科學不斷發現創世證據

梁斐生 

【編者按】關於宇宙的由來，人類一直沒有一個固定的答案。《聖經》啟示的上帝創造天地一說固然絕對，卻因與今相隔時代久遠且缺乏相應的科學依據而被很多人當成是神話故事。難道這一切真的就無從考證？不，現當代天文學家層出不窮、有意無意的發現，正在幫助我們從一個理性的角度越來越了解和接近宇宙起源的真相。文中，梁斐生博士從天文學的角度出發，通過數位諾貝爾獎得主的發現證實了宇宙有起源、從無到有、被造等客觀事實——這與《聖經》的創世觀點，不謀而合。梁博士曾任職加拿大國防部多年，致力於國防太空、通訊衛星、反飛彈防禦及核子輻射研發工作，著有《從聖經揭開動蕩世代的奧秘》。

正 文

聖經開宗明義第一句就宣告：“起初，上帝創造天地。”（創世記一1）可到了1789年，法國化學家拉瓦錫（Lavoisier）從實驗證明，物質是永恒的，不能消滅，也不能憑空產生。於是很多人相信聖經與質量守恒定律無法共存，宇宙絕不可能是上帝從無變有的創造。

1917 年，愛因斯坦從相對論的數學程式發現宇宙在不斷地擴張或收縮，但是因為當時學術界普遍的信念是：宇宙是靜止永恒不變的。為了使數學程式迎合當時的“知 識”，愛氏特別引進一個常數，抵銷宇宙不斷擴張或微縮的可能性。當時的比利時神父，天文數學家李密特（Georges Lemaitre）已指出，這個常數做成愛氏的方程式不穩定。李氏從相信聖經的角度看，宇宙應該是由一個宇宙蛋（cosmic egg）爆炸而成。

到了1931年，美國天文學家哈勃（Edwin Hubble）借助當代最大的望遠鏡觀察，發現大多數星係都有紅移現象，不斷向外迅速擴展。這時愛因斯坦才承認，他所附加的宇宙常數是一生中最大的錯誤，同時亦接受了“宇宙有起源的必須性”。

1940 年代，留美俄裔物理學家伽莫（George Gamow）進一步提倡宇宙起源爆炸論（The Big Bang Theory），卻備受當時天文學界的冷嘲熱諷。著名的無神論哲學家羅素（Bertrand Russell，1872-1970）說：“整個宇宙的產生隻是偶然，我們沒理由相信宇宙有任何起源，以為凡事必有起源是因為想像力貧乏。我 們現在找到許多被認為是自然規律的事，不過是人類的習慣用法。”芝加哥大學的亞特樂（Mortimer Adler）在《How to Think About God（怎樣思想上帝）》一書中，也拒絕相信宇宙有任何起源的可能，因為“如果宇宙有起源，就得先假定有一個創始者”。

【第一對獲獎者，證實宇宙有起源】

1965 年美國貝爾（Bell）研究所的彭西亞斯（Arno Penzias）和威爾遜（Robert Wilson），無意中測量到宇宙起源大爆炸餘留至今的微波輻射，正好符合伽莫的理論：假如宇宙真由激變性大爆炸（Catastrophic Cosmic Explosion）形成，那麽溫度高達兩千億的原始火球（Primordial Fireball）可能至今仍保存輻射背景的蹤跡。

1978年，彭、威二人獲諾貝爾物理獎，是因證實宇宙有起始的第一對物理學家。彭氏表示：“天文學叫我們認識一件獨特的事：宇宙是無中生有的。當中須要非常微妙的平衡和精確的條件，才可產生生命，可能背後是有計劃（或超自然）的因素。”

【第二對獲獎者，發現宇宙誕生的證據】

接 下去美國太空總署（NASA）為解決宇宙創始之謎，於1989年發射了宇宙背景探險號（Cosmic Background Explorer, COBE）人造衛星。1992年4月23日，太空物理學家史莫特（George Smoot）公布，發現了宇宙起源爆炸所引發的微波。史氏說：“微波中較小的已形成天河係（clustered galaxies）和太空中廣闊無邊的空間。”霍金稱這“若非是有史以來至大的發現，便是世紀創舉”。

