As Simple as Possible

"Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler." -- Albert Einstein

I ran across this quote from a book I finished last week, which took me WAY too long to work through: The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space. Time. And the Texture of Reality by theoretical physicist Brian Greene. You may or may not have noticed that I updated my reading list along the side of the blog, and one of the books I'm currently reading is his earlier book The Elegant Universe, which is certainly the book that brought him his fame.

The book is really a build up to the most prominent "Theory of Everything" (ToE) called Superstring Theory (String Theory, for short). Of course, he spent some time talking about Classical Physics, and then the theories from the 20th century: Einstein's theories of relativity (Special and General), and Quantum Mechanics. Generally speaking (pun?), Special and General Relativity are theories about the macroscopic universe ... big things; things larger than the atomic and sub-atomic levels. Alternately, Quantum Mechanics has to do with the atomic and sub-atomic realms ... the world of the very small. These two theories are at odds with one another, and yet both are successful in their respective areas.

Since the mid-19th century, physicists have been able to demonstrate that many of the forces in the universe are actually different sides of the same coin. For example, Faraday demonstrated that electricity and magnetism were different expressions of the electro-magnetic force. Maxwell then took this brilliant idea and expressed them in mathematical formulas, which are among the most famous equations today and known as Maxwell's Equations.

Light, being an electro-magnetic wave moves at the speed of light, which is the speed limit of the universe. Einstein then posed the question: relative to what does light move at approximately 300,000 km/s? Here's what I mean ... let's suppose that a ship was moving at 1/2 of the speed of light and shone a bright flashlight pointing in front of it. Wouldn't the ship's speed add to the inherent speed of light? And therefore, wouldn't the speed of the light coming out from the ship be 1.5 light speed (also the speed capability of the Millenium Falcon)? Surprisingly, and very much at odds with our natural inclinations, Einstein determined that light will always travel at 300,000 km/s relative to everything ... even objects in motion. If we were to measure the speed of the light coming out from the spaceship, we would measure it at the speed of light, and no faster.

Kind of odd, isn't it? The first time I had this question put to me, I honestly thought the answer was going to be that light coming off of objects in motion would add the object's additional speed to the inherent speed of light. That's the beauty of Einstein's theories of relativity: they prove that light is constant for all perspectives and one's state of motion. If you were traveling at 99% of the speed of light and shone a light beam in front of you, you would measure it going at the constant speed of light.

One of the by-products of Einstein's theories is that there was a trade-off in saying that light's speed is constant for all perspectives and all states of relative motion, and what was given up was the idea of space and time as fixed constants. He argued that space and time could warp and bend depending on one's motion, or because of intense gravity. Furthermore, space and time were discovered to be intimately related and were given the name "Space-time" by Einstein. [As a quick side-note, you might be wondering about what space is. If you take all the matter out of space, is it really empty space? Einstein would say no, space is definitely a something. Space can bend, warp, twist, and it is also permeated by the Higgs Field (you might remember the discovery of the Higgs Boson in 2012), which is believed to give all matter its determined mass. Again, very counter-intuitive!]

Special and General Relativity have worked incredibly well for all things that we can see: things on Earth, in our solar system, and galaxies stemming to the edge of the visible universe. Where Einstein's theories break down is when we come down to the quantum (atomic) level. For the world of the tiny, Quantum Mechanics is the prevailing theory that is able to explain, with remarkable precision, predictions about the nature of fundamental particles. The troubling thing about Quantum Mechanics is that it is confusing. Though you might be able to easily grasp the basic concepts of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics are more challenging.

One of the most important aspects of Quantum Mechanics is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, that basically states that we cannot know both a particle's position AND velocity. The more we know of one, the less we know of the other. Then there's the fact that all matter has particle and wave aspects to them. And of course, the lack of certainty wouldn't be complete without the recognition that we can't know the precise location of a particle until we observe it. It shouldn't come as a surprise that Quantum Mechanics is not about providing certainty. Rather, it seeks to provide probability. Oh yes ... there are some pretty complex formulas and theories to explain these things, such as Schrodinger's Probability Wave Function. One of the conclusions made by Quantum Mechanics is that a particle will function as a wave until we observe it, and then we can discover it's position, and in doing so will sacrifice information about it's velocity.

The big difference between the realm of particles with the macroscopic world in which we see, is that the quantum world behaves so differently. Theorists call this "Quantum Weirdness," which just brings a smile to my face. Confused? Not convinced? You are not alone. In fact, Richard Feynman, one of the most famous Quantum Physicists, made this famous statement: 

 

"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics." 

 

With regards to the concept of not knowing the location of a particle until you observe it, Einstein said this: 

 

"I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it."

Now onto the good stuff. Superstring Theory is an attempt to unify these two theories to explain all four of the forces in the universe, and objects of any size. This is an impressive goal, one that Einstein spent the last decades of his life pursuing, though he was completely unsuccessful. String Theory has made real progress and is the best contender to create a unified field theory, a so-called Theory of Everything. A ToE doesn't claim to explain literally everything about every field of science or study, but only to unify the known forces in the universe.

