Today’s New Reason To Believe

by Jeff Zweerink

Next August, Reasons To Believe will host a conference on a week-long Alaska cruise onboard a Holland America ship. Those of you who plan to come along will enjoy all the comforts the ship offers as it sails along the beautiful Alaskan coast. With everything bearing the Holland America logo, imagine finding each room stocked with Royal Caribbean sheets and towels. Such evidence would indicate that other vessels beyond our own existed.

A team of cosmologists recently made a similarly shocking discovery when looking at our universe.

Since its detection in the 1960s, the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation has provided a wealth of information about our universe. This uniform, pervasive radiation points to a cosmic beginning to all of space and time. More recent studies of the CMB demonstrate that our observable universe exhibits a flat geometry and is dominated by a mysterious “dark energy.”

Perhaps the most remarkable discovery to come from studies of the CMB is that the observable universe appears to be moving in a particular direction!

The gravitational potential of galaxy clusters and their motion affected CMB photons as they passed through the clusters on their way to Earth; scientists refer to this as the Sunyaev-Zel’dovitch (SZ) effect. By measuring the SZ effect caused by the clusters’ motions—the kinematic SZ (or KSZ) effect—scientists can determine the direction and speed of the clusters. Although for individual clusters the KSZ is generally small and indistinguishable from noise, any coherent motion becomes detectable when analyzing a large number of galaxy clusters.

As reported in a recent article in the Astrophysical Journal, a team of scientists performed such an analysis. They’ve found that the entire sample of galaxy clusters is moving in the same direction with the same speed out to distances of six billion light-years. The most straightforward interpretation of this result is that gravitational effects occurring before inflation pulled the observable universe in one direction. Although inflation moved the mass/energy responsible for this “tug” far beyond our ability to detect it directly, the observable universe continues to move in the direction it was tugged.

If this result stands under further testing, it would add to the observational evidence that we live in a Level I multiverse. The authors of the article also note that this explanation may also account for the unexpectedly small values measured at the lower harmonics in the CMB radiation compared to predictions. As I described in a previous TNRTB, some have used this discrepancy to argue that the universe is basically the same size as the observable universe (which means no Level I multiverse).

To borrow an analogy from my colleague Kenneth Samples, many think multiverse furniture fits more comfortably in naturalists’ worldview. I have argued to the contrary. Not only does the multiverse not help naturalists, it finds a welcome home in a Christian setting.

If you would like to see a question about the multiverse addressed in this forum, send it to multiverse@reasons.org.

by Jeffrey Zweerink

A team of particle physicists hope to soon being operation of the most powerful man-made particle accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Although much press has focused on scientists who claim that LHC might produce objects that will eventually destroy Earth, I thought it useful to discuss one potential discovery it might make, namely the existence of extra dimensions.

The advances in string theory research over the past two decades indicate the existence of dimensions beyond the four space-time dimensions we experience. Precision tests of gravity constrain the size of any proposed extra dimensions at less than the average width of human hair. However, particle colliders like the LHC provide more powerful probes of the size of extra dimensions and also their shape.

Almost every currently available model that attempts to unify all four fundamental forces under one theoretical umbrella requires the existence of these extra dimensions. One might wonder how these extra dimensions fit within RTB’s creation model because life depends on the universe having exactly three large spatial dimensions and one large time dimension (referred to as 3+1 dimensions).

While life requires a universe 3+1 dimensionality (for the large dimensions), the extra dimensions in unified theories are small and highly curved or compactified. No experimental evidence supports the existence of these extra dimensions, but LHC scientists hope to find such evidence as data accumulates from the abundant particle collisions. In particular, certain particles can be formed only if the compactified dimensions are highly curved. Detection of these particles would verify the existence of the extra dimensions required in unified models. (For a more technical description of the particles, see this article in the Physical Review Letters.)

Only time will tell what the experimental data will reveal, but I believe the LHC will probably detect evidence of these dimensions. Furthermore, I expect future investigations of the dimensions to provide further support for the idea that a supernatural Creator fashioned this universe to support humanity.

If you would like to see a question about the multiverse addressed in this forum, send it to multiverse@reasons.org.

by Jeffrey Zweerink

Would it trouble you if scientists discover that a multiverse actually exists?

I see two issues in formulating a response to this question. First, does the multiverse conflict with Christianity? Second, how does the multiverse impact apologetics? I have addressed the former question in a previous TNRTB so I will focus on the latter question here.

In order for a strictly naturalistic multiverse model to provide an adequate explanation for this universe and our existence, it must meet a number of requirements.

First, the multiverse model must be self-contained. Christianity argues that the universe has a beginning (and thus a cause, or Beginner) and that the universe exhibits design such that human life has a suitable habitat. A naturalistic model cannot exhibit a beginning or true design because that requires an external agent—a Beginner or a Designer. Thus, any multiverse model must explain the apparent design acknowledged by the scientific community without having any aspect of the model reflect fine-tuning.

Second, any successful multiverse model must account for all observations and data. In other words, any proposed multiverse model must naturally produce a region that looks like this observable universe. Additionally, any multiverse model must also make predictions about what scientists will detect in our observable universe. Otherwise, no scientific tests can verify or falsify the model because, by definition, the proposed multiverse forever lies beyond the reach of observations.

Third, the models must provide a mechanism that produces a sufficient variety of universes. A popular argument says that a monkey typing away for an enormously long time will eventually reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare. However, the argument is only true if the keyboard contains all the letters of the alphabet as well as any necessary punctuation. With a keyboard of vowels only, the monkey will never produce any readable work regardless of how long it types. Similarly, unless a multiverse model produces a sufficient variety of universes, it cannot explain the fine-tuning observed in the laws of physics, the fundamental constants, and the characteristics of Earth, Sun, Moon, planets, and galaxy.

Fourth, our universe must be one possible outcome in the multiverse model. Otherwise the model is like a keyboard with no “e.”

Fifth, and most importantly, life must be completely physical. Although this requirement flows from the first, it bears separate mention to highlight its importance. All multiverse models I have encountered so far implicitly make the assumption that life is completely physical. However, if human life has a nonphysical component, such as the image of God, then no amount of twiddling the laws of physics and rearranging the stuff of the universe will produce a human being without divine intervention.

In evaluating multiverse models, one must keep these requirements in mind. I think it reasonable for the naturalist to assume that inflationary cosmology could produce a large number of universes that operate under different laws of physics and that this universe is one of those universes. Although both of these assumptions need further verification, multiverse advocates have put forth models currently consistent with requirements three and four.

In contrast, I have shown how robust arguments demonstrate that the multiverse must still have a beginning. Thus a strictly naturalistic multiverse fails the first requirement.

Similarly, the idea of Boltzmann brains means that our universe appears odd in the multiverse. Remember, sentient life abounds in a naturalistic multiverse model. Either the existence of Boltzmann brains means that we are atypical observers or the multiverse-generating mechanism must be fine-tuned in order to not produce Boltzmann brains. Either way, our existence appears fine-tuned. Once again, the naturalistic multiverse fails the first requirement.

In the next two “Multiverse Musings” I want to address the second and fifth requirements. An important piece of evidence for the observable universe’s geometry as well as last month’s musings indicate that multiverse models may not pass requirement two.

I am almost 100% confident that a Level I multiverse exists. However, I would argue that the term “multiverse” in this context is somewhat of a misnomer. After all, the essential point of a Level I multiverse is simply that space does not end at the farthest reaches astronomers can observe. From a scientific perspective, a Level I multiverse fails requirement three. I am more ambivalent about the existence of a Level II multiverse. Mainstream scientific views on inflation provide some evidence for a Level II multiverse, although much more speculatively than Level I.

In the end, I don’t personally see any significant biblical problems with God creating a multiverse that accounts for some of the design aspects of our universe. On the other hand, even if the multiverse exists, it still poses significant problems for a strictly naturalistic view.

If you would like to see a question about the multiverse addressed in this forum, send it to multiverse@reasons.org.