史 莫特宣稱：“我們找到的是宇宙誕生的證據。”“好像張開了眼，看到上帝一樣。其中的秩序是多麽精美、多麽均衡和精密！讓我們聯想到宇宙背後必有設計。當我 們解釋宇宙大爆炸遺留下的微波，簡直像讀到上帝第一天創造宇宙的日誌。有什麽比這工作更神聖？”當記者詢及究竟是什麽力量促成宇宙原始大爆炸及這微細的波 浪，史莫特認真地回答：“上帝可能是它的設計者。”著名的無神論哲學家弗盧（Anthony Flew）說：“現代宇宙學令頑固的無神論者汗顏，因宇宙學者已經提供哲學上認為不可能的證據─宇宙是有起始的。”

2006年，史莫特和美國太空總署的馬瑟（John Mather）雙雙獲得諾貝爾物理獎，成為因證實宇宙有起源而獲諾貝爾獎的第二對物理學家。

【第三對獲獎者，證實從無變有的可能】

2012年7月4日，歐洲核子能中心（CERN）宣布，在歐洲地下100米的大型強子對撞實驗中，觀察到科學界尋覓近半個世紀的“上帝粒子”，證實他們所提出的希格斯場（Higgs field）的存在，使無質量的光子和粒子轉變為具有質量的物質。

因為涉及質量從無到有的過程，甚有上帝從無到有的創造意味，因而被稱為“上帝粒子”。無神論者霍金曾打賭不可能找到“上帝粒子”，至此隻得認輸。

2013年，因為提出“上帝粒子”的英國物理學家希格斯（Peter Higgs）和比利時的恩格勒特（Francois Englert）一同獲得諾貝爾物理獎，是為印證宇宙起源的第三對學者。

【可能第四對獲獎者：發現引力漣漪】

2014年3月19日，《以色列時報》以頭條標題報導：“以色列正統物理學家聲稱：宇宙大爆炸的新證據支持聖經的創造論。”

以色列巴伊蘭大學（Bar-Ilan University）前物理學係主任阿維澤爾（Aviezer）表示：“這些引力波證實宇宙大爆炸的發生。”“宇宙大爆炸與創世記的記載完全吻合。”

“如果不討論是誰，或因什麽緣故而引起宇宙大爆炸，宇宙創始的大爆炸過程與創世記完全吻合。若一定要我提出一個理論來解釋創世記，我會選大爆炸。”

“根據創世記，宇宙的創造是由能量和光的球從虛無突然出現，與宇宙大爆炸論所描述的能量和光球完全一樣。”“多個世紀以來，無中生有的創造被認為是不可能，今天卻被視為科學事實。”

他又補充，接受這個學說與宗教無關，並引用霍金的話說：“實際的創始點是在目前已知的物理學範圍以外。”

近期現代宇宙學的作者，加州大學的紹基（Joseph Silk）教授說：“大爆炸是現代版的宇宙創始。”

英 國舉世聞名的天文和數學家彭羅斯（Roger Penrose）在其著作《The Emperor's New Mind（國王的新思）中指出，要造成類似今日我們所居住的宇宙，設計的精確度必須達到(10^10)^123分之一。從任何數學角度來看，(10^10)^123分之一的精確度絕不能用偶然和巧合解釋。

賈斯特羅（Jastrow）是美國太空總署的創始人之一，他說：“現在我們看到太空的證據怎樣指向聖經的創世觀點。”

曾獲英國最負盛名科普利榮譽獎的英國科學家惠特克（Edmund Whittaker）認為，宇宙的起源是因“上帝按自己的意思，從虛無創造大自然”。

彭西亞斯說：“迄今從觀察或收集所得的天文數據，全都支持宇宙是被造的。”

史莫特說：“毫無疑問，大爆炸論與基督教從無變有的創造論平行共存。”

 

 

Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God

The odds of life existing on another planet grow ever longer. Intelligent design, anyone?

By Eric Metaxas Dec. 25, 2014 4:56 p.m. ET Wall Street Journal

In 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.

Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 27 zeros—planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 24 zeros—planets capable of supporting life.

With such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large, expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the 1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search continues with private funds. As of 2014, researchers have discovered precisely bubkis—0 followed by nothing.

What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”

As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

There’s more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself.

Mr. Metaxas is the author, most recently, of “Miracles: What They Are, Why They Happen, and How They Can Change Your Life” (Dutton Adult, 2014).