A Sixth Way from the Second Law?

brainSt. Thomas’ famous five ways of knowing of God’s existence through our reason and knowledge of the world are plenty enough for most of us to contemplate. Recently, however, in my professional work I’ve run across yet another way in which Creation gives us at least a hint — perhaps resounding evidence — for a Creator. The technical paper which occasioned these reflections — ably summarized for an educated lay audience, with commentary, here, by a politically conservative, atheist Harvard string theorist — is part of a whole literature in physics concerned with the meaning of Entropy for the direction of the flow of time (known as the “arrow of time”) and what Entropy means for theories of a universe that are purely natural — ie, that posit no supernatural origin of things.

Entropy
To summarize and remind readers, entropy is a physical quality, like temperature, that measures how ordered or disordered a system is. A perfectly cold ice crystal would be a low entropy state, while the steam coming out of a chimney is a higher entropy state. One of the most basic physical facts that we know about our world is that, over time, entropy is inexorably increasing. This is an important fact, called the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and it’s built into all of our intuitions about the world. But it’s a bit of a puzzle to theoretical physicists, because all the laws of nature we’ve found are time reversal invariant — Ie, there doesn’t seem to be any part of the fundamental laws of the world that guarantees that entropy should increase. In particular, if we were to see a film of a mound of broken glass jumping off the floor and assembling itself into a coffee mug, we would immediately conclude that the film was being run backwards. However, there is no law of physics, except for the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, that guarantees this: no fundamental law excludes the possibility of a bunch of sound and heat spontaneously picking up those glass shards and reassembling them into a ordered state.

The Low Entropy Big Bang
Taking these observations and applying them to a Universal scale, we can thus say that our own Universe must have been in a very much lower entropy state when it began all those billions of years ago than it is now. This is fine for any of us who are glad to have God involved in the whole Universe-creation business, but it is a severe problem for the atheist. Why? Essentially because he, to be consistent, must maintain that the Universe in which we live is in some sense an average one among the possibilities, that it was spontaneously born from some eternally existing prior state, and that it should be a predictable sort of product of such a prior state. But if there is anything we know about the physical world, it is that low entropy states never, ever spontaneously form. And in an eternally existing prior state, there would be an infinite amount of time available for entropy to become maximal — therefore implying that there could never be a low entropy big bang.

Fluctuations and Boltzmann’s Brains
“But what about random fluctuations?!” the desperate atheist physicist replies. “If we have all these endless epochs available to us, shouldn’t we expect there to be random fluctuations wherein low entropy big bangs might spontaneously arise?” This idea nearly works, in that it is possible at least to imagine such a thing being true; but it introduces a new problem, that of the so-called Boltzmann Brains. A Boltzmann brain is a human — or at least self-aware — mind that spontaneously is created through a low-entropy fluctuation in the eternally existing universal prior state. It turns out that, since spontaneous lowerings of entropy have a probability that is proportional to the exponential of the negative of the change in the entropy, there should — in the fluctuation believer’s model of things — be infinitely more randomly emerging self-aware Boltzmann Brains than there are naturally emerging minds like us, that live in low-entropy Big Bang universes. Thus, the naturalist, so wholly committed to being in a typical, unsurprising Universe that requires no special fine-tuning or hand of God, is left with the contradiction that he, by the very fact that he lives in a Universe and isn’t just a mind in a bubble, is a very, very, very special mind indeed.

Lots of clever folks refuse to see this as a final nail in their spurious naturalistic Metaphysics, but it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise to anyone who already knows that God made the world. But it’s still neat to see how cleverly He has arranged the signs and laws of that Universe to point to Him. And to end in a way modeled on St. Thomas: There is, therefore, a being who permitted all things to be ordered at the beginning of time, to which all men give the name of God.

6 Responses to “A Sixth Way from the Second Law?”


  1. 1 Matt Mar 16th, 2007 at 9:34 am

    I’m not sure, but your RSS feed on this new site might be broken. I personally can’t get it to work.

  2. 2 TPC Mar 16th, 2007 at 11:08 am

    A long, long, long, long time ago when I was a beer swilling undergraduate, I had a bleary suspicious that understanding how the second law fit into things required God. But I couldn’t prove it - didn’t have the math.

    God bless,

    TPC

  3. 3 Doctor Asinorum Mar 16th, 2007 at 12:56 pm

    Matt, I think the problem is on your end. I just added the RSS 2.0 feed to NNW without a problem. We offer three feeds—I think it may have been the ATOM feed that was broken.

  4. 4 Mater Marci Mar 16th, 2007 at 11:09 pm

    So does “broken RSS feed” etc point to entropy? Methinks it does.

  5. 5 StMichael Mar 17th, 2007 at 1:04 pm

    I think one of easiest metaphysical ways to respond to the charge that random fluctuations in a state prior to Planck time is to point out two things: fluctuations only occur in spacetime, and before Planck time no such state existed; second, that to maintain that the universe arose spontaneously from nothingness in the absolute sense is to deny the principle of non-contradiction and commit the prime logical fallacy. And now physics itself seems to verify that. How delightful :)

  6. 6 Ambrosius Mar 17th, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    StMichael,

    IT’s actually rather more subtle than that — atheist physicists may be philosophically naive, but they ain’t stupid.

    Some maintain the nonsensical “from nothing” position, but most think that the real Universe is eternally existing and that our universe is just part of it.

Leave a Reply




Regina Sacratissimi Rosarii,
ora pro nobis

Dramatis Personae

Ambrosius
    Praeses Noster
Iacobus
    Sub-Praeses
Iosephus
    Magister Bibendi
Doctor Asinorum
    Poeta olim laureatus
Franciscus
    Praesidis Optio
Clara
    Legatus ad mulierculas
Bonifacius
    Vetus animus

    Contact Information

    information
    - at -
    cornellsociety.org


    Sententiae Legendae



    Religiosae Societates



    Loci Traditionalibus



    Bibliopollae Catholici



    Popinae Bene Edendi





    Patrons of our Society


    St. Louis-Marie de Montfort,
    ora pro nobis

    Pope St. Pius X,
    ora pro nobis


    Patrons of our Contributors


    St. Joseph,
    ora pro nobis

    St. Ambrose of Milan,
    ora pro nobis

    St. Thomas Aquinas,
    ora pro nobis

    St. Francis (and St. Clare),
    orate pro nobis

    St. Catherine of Siena,
    ora pro nobis

    St. Alphonsus Ligouri,
    ora pro nobis

    St. John Chrysostom,
    ora pro nobis
    see stats