a lecture by Ken Wear, prepared 1995
No matter what theory is adopted about the beginning of our solar system or our galaxy or
the totality of it all, the question returns to the source or origin of the conditions necessary
to the starting point of that theory.1(To view
footnote, click here) How did the matter
involved in the Big Bang come into being? What was the origin of God? Might as well
suppose that in the beginning there was nothing at all, nothingness -- utter emptiness --
extending in all dimensions without end and without beginning. If we also suppose that
nothingness is inherently unstable, which has been observed in the laboratory, we have a
starting point. So bye and bye, by whatever mechanism, there were universes and the
stuff of universes in all directions extending so far that our imaginations are overwhelmed
by its enormity.
Now I collected a sample of sand from a beach on Florida's Gulf Coast and counted the
grains of sand to 1000 and divided the rest into little clumps of about the same size and
learned there were some 20,000 grains of sand in one gram -- over half a million in one
ounce. According to Einstein's theory (e=mc2), if we could convert one
grain of sand entirely into its energy equivalent -- we can't, but if we could -- we could
light up 1000 watts for about an hour and a half. One grain of sand! Light up this room
an entire evening.
It seems reasonable to assume that the energy content of that grain of
sand is equal to the energy required to form it initially. When I reflect on the
energy content of that one grain of sand and then look at the beach with its thousands of
tons of sand -- about a million grains in a modest hand full -- and then compare that
beach with the whole U.S.A. or the whole world, I have to recognize that the energy
equivalent of our Earth is beyond my ability to contemplate. But our sun
contains 99% of the matter in our solar system and of what is left our Earth
contains less than 1%; at that our sun is only a medium-size star among an estimated two
billion stars in our galaxy alone; and our galaxy is only one of an estimated two
billion galaxies in our observable universe and we can't begin to speculate
what lies beyond. Total energy content of our Universe: My imagination fails to cope.
It is fascinating to read of all the things astronomers and space
scientists are learning about what lies beyond our reach: the
scorching acid surface of Venus (which some insist was at one time
inhabited by intelligent beings); the little moon of Jupiter
which is so torn by gravitational forces that its innards move and
the frictional heating keeps it molten, ready for volcanic
eruptions; the invisible objects in space that reveal their presence by
radio broadcast; stars so big that they collapse into near
nothingness and stars so big that they explode. All manner of
celestial fireworks can be seen through the powerful telescopes
and other devices, each star or galaxy or dust cloud performing
its feats in keeping with the same physical laws as all the rest:
stars that glow red and stars that glow blue-white and stars that
do not glow at all; X-ray sources without visible light; pairs of
stars orbiting each other so that from time to time one eclipses
the other; stellar explosions and their remnants, . . .
I wonder sometimes if there are other intelligences in other
places who witness and marvel at these same things. Theory has it
that gases and particles scattered all over this part of our
galaxy began to swirl and be pulled together by their mutual
gravitational attraction. In time the stuff got close enough
together that it began to be compressed to extreme pressure and
temperature and the nuclear fusion reaction of our sun ignited.
The planets are blobs of matter flung off the igniting sun or they are bits
and rings that somehow escaped being pulled to the central body
and condensed, and then coalesced into small cold bodies. And this
scenario is likely common to the origin of most other star systems.
With our instruments we cannot see the smaller dark and cold
bodies surrounding the various stars; yet if the formation of our
solar system was typical it must be commonplace to have planets
orbiting suns, even with the larger planets having their own
captive orbiting bodies. In fact, very recent observations of
wobble of several stars suggest large planets orbiting rapidly and closely
around their suns -- very different from our sun with its small planets
at great distances and orbiting slowly.
With such a multitude of stars there must surely be others with planets very much like
our Earth with its moderate temperature and water-and-carbon chemistry.
Whether these planets number thousands or millions in our galaxy, it seems inescapable
that life forms have developed on countless other planets; intelligences of various levels
must have evolved, some lower, some higher, perhaps vastly earlier than on our Earth.
