Whence Came You? Recent Scientific Challenges To The Big Bang Theory

Whence Came You? Recent Scientific Challenges To The Big Bang Theory

From time immemorial, the thinking man has pondered the origins of the Universe and his role in the cosmos. Scientists in the early 20th century brought forth The Big Bang Theory to explain the creation of the Universe. Recent scientific research, however, provides compelling evidence that the age of the Universe could be infinite. Was there a singular starting point of the Universe? What if the Universe has existed forever?

Understanding The Big Bang Theory

The Big Bang Theory postulates that our Universe did have a definite beginning. Prior to that, there was nothing. After that moment, there was something: our Universe. According to this theory, our Universe came into existence as a “singularity” approximately 13.7 billion years ago.

Singularities are thought to exist at the core of black holes, which are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure inside a black hole is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually smashed into infinite density. The Big Bang Theory argues that our known Universe began as an infinitely small, hot and dense singularity.

This is an illustration showing the cosmic epochs of the Universe.Then there was an explosion at which time the singularity inflated and then cooled. The Universe changed over millions of years from something tiny and very hot to the Universe’s current size and temperature. And the Universe has continued to expand and cool throughout history.  Thus, the Big Bang Theory provided a scientifically-based explanation of what happened at the very beginning of our universe continuing until our current time.  

Evidence for The Big Bang Theory

In the 1920s, Edwin Hubble studied distant spirals in the deep skies, measuring the individual stars within the spirals and HubbleandTelescopedetermining the brightness of each star. By combining these measurements with their movement and brightness, Hubble deduced that the Universe was expanding from a once compacted state.

If the Universe was smaller and denser in the past, The Big Bang Theory argues that the Universe expanded from a smaller state to reach its current point. In the 1940s George Gamow added to the theory by postulating that if the Universe was smaller it must also have been hotter. Defined by its wavelength, radiation’s energy and temperature stretch as the fabric of space expands. Thus, if the Universe were smaller, radiation wavelengths were condensed and created a higher temperature.

Extrapolating backwards, there is a point reached when radiation becomes too energetic to form neutral atoms. In the 1960s, Arno Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson experimented with the Holmdel Horn Antenna, built to detect radio waves bounced off Echo balloon satellites. When Penzias and Wilson reduced their data, they discovered a persistent low, steady and mysterious noise. Certain that the radiation they detected on a wavelength of 7.35 centimeters did not come from the Earth, the Sun, or the Milky Way Galaxy, they eventually postulated that it was the radiation left over from an explosion that filled the Universe at the beginning of its existence. They termed this remanent energy, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation. Their work helped to cement the wide-scale acceptance of The Big Bang Theory.

Recent Scientific Challenges to The Big Bang Theory

Modern scientific research demonstrates compelling evidence against the concept of a singularity as the beginning of the Universe. Astrophysicist Ethan Siegel argues that instead of the singularity point, the Universe transitioned from a prior state, not filled with matter, antimatter, radiation, neutrinos, etc. Undergoing a period of Cosmic Inflation, this pre-Universe was filled with a form of energy inherent to space itself and expanded slowly without a change in energy or temperature. In the phase of Cosmic Inflation, there was an exponential expansion that stretched the Universe flat and wiped out any ultra-massive relic particles and topological defects. Ending approximately 13.8 billion years ago, Cosmic Inflation set up the conditions that lead to a Big Bang event, thus creating our known observable Universe. This theory adds the fascinating possibility that we may be living in a multiverse and our observable Universe is just one of many Universes.

In February of 2015, two physicists, Ahmed Farag Ali, Professor at Benha University in Egypt, and Saurya Das, Professor at University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, pub440px-CMB_Timeline300_no_WMAPlished “Cosmology from Quantum Potential.” Their work proposes a “corrected” version of Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity and demonstrates inaccuracies in the current Big Bang Theory.  In the new formulation, the Universe did not originate from an infinitely dense singularity. In fact, the “theory suggests that the age of the universe could be infinite” according to the study co-author Saurya Das.

Moreover, Das and Ali’s research utilized Bohemian Mechanics to reconcile two of the most dominant theories in physics, Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity. Using this form of quantum theory, the researchers calculated a small correction term that could be included in Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity. In the new formulation, there is no zero-point singularity, and the Universe is infinitely old.

Destroying Ignorance

The Masonic Philosophical Society was established with the primary ambition to destroy ignorance. Which begs the question, “What is ignorance?” Perhaps ignorance is accepting what others tell you or what you have been taught without qucosmologyestioning. Instead of blindly accepting a concept like The Big Bang Theory as fact, Masonry teaches an individual to question why we believe something, to do our own research, and to consider other points of view. By questioning our preconceived notions, we open new doors of insight into how our world works and our role in the cosmos.

Being Blackballed – Part 2

Being Blackballed – Part 2

This is a continuation of a blog published in April 2018, and located here. In that post, we discussed the history and responsibility of balloting. Here, we’ll continue with the idea of being blackballed and the repercussions of such an event.

There are diverse attitudes to being blackballed. Some rebel to the idea that any one or any group can “shun” or “refuse” them what they seek. The idea of being blackballed is considered archaic, as if there is anything that could stop someone in our modern age from achieving what they want to achieve. To be blackballed is a singularly terrible event that should never, ever happen. There’s the view that being blackballed is akin to a formal shunning or being ostracized, whence some of this history derives, and to be blackballed is a stain on your character. Another point of view is that there is a “gang” of people who may be against you, actively working to stop you from achieving your goals. How many times have we heard, “the election is rigged?”

