Being in the Universe

The great physicist, Stephen Hawking, whom I have written of before here, posits that the universe is forever "expanding."

One may say that time had a beginning at the big bang, in the sense that earlier times simply would not be defined. It should be emphasized that this beginning in time is very different from those that had been considered previously. In an unchanging universe a beginning in time is something that has to be imposed by some being outside the universe; there is no physical necessity for a beginning. One can imagine that God created the universe at literally any time in the past. On the other hand, if the universe is expanding, there may be physical reasons why there had to be a beginning. One could imagine that God created the universe at the instant of the big bang, or even afterwards in just such a way as to make it look as though there had been a big bang, but it would be meaningless to suppose that it was created before the big bang. An expanding universe does not preclude a creator, but it does place limits on when he might have carried out his job!

Man's knowledge of his surrounding is forever "expanding." It is his forever arrival of what has already been.

Being a Genius

Who is a genius? Some believe in genius a must who visits, others believe that it is born, and still others believe that it is a combination of both. Some think that genius is the subjective nature of opinions. But make no mistake about it, genius, is a collective label and by this notion it is not altogether personally subjective. We don't have to like a piece of art or music or wholly appreciate a technology to recognize the artist or inventor's genius, yet we collectively agree.

For example, we collectively agree that DaVinci was a genius. We collectively agree that Mozart was a genius. We collectively agree that Stephen Hawking is a genius.We collectively agree that George Washington Carver was a genius. We collectively agree that Prince is a genius. We collectively agree that Auguste Rodin was a genius. We collectively agree that Marcel Proust was a genius. We collectively agree that Thelonious Monk was a genius. We collectively agree that Sartre was a genius. We collectively agree that Alexander Pushkin was a genius. We collectively agree that Georgia O'Keeffe was a genius. We collectively agree that Toni Morrison in a genius. We collectively agree that Van Gogh was a genius. We collectively agree that Thomas Edison was a genius.

Genius is not merely subjective; it's collective thought and acceptance. It's also impact, appreciation and value. The interesting thing is that geniuses are not often labeled as such during their lifetime. But it is something that we recognize collectively in spite of particular present or future acknowledgment, individual taste or in-depth knowledge of those who appreciate them. I love the mind of Stephen Hawkings, but some of what he says just blows me over, not only because my background is not physics, but because of his particular perceptions of science and the universe.

By the way, all of the above geniuses stand alone as individuals with repeated brilliant works and discoveries, though more than a few, such as Rodin and Edison, worked so closely with others that here are discrepancies as to who actually created some of their works and inventions. But the muse remained with these, but it would be interesting to think what they thought of their own works. Van Gogh certainly did not think very highly of his works all the time, neither did Mozart or O'Keeffe and many others as their letters reveal.

What are your thoughts on genius? Who else might be included?

Being Inspired by Others

"The force of his mind overcame his every impediment."

-- Thomas Macaulay on Samuel Johnson.

The same can be said of the brilliant physicist, Stephen Hawking.

Being Compatible

While the Catholic church found Galileo guilty of heresy in the 16th century, later vindicating him in the 20th century, it is just good to see that science and religion can come together on agreeable terms, even if the beliefs haven't always been believed to be compatible.

In this sense it was particularly wonderful to see that the Vatican invited the brilliant physicist, Stephen Hawking, to speak at an event given by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. "There is no opposition between faith's understanding of creation and the evidence of the empirical sciences," said Pope Benedict.


In an interview with Reuters last year Hawking said that he was "not religious in the normal sense." Many of us would not be considered such either. "I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science," he continued. "The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws."

The laws of God and those of science may be indeed compatible.