String Theory says that just as atoms are comprised of sub-atomic particles, there are even more fundamental elements that make up everything: strings. They theorize that what makes a string a sub-atomic particle is its vibration, just like a violin string can play different notes, so can the fundamental building blocks of matter. These strings also help explain another unique aspect of this theory: that there are 10 or 11 dimensions. Where are these extra dimensions? They are very very small, and seemingly invisible with today's instruments. Instead of the three spacial dimensions, and one time dimension, String Theory claims there are 6 or 7 additional spatial dimensions. Most importantly, String Theory removes the difficulties between Relativity and Quantum Physics.

A lot has yet to be proven. For instance, these alleged strings are significantly smaller than our instruments can measure, and perhaps will ever be able to measure. However, someday we might be able to indirectly prove the existence of strings, similar to how they've proven the existence of black holes. This would also help to explain these unseen spatial dimensions. In formulating a unified field theory, they hope to be able to more accurately explain what happens inside of a black hole, or what happened at the beginning of creation (obviously there are some areas I'd disagree on because of the truth of Christianity).

It is an exciting time for the field of science, because even if we aren't able to craft a workable unified field theory ... a Theory of Everything ... at least we can rule out some possibilities. My hope is that we are able to make major headway in conjuring up some workable theory, but either way, it's the journey that excites me and keeps me interested. If Superstring Theory proves to be correct, then it would demonstrate in another beautiful way in which the Lord of all Creation structured the entirety of His universe, using a symphony of strings, each vibrating at His command.

Thanks for reading,
Bainton 

Waiting for a Knock on the Door

The strangest thing happened the other night. A little after seven o'clock I get this phone call from an unknown number, but with the same area code. I decide to take my chances and answer my phone.

Me: "Hello?"

Unknown: "Hi, umm, yes ... can I speak with Rusty [insert my name]?"

Me: "May I ask who's calling?"

Unknown: Someone in the background feeding the caller an answer ... "We're the missionaries with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

Me: "Oh, okay. I honestly thought you were a solicitor calling this late at night. What's up?"

Missionary: Again being fed an answer ... "We would like to talk with you about the gospel of Jesus Christ."

Me: "That sounds great. How about tomorrow at one o'clock?"

Missionary: The background missionary feeding a final response ... "Great! What's your address? ... we'll see you then!"

Me: "Looking forward to it!"

I've had some random run-ins with LDS missionaries, but never quite like this. I'll be honest: I was really looking forward to the following day. It had been a couple years since I spoke with Mormons, so I needed to brush up on a few things. I primarily read through the King Follet Discourse - a key sermon by Joseph Smith - and some Biblical texts pertaining to the Trinity.

The next morning, I began arranging my day to accommodate their arrival. Just before 1:00pm I sat down on the living room couch, and re-read some passages before they arrived. The only problem is, they never showed. I actually waited until 1:40pm before officially giving up. And they never did show, or even call. I was a bit disappointed.

My best guess for what happened is that they took the time to look up who I was, and determined that someone with my first and last name, in Gilbert, has had dozens of encounters with Mormon missionaries. In other words, I'm on the so-called "black list" of persons not to talk to. I've been told by more than one pair of LDS missionaries, in my own home, that I'm "not worth their time, because there are many who are ready and willing to convert." In other words, they take proselytizing very much like sales: if someone isn't ready now, move on to the next person. My problem with this approach is that it is entirely unbiblical.

I completely agree that if someone is behaving unreasonably, and proves to be a factious individual, that person would fit the bill for someone you're wasting your time on. We don't want to cast pearls before swine, surely. But in my experience, respectfully and meaningfully disagreeing with Latter-day Saints is all it takes to get branded an "anti-Mormon" and "contentious" individual. The cultic mindset is demonstrated in their unwillingness to read or even to listen to the other side. Of course, they will meet with you all day if you keel over and blindly embrace their message. Be wary though of the moment you ask biblically-based questions that seem to disagree with their views. Apart from the work of the Holy Spirit, the conversation will abruptly end.

After the realization hit me that they were not showing up, I wasn't angry. I felt bad for them. After all, I once was like them: lost and deceived by sin. I'm again reminded of how beautiful the gospel is ... the real gospel that saves sinners. I'm so thankful that the triune Lord of majesty had mercy on a sinner like me, though I was completely unworthy. I can have nothing but compassion for the Latter-day Saints because they are lost sinners, part of a cultic system, where they are actively encouraged to not interact with opposing viewpoints. The saving gospel has the opposite message: know the enemies of the gospel so that you can reach them with the gospel. That's why I have taken the time to study their scriptures and beliefs: to speak their language and to be able to communicate the truths of Christianity to them. 

 

I pray that the God of Peace would have mercy on those two gentlemen, whom I may never meet; that He might save them through the power of the gospel. In the meantime, I'm happy to be a willing instrument to proclaim the good news about Jesus Christ.

14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “ How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!” (Romans 10:14-15, NASB).

Thanks for the journey,

Rusty