And it is possible their curiosity has prompted sending UFOs (likely with robotic controls)
to learn what other civilizations have done. While we can't journey there because of our
limited technology, I cannot imagine any practical benefit of conquest because of the
limitations of distance and transit time: the economics necessary to subjugation and
exploitation at such distances that we measure travel time in human life spans does not
show opportunity for profit beyond satisfaction of curiosity. Yet we dare not reveal
our presence or stage of development for fear someone out there may be as aggressive
as we are and, fearing the outcome of our continued advancement, wish to preempt our
becoming a rival.
Now I doubt that we have observers among us who owe their
allegiance to others in distant planetary systems. It should not
surprise us that more advanced and intelligent civilizations may
have discovered our Earth with its evolving science, nor even that
they have, despite the necessary intergenerational commitment,
dispatched research crews to record and report the state of our
electromagnetic emanations or our spacecraft or other scientific
interests. I am prepared to accept that there is substance to at
least some of the reports of Unidentified Flying Objects; in fact,
I wonder what government or scientific logic hinders efforts at open
revelation and discussion; perhaps we ought undertake development
of scientific instruments and
volunteers to operate them so we can make scientific observations
of sightings and perhaps learn from them. Nevertheless, should
there be among us persons of alien origin I would think they would
find it in their best interest to place their allegiance here
because of the time and difficulties of return. But we have
neither evidence of the superior science that aliens would
surround themselves with, nor of alien residents establishing
historical niches for themselves by sharing their superior science
with us. What a tremendous boon to our science and the
civilization it supports such revelations would be!!
But I wonder if in fact civilization is a self-limiting process. With the
invention and pursuit of science, knowledge must in time permit the creation of
super-weapons capable of destroying their civilization or returning it to a primitive
state where its knowledge is lost or useless. Is it possible -- rather, isn't it
probable -- that high intelligence and advanced science have come into being
thousands and thousands of times in our galaxy, each time to be destroyed through the
unleashing of its own weaponry, or, through the pressure of its own numbers, poisoned
its atmosphere or polluted its environment to the extent that life was cancelled. It
seems likely that it is the nature of civilization that it may rise, flourish for a time, and
then twinkle out as a result of its own accomplishments, i.e., that there are cycles
of civilization.
We may have witnessed the fiery death of a civilization elsewhere, observing it as we
would just one more meteor burning in Earth's atmosphere -- entirely oblivious to its
meaning or ominous portent for our own civilization.
Now I have spent the greater portion of my life committed to the
proposition that there is an omnipotent supreme being, that He has
a personality and can be described in terms of His characteristics, that we are
creatures of choice and not merely actors of some preordained
plot, that He may choose not to intervene to hinder our ill-
advised purposes or deeds, that He or His surrogates may on
occasion respond to my petition even though I am utterly ignorant
of the political structure of His domain and must petition from
ignorance. This is my reality. But I consent that my reality, no
matter how earnestly believed and practiced, is merely my own
personal interpretation and may or may not reflect the truth --
what IS and what is NOT.
But no matter what concept each of us holds of things religious or
the spirit world or things eternal, it is still our reality that
we are the makers of our own environment. It is through our
wisdom or through our folly that we select and nurture the best or
embrace the whirlwind. No one of us can single-handedly correct
the world's ills; yet it will take only one madman to plunge the
world toward disaster or suicide. Despite our personal
limitations, each of us can make his own contribution.
In our generation we had such a madman in the Middle East. He
launched a war and, when defeat appeared inevitable, ordered
dumping vast quantities of petroleum into the Gulf and setting
afire oil wells that could not be so emptied. One man,
apparently operating under the theory 'If I can't, no one can.'
Destroyed uncalculated quantities of oil, possibly enough to
fuel our civilization for years, and in the destruction of oil
produced an ecological disaster of immense proportions. Had he
possessed bacteriological or nuclear weapons, who can doubt he
would have unleashed these in striking out at the forces
arrayed against him. One man, surely a madman, in a position
to create such devastation.
