Church to line up behind imperial policy, the local  warlords who emerged as kings and princes out of the ashes of the empire liked it when the church gave them backing. Soon enough those kings and princes were divinely authorised in their tyrannies. From the days of the empire through to today, dissident groups within the church found themselves suppressed by men carrying swords, divinely authorised swords. Even now the church turns its back on rabid injustices in parts of Latin America, favouring tyrants over the poor.

But if people are sometimes unhappy with justice as obedience to tyrants, the church had an answer for that: God will take care of it. If you think your tyrant is unjust, it'll all be taken care of, in purgatory, or even hell.

A  Christian Happy Dance circa 1670
At the dawn of the modern era there was a wildly popular book called Man - Microcosm. By 1670 it was entering its 3rd edition. The author offered a few verses, applied a cartoon and a sermon. This image is from a section called God’s swift punishments and the verse is from the Vulgate Bible: Luke 18, verse 7. It translates Will not God avenge his elect, who cry out to him day and night, though long he bears with them?

So what this odd picture shows is a Christian Happy Dance tapped to the tune of divine retribution. It’s not that Christians don’t believe in vengeance, it’s just that they’ve been told God will do it for them. Vengeance is mine, says the Christian God, holding the carrot of heaven and the big stick of a permanent sulphur flesh-eating hell. Oh yeah, that’s a religion of peace. You can understand how kings and robber barons want nice Christian subjects.

There are Jesus people who don’t buy into this, but they’re all too rare. God & country is just too cozy for all involved.

28 November 2015

Profiles in Fundamentalism: Pastor Steven L. Anderson



According to Pastor Stephen L. Anderson, an independent Baptist pastor of the extremist sort, the ISIS attacks in France occurred because of  Humanism, the Enlightenment,  French abortion rights, gay rights, the former gay Mayor of  Paris,  and wicked fashions called down the Judgement of God.  During his recent 50 minute rant, proudly posted on Youtube, he said to the people of France “God allowed these heathen hordes to invade you because you are a heathen nation… France’s problem is not my problem.  Because I’m not the one who said adultery is fine, I’m not living in the gay capital of Europe,… If God want to judge them, that’s between them and God… But you know what, we’re next.“

27 November 2015

The Colorado Murders


The violence tonight in Colorado Springs, where at last report three have died and nine have been wounded in the attack on a Planned Parenthood clinic by a man equipped with an assault rifle are only the latest round in attacks by Christian Fundamentalist extremists in the United States.

23 November 2015

Letters to Fundamentalists No. 1


[These comments were extracted from a review I wrote concerning John M. Frame’s“A History of Western Philosophy and Theology.” My review argued that Frame mishandled philosophical terminology, misunderstood or misrepresented the positions of the philosophers and theologians he chose to comment on, and beyond simple inaccuracies, had deliberately constructed a set of typologies, which while using the language of philosophers, perverted that language in the service of his own apologetical purposes and denied his readers any real understanding of the history he purported to chart.

I may not be a philosophical realist, but I do realise that between what I have written, and the position of a modern “Conservative” Christian, we are likely at a point of incommensurable difference. The shame of this situation is that it is very clear that Frame and I do not value the same concepts of what constitutes scholarship. Since before Plato, the philosophical tradition has accepted that a fundamental aspect of its work is an openness to the other through a process of disciplined enquiry.

22 November 2015

Contra Omnes Apologia



As a child, I grew up in a church deeply divided over the nature of revelation. Attending Missouri Lutheran Church services in the 1960s was sometimes a pure leap of faith as to the love of God, for that love was surely not evident in church meetings. In our tiny country parish, I saw two loving and well respected clergy pushed out of their pulpits because their theology was not sufficiently conservative for a few vocal members of the congregation. I remember hearing a phrase that began like this: “Only a heretic could ever say…”