In other words, being blackballed is rarely caused by the person being blackballed; it is a misperception of their character, deliberate malice to stop a rising star, or punishment for some sort of wrong doing. The person blackballed sees themselves as blameless as they didn’t do the actual casting of the ballot. That is, the reason for the blackballing or the loss is viewed through their very personal lens. Modern conventional wisdom holds that ostracism is usually meant to hurt or punish people rather than support the good of society. In modern times, it is viewed as bad for the morale of a group; in ancient times, the good of the society was paramount. In short, it’s fair to say that most modern people feel that being blackballed is a very bad thing.

Perhaps we can throw a wrench in this. Perhaps we can look at being blackballed as something positive. Stanford University recently did a news story on a recent study focused on being ostracized. Interestingly enough, the researchers found that the exclusion, or being ostracized, allowed individual groups to stop bullying, stop the exploitation of “good” people, and generally allowed the group to reform the one being excluded.

The study concluded that gossip and ostracism are part of human nature and that without them, we might not as easily reform the behavior of people who don’t play well with others. In fact, those who want to be part of the group but don’t play well with others might benefit from this blackballing and learn. Being “blackballed” might have some positive effects.

There is a frame of mind that rebels at the implications of this. Should everyone conform? Should everyone play nice with others to gain some of cooperative achievements? It smacks of Big Brother or a police state; stay in line, and no one gets hurt. Perhaps in the workplace, but what about in a fraternal organization? Perhaps it is the way we go about ostracism and as stated above, how we handle our personal view of the act of exclusion that makes the difference.

Many groups are exclusionary and require requirements for admission, and not all groups should be open to all people. However, we, and I include Freemasonry in this, rarely take the time to work with people who want desperately to be part of the group. We cling to the idea that they must improve or they can’t join, and they need to do it on their own. Why should I help someone with so negative an attitude or abhorrent behavior work to become part of my “in crowd?”

Because it is not about us. It is not about ostracism but about inclusion. If we are ever to work in perfecting humanity, wouldn’t we want to step forward and help people become better? Are we, who really want to improve the world, all talk and no action? I don’t think so. I once knew a woman Freemason who said “why do all the weirdos come to us?” She was whining that everyone in her group was “not normal.” The truth is, none of us is normal, and I think that most of us want to believe that people want to improve.

If that’s the case, why wouldn’t we help people really work hard to improve themselves to make the “grade” and become one of the leaders of the perfecting of humanity? Freemasonry is about bringing together, not tearing apart. Ordo ab Chao is inclusion, not exclusion.

I listened to a recent podcast on “Whence Came You” discussing “guarding the west gate.” It was heartening to hear that all organizations, including Freemasons, have challenges about admitting quality people. There is nothing to stop us from assisting those who might not yet be worthy to become worthy. 

I have seen many people who come to Freemasonry who have a true passion for the Craft, or what they know of it, and, for whatever reason, they might not meet our “qualifications.” If someone struggles with reading or writing, why wouldn’t we work with that person/applicant to bring them up to the level where they will feel comfortable and equitable in being a member? It might mean working with them on reading, or assigning them papers to write, or book reports. It might mean encouraging them to go to a college course or Toastmasters. Rather than getting to the point of blackballing or blind acceptance, we should care enough about the people who are joining us to make those efforts to help them be comfortable and share their talents.

This kind of work, though, isn’t comfortable. It takes a strong sense of leadership and communication to be the facilitator in these types of situations. The leader must know how and why they act, how to communicate well, and how to bring people to acceptance rather than denial. It takes Lodge leaders with clear direction and sense of purpose for the good of the Order, not their personal or even singular Lodge gain. It also takes a strong character of the applicant to listen to the criticism and make appropriate lifestyle changes to improve. These are the kinds of people we want to be Freemasons: those who love the craft and want to be true service workers in the name of humanity. If we can both, the facilitator and the mentee, let go of ego and stigma, there can be true growth.

What happens when we ignore this kind of calling? I was one participating in a ballot where the person was clearly not qualified for the group they were joining. They had self-esteem issues and had problems controlling their emotional responses. They were ill-prepared for what awaited them. Unfortunately, they were balloted on and approved unanimously. Unanimously. Nothing could have been more harmful for that person and for ourselves. I was left with a huge sense of guilt for throwing this person into a situation they were ill-equipped to deal with. I was left with a sense of letting down my institution, because I did not do my duty and attend to this person’s needs rather than ego. I figured, what did I know? Who was I to deny this person? In the end, it was my responsibility to care for them and for my group, letting go of my need to be “approved of” by the group or this person. I will never forget this lesson. I will now always stand up for the truth of what I see and feel, and will take that responsibility for helping my fellow man. I’ve learned that as part of the group; it is my duty.

Should it ever get to blackballing, I would hope that the person being blackballed would have the grace, virtue, courage, and zeal to listen to the criticism with an open mind and heart, and grow from that experience. I would hope they exhibit the kind of leadership that should grow into being an outstanding Freemason and contributor to humanity. I would hope that the leadership of said group would also see it as an opportunity to grow rather than to shun, to live up to their ideals, rather than work from their sense of ego, fear, or discrimination.

Blackballing should not be shunning; quite the opposite. Blackballing should be an opportunity for Freemasons, and others, to express their truth and to help improve the person being blackballed to become better than they are. If we take the stance that we do everything we can before the ballot is cast, and perhaps that ballot is the last wake up call, then it seems we have done our duty in working on ourselves and in perfecting humanity.