And in our generation we have seen the unconcern of economic interests in refusing to
use double-walled oil tankers until the unthinkable happened and the Exxon-Valdez ran
aground because of a drunken skipper. An entire ecological system, not simply
despoiled, but forever altered in bird and animal populations with effects we can only
imagine. Two billion dollars thrown at clean-up, when no one had any idea what to do,
couldn't right a wrong that environmentalists had been fearing and fighting for years.
And still we have no means of preventing oil spills or containing them or undoing the
damage. It is their world, too, and their progeny will suffer the consequences just as
the rest. Some say "Follow the money;" and I add "to the grave of our civilization."
Where is the sense of environmental stewardship? (Several other areas of
concern will be cataloged at the end of this discourse.)
While no one can by himself correct all of the world's ills, each
of us can make his own contribution toward selecting and
nurturing the best. Each of us can refrain from being or
assisting that madman while at the same time helping one another
recognize the necessity for each of us taking part in
forestalling disaster. It falls the lot of each of us to apply
what intelligence he has to seek ways in which we can all live and
develop peaceably with our forebears and our offspring and our
neighbors, to clean and protect our own immediate surroundings
without harming others or their surroundings, to seek and master
knowledge of our ecology, and to help others in their quest to do
the same. In working together we might even avert the ultimate
folly of waging war over resources that will be depleted through
conduct of the war. Or put off day by day the ultimate
catastrophe by either weaponry or population pressure.
Someone has said that our civilization may go out with a bang as
by nuclear explosion, or it may go out with a whimper as nature
becomes overloaded with man's offal. The possibilities seem
endless: Today it is unbreathable air or undrinkable water;
tomorrow it may be ozone depletion or nuclear wastes; then it may
be poisoning or loss of oxygen generators or loss of too much
ground cover or loss of too much top soil; or fouling the oceans
so they no longer can support aquatic life; or in our ignorance
eradicating a species that is crucial to our ecology: The
possibilities seem endless.
The laws of probability tell us that, if it is at all possible, it will eventually happen. As
our numbers increase and our technology expands, it becomes increasingly possible that
one of us will make that fatal mistake and our civilization will be no more. So the laws of
probability forecast our doom. Should our species survive, it will surely be by accident
rather than deliberate attention to the needs of the Nature we depend on for sustenance.
I would like to think that man will be able to expand his knowledge and improve his
restraint so as to postpone his doom from day to day and from generation to generation
for eons. Even though, sooner or later, it will be the same here as with so many
civilizations in other parts of our galaxy.
And no one will know; no one will learn; no one will care.
To offer an opinion or seek further comment, you may send an e-mail
that will pass my spam filter if you use as Subject -- I read your post
about the Beginning and End -- exactly as you see it here.
Click here for the
e-mail form.
To view another title, click on that title.
Afterthought:
Or we may reflect on the resurgence of Earth's civilization after a massive catastrophe
obliterates most of mankind and his efforts. I suggest a survival community (Mountain
Meadows) as a safeguard; to view suggestions click here.
1FOOTNOTE: The most fundamental
tenet of science is that for each cause there is an effect, or, conversely, for each effect there
is a cause. Yet our Big Bang theory ignores the tenet (unless the initial condition is taken to
be the end point of an earlier oscillation by pre-existing matter, in which case the origin of
that matter becomes the object of speculation). Proponents of the idea "God created . . ."
overcome the problem of ultimate origin of matter but substitute the problem of the origin
of God Himself. Moreover, the more accurate translation of the Revised Standard Version
of the Bible, "When God began to create . . ." could just as easily imply limitation to our
Sun and its planets without addressing the larger question of the beginnings of our galaxy
or the universe beyond.
Comment added 10-31-04
Apart from unrestrained population growth and heedless disposal of offal, the
greatest current threat to our civilization arises from the activities of religious zealots,
notably Christian and Muslim. Christians have a long history of charitably extending
life spans while ignoring the economic development and infrastructure necessary to
support the increased population. Muslims have attempted to intertwine state and
religion so that personal aspirations to political or ecclesiastical power have produced
perennial conflict and retarded investment. While Christian fundamentalism creates
miseries of want (and habitat destruction) due to population pressure, Muslim
fundamentalism has produced extreme repression of women, failure to provide for
education of the young, lack of economic development, and ferocious efforts to
blame and punish the more successful states (including the activities that led to the
'war on terror').
