I recently read an article by Isaac Asimov, written in 1964 and published in a World Book Encyclopedia. He told in scientific terms how life on this planet probably started. After I read it, it was like a light turned on in my head.

A long time ago, when the Earth was very different than it is today (i.e., no plants, no animals, no Starbucks, lots of hydrogen and nitrogen in the atmosphere, etc.), the oceans were much more volatile and both liquids and gasses on this planet were much thinner. The sun’s rays could penetrate the atmosphere much more powerfully, and UV rays would get through to everything. At some point, the oceans’ water was less like the water it is today and more like ammonia, with all the hydrogen and whatnot, which is a fair argument since hydrogen is the most abundant substance in the universe.

Back in the 1950’s, some scientists ran a series of tests in which they concentrated UV rays on liquid mixtures that they theorized the oceans were probably like. The UV rays typically caused the atoms to get very excited, and larger molecules formed. They found in several of the compounds (which were most akin to ammonia) that the concentrated UV rays caused the creation of amino acids, which are the basic building blocks of proteins, which are key to providing energy for things like, oh, you know, self-reproduction.

So, the theory goes that back on ancient Earth, the sun’s UV rays eventually created amino acids in the ocean, which after a while formed into proteins, and sooner or later cells began to reproduce themselves (ta-da! Life!), and gradually became more and more complex, which has gotten us to where we are today.

Asimov said it more elegantly.

Nevertheless, I find it to be a very, very good explanation