© 2005 The Brotherhood of Man Library
| Personality, Identity, Mind, and Consciousness, in the Urantia Revelation | Volume 12 - No. 1 — Index | Creation of the Universe. Did God participate? |
Is a self-generating universe, starting from nothingness, a possibility? And is the spontaneous generation of life a reasonable expectation? These are the questions that, sooner or later, most of us will ask ourselves.
One answer that science has given us is that the laws of science are invalid under conditions of nothingness. Neither are they valid for the supposed conditions prior to the Big Bang. But given the Big Bang occurred, then science can certainly be helpful for estimating the probabilities of the universe developing in specified ways. Likewise for a rebound universe.
What is a rebound universe? If a universe is finite then sooner or later it should either expand forever or else collapse in a Big Crunch. The latter is different depending on whether we assume space is continuous or has some net-like structure. If continuous, the collapse could go to a dimensionless point. But if net-like then, presumably, it cannot collapse below the tiniest of its spatial dimensions and must then rebound.
If we allow ourselves to believe in some kind of self-generating universe, can we also allow ourselves to believe in the spontaneous formation of life? What are the chances for an elementary life form putting itself together from some kind of organic soup. After all there must have been a multitude of situations on the primitive earth in which all the basic ingredients necessary for living cells to self-generate were present, otherwise life would not have occurred. At least that is the hypothesis we are assuming.
All life, as we know it, consists of complex carbon-based organic molecules protected from the “outside” by some kind of membranous barrier. It would also need to be self-repairing and self-reproducing if it was to persist.
Currently it is thought that our planet came into existence about 4.5 billion years ago, and that life appeared close to the 4 billion year mark. The evidence for this includes the ratio of oxygen isotopes that accompany fossil material thought to be derived from photosynthesis by ancient organisms. This ratio is peculiar to the photosynthetic process.
Further evidence comes from the dating of ancient stromatolites in Western Australia, Canada, and elsewhere. These structures result from the activities of photosynthetic cyanobacteria. Additionally there is the dating of oxidised iron minerals that are deposited in the oceans as a result of the oxygen released into those oceans by ancient photosynthetic organisms. Those at Isua, Greenland are dated to 3.8 billion years ago.
Photosynthesis is one of the most studied of biological processes. Yet after more than 50 years of intensive effort the complexity of this process continues to defeat us–despite the potential rewards being so enormous. For if we can simulate photosynthesis, we should have an unlimited source of cheap energy.
¶ How could such a complex process develop so early in the history of our planet?
To get an idea of the complexity of putting this process together, let’s take a look at just one of its parts–that called photo-system 2, the catalytic core of which is shown in Figure 1. The 4 spheres having a dot in their middle represent manganese atoms, the smallest spheres are hydrogen atoms, middle size is oxygen, and a single calcium atom is at the apex of the box-like structure.
The manganese atoms in the box pass electrons on to the single one outside. Three electrons is enough to give it the potential to split its attached water molecule, which reaction yields an OH (hydroxyl) radical plus a proton. The next electron destroys the radical which becomes an activated oxygen atom.
The single calcium atom at the apex of the box holds its attached water molecule in exactly the right place to be attacked by the activated oxygen, the result being a normal oxygen molecule (O2), plus 2 hydrogens that are at the disposal of the host bacterium to combine with carbon to produce sugars, etc.
This core catalytic center of photosystem 2 has so far resisted all attempts to synthesize it. Yet every single day, using energy from the sun, simple single-cell bacteria produce it by the truck load.
But this is only one cog in a complex wheel. Additionally involved in photosynthesis there is photosystem 1 absorbing light at longer wave lengths, plus chlorophyll, also light absorbing, plus a group of proteins specifically tailored to stabilize the structure of the systems, even repairing or replacing them when necessary.
All of this amazing repertoire would need to have been present by the time these bacteria became effective at oxygenating the oceans sufficiently to precipitate oxidised iron minerals in layers on the floor of the oceans 3.8 billion years ago and build stromatolites almost 4 billion years ago.
Just how many different proteins were present in these very first photosynthetic bacteria almost certainly numbered above a thousand. But even if it had been just a dozen or so, the complexity of producing them is illustrated by calculations of the probability of building just one specific protein molecule through the random choice of the amino-acid building blocks from which all protein is formed.
The sequence of those building blocks is specified by the sequence of units of three nucleotides made up of adenine, guanine, thymine, and cytosine that compose the DNA gene specifying a specific protein. The chances of forming a single functional gene for an average size protein comes out at one in 10150 assuming the random selection of the sequence.
Such probabilities are multiplicative. So if we wish to make a second type of protein molecule we have to multiply 10150 by 10150 which is 10300–an utterly and impossibly remote possiblity.
In considering the origins of life on our planet nobody has yet come up with any reasonable concept of the mechanics of how such a process could have occurred.
But this is not our only set of unknowns for highly improbable events. Example–what are the chances of a universe like ours creating itself by itself? We have touched upon this in an earlier issue of Innerface but it is important enough to merit a reminder.
To actually design a universe like ours, at our present state of knowledge there are about 20 parameters (numbers) that must be entered as a ‘best guess.’ These include: how strong do we make gravity, or electric charge, or the force that holds an atomic nucleus together, and so on?
Ideally, if we had a perfect theory covering all aspects of material reality, these numbers would naturally fall out from the theory. But, at present, we have two major theories, one covering reality on a large scale (General Relativity), the other covering the scale of the atom and below with a similar degree of accuracy (Quantum Theory)–and they are incompatible!
The first of these, General Relativity, in a study on two neutron stars spiralling towards each other, has been shown to be accurate to one part in 1014 (100 million million). Nevertheless physicists claim quantum theory is the most accurate theory known to man. But despite this quite incredible accuracy of present theory, we still have to make educated guesses at the values of 20 parameters that we need for a ‘final’ theory.
How then would God go about creating a universe like ours containing people like us? To commence let’s have God simply attempt to create a universe having stars like ours.
Let’s imagine God is seated before a bank of celestial computers having the twenty dials that tune the parameters for providing the required outcome. He starts with the most important–tuning the force of gravity. The control dial is set in terms of proton masses and must be tuned so that stars are formed of the right size and lifetime to eventually provide a stable universe. If the stars are too small, they will not ignite to burn their hydrogen fuel to helium, if they are too big they won’t last long enough to be useful. Or they might collapse to a black hole.
After some tinkering, the computers throw up the number, 1x10-38 proton masses. That means one divided by 10 followed by 38 zeros. Now that’s tiny. God punches a few keys and gets some answers–the expected life of an average star comes out as ten billion years, which is about what is needed. Dropping a zero reduces lifetime by 1000-fold, drop another zero and the star lasts only 10,000 years. God accepts the computer value.
The next important job is selecting a cosmological constant that will fix the mass-energy density of space. The computers say it must be set to no more than 10-40 proton masses. More tinkering and it is found that for any bigger value, the universe won’t last long enough to produce stars. God again accepts the computer value.
God still has 18 parameters (values) to assign. While he does the work, let’s find out what the chances are of getting our kind of stars in our kind of universe if we just spin those twenty tuning dials at random.
That’s not a major problem for the celestial computers, and the answer comes in a fraction of a second as just one chance in 10229. That means one chance in 10 followed by 229 zeros!!! One chance in 10229 is so incredibly slight as to be beyond our wildest imagining–for all intents and purposes, impossible.
But a starry universe is only a beginning. For life to exist, the stars need to have planets and, among other things, inhabitable planets need to have an orbit giving a temperature range that permits permanent surface water to exist. Then an atmosphere, the right balance of chemicals, and thousands of other critical little things are essentials. Like the crucial need for an ultra-violet light filter at the top of the atmosphere. Or the right amount of oxygen in the atmosphere. A few percent increase and our forests and grasslands go up in an unstoppable blaze. Or too much carbon dioxide, and temperatures soar, the ice cap melts, ocean levels rise, islands disappear, low lying continental land is flooded, millions become homeless and displaced. Maybe all this will happen anyhow!
All things considered, the possibility for self-generating universes and self-creating life does not appear all that bright. In fact it appears to be impossibly remote. So what does the Urantia revelation tell us.
That we are called Life Carriers should not confuse you. We can and do carry life to the planets, but we brought no life to Urantia. Urantia life is unique, original with the planet. This sphere is a life-modification world; all life appearing hereon was formulated by us right here on the planet; (UB 58:4.1)
“The material self, the ego-entity of human identity, is dependent during the physical life on the continuing function of the material life vehicle, on the continued existence of the unbalanced equilibrium of energies and intellect which, on Urantia, has been given the name life”. (UB 112:2.20)
There was a time when we could put these two widely separated statements together and contend that they mean that only if an organism has the potential to develop intellect do the Urantia Book authors classify it as “life.” Accepting this definition, we could live with the indisputable evidence for what we have routinely calld “life” existed almost 4 billion years ago.
The following quotations nullify that interpretation.
“550,000,000 years ago the Life Carrier corps returned to Urantia. In co-operation with spiritual powers and superphysical forces we organized and initiated the original life patterns of this world and planted them in the hospitable waters of the realm. All planetary life down to the days of Caligastia, the Planetary Prince, had its origin in our three original, identical, and simultaneous marine-life implantations.” (UB 58:4.2)
“The bacteria, simple vegetable organisms of a very primitive nature, are very little changed from the early dawn of life; they even exhibit a degree of retrogression in their parasitic behavior. Many of the fungi also represent a retrograde movement in evolution, being plants which have lost their chlorophyll-making ability and have become more or less parasitic. The majority of disease-causing bacteria and their auxiliary virus bodies really belong to this group of renegade parasitic fungi. During the intervening ages all of the vast kingdom of plant life has evolved from ancestors from which the bacteria have also descended.” (UB 65:2.3)
Written by a “Life Carrier,” it is written as if there was no life of any kind (including bacterial life), on this planet prior to the implantations made by the Life carriers just 550,000,000 years ago.
This accords with what most believed in the 1930’s–that the pre-Cambrian period was devoid of life forms until the Cambrian age about half a billion years ago. It also accords with what is expressed on UB 101:4.1
“The laws of revelation hamper us greatly by their proscription of the impartation of unearned or premature knowledge.” (UB 101:4.1)
In many instances the Revelators have gone to extremes to follow their mandate. But they did tell us what they were doing, if we would listen. (see also UB 92:4.9, UB 115:1.3)
However they have given us their answer to the question of whether life is a spontaneously occurring phenomena. No, life is not a spontaneously occurring phenomena. It is always brought to the planets by the Life Carriers.
“Life does not spontaneously appear in the universes; the Life Carriers must initiate it on the barren planets.” (UB 36:3.1)
“The Life Carriers often carry actual life plasm to a new world, but not always. They sometimes organize the life patterns after arriving on the planet. . … Such was the origin of the planetary life of Urantia.” (UB 36:3.2)
“That we are called Life Carriers should not confuse you. We can and do carry life to the planets, but we brought no life to Urantia. Urantia life is unique, original with the planet. This sphere is a life-modification world; all life appearing hereon was formulated by us right here on the planet.” (UB 58:4.1)
According to the Urantia revelation, Life Carriers first visited this planet 900,000,000 years ago as part of an inspection commission which recommended Urantia be placed on the life-experiment registry. They returned 600,000,000 years ago but decided to wait before initiating life, something which was done 550,000,000 years ago.
So whereas the overall description of life establishment procedures may be correct, the details for Urantia certainly is in conflict with current evidence, though in line with what most thought in the early 1930 period. Perhaps we will get the opportunity to check it out on the Mansion Worlds.
That leaves us with the other question–do universes create themselves? The answer again is no, they are created. An interesting addition is that they are regulated. They do not run down and energy flow is regulated, a cyclic process that is heading towards a steady state equilibrium.
“. . . Supreme Power Centers . . . are permanently assigned to our local universe. These beings receive the incoming lines of power and relay the down-stepped and modified circuits to the power centers of our constellations and systems . . .Power centers are not, however, concerned with transient and local energy upheavals, such as sun spots and system electric disturbances; light and electricity are not the basic energies of space; they are secondary and subsidiary manifestations.” (UB 41:1.2)
The power-energy supervision of the evolutionary inhabited worlds is the responsibility of the Master Physical Controllers. . . . They are able to effect energy control in a collective as well as an individual capacity. As requirements vary, they can upstep and accelerate the energy volume and movement or detain, condense, and retard the energy currents. They influence energy and power transformations somewhat as so-called catalytic agents augment chemical reactions. They function by inherent ability and in co-operation with the Supreme Power Centers. (UB 29:4.21, UB 41:2.8)
So, barring an accident, it appears that our planet should be safe for a long time into the future.
¶ External links
- Article in Innerface International: https://urantia-book.org/archive/newsletters/innerface/vol12_1/page7.html
| Personality, Identity, Mind, and Consciousness, in the Urantia Revelation | Volume 12 - No. 1 — Index | Creation of the Universe. Did God participate? |