For further comment on the end of civilization, see "end of civilization" in the essay
"Social Contract".
In no Arab lands (except, in recent years, Turkey and perhaps Egypt) is there a history of
democratic tradition; there is no understanding of democratic practices and no reason to
desire democratic institutions over other political forms. In personal decision-making it
seems the norm in Arab lands to examine options from the standpoint of who will be the
likely victor in a conflict, and then align oneself with the victor (since alignment with
the victor holds the greater hope for reducing the miseries of life).
Other examples of natural causes or heedless and thoughtless development that may prove catastrophic are:
Taken from an essay, now abandoned The Law of Unintended
Consequences does not relax. We cannot guess the ultimate outcome of such as massive
clearing of land and inundating it with water behind a dam; anaerobic decay of stumps
generates methane where once forests absorbed carbon dioxide. Or heedless dumping and
other abuses of the ocean have led to fish farms to furnish food once harvested from the
open seas. Or pesticides to improve agricultural yield have decimated the bees necessary
to pollination. Or intensive agriculture has leached from the soil needed nutritional
ingredients. Our efforts at development do indeed affect the environment.
We should heed the lesson of Venus. I think it likely the planet Venus hosted intelligence
hundreds of millions of years before intelligence arose on Earth. Heat hastens chemical
reactions and Venus, being closer to our Sun, enjoyed higher incident energy on its upper
atmosphere than Earth. With an appropriate mixture of atmospheric water vapor producing
a shielding cloud cover, thermal conditions at the surface likely accelerated (when
compared with Earth) chance chemical combinations that must have been in play in the
origination of life. But the advent of intelligence brought with it unbridled selfishness
and heedless development that in time cancelled life and the results of application of
intelligence, and the succeeding millions of years have erased all traces of that
intelligence. Spacecraft study of Venus has shown the tortured surface and atmosphere
that are inimical to life. It is questionable if mankind will survive long enough for a
combination of technology and curiosity to make possible search for fossils on Venus, so
we have little hope of confirming this speculation. But we should take to heart the lesson
this possibility suggests.
My printer takes 6 pages or 3 sheets of paper to print this document.
I solicit your thoughts on preparation for a civilization-ending
catastrophe, whether man-made or natural. Considering the various needs of mankind, how
should we rank preparation for, hopefully, survival of some vestige of our civilization? In
my view we are perilously close to a war that will exhaust resources such as copper. I
want to add comment by citizens who have reflected on responses to the tenuousness
of our civilization.
Was the Big Bang the Ultimate Beginning
Versions of Reality
My Reality: The Cosmos and My Religious View
Or, for complete contents of this web site, click here.
As an arm chair exercise, reflect on the hundreds of
millions of years for intelligence to arise on Earth. And then, with agriculture and the
rise of leisure and then science, comes the perennial struggle for power -- for the
dominion of one person over others -- which seems an unavoidable consequence of
intelligence. There results weapons of war and destruction and their proliferation and
the possibility that one heedless maniac can destroy the entirety of civilization. The
window of time, for the rise of science that can either destroy this world or undertake
communication with other worlds, is minute -- vanishingly small -- compared to the
time required for the rise of intelligence from the dust of creation. That window of
time will likely forever bar communication and cooperation between worlds.
To return to article, use your BACK button or click
here.
(from Lifeboat Foundation) viruses (natural or bred) self-replicating nano devices volcanoes, tsunami, earthquakes meteorite collision supernova ice age or run-away warming nuclear mishap or war bioterrorism abused nanotechnology alien aggression poisoning atmosphere or ocean accumulated waste To visit Lifeboat, click here
12-04-07: A nightmare informs me that an experimental virus, accidentally escaping from
a laboratory, is the most likely immediate cause of massive loss of life and perhaps the
greater part of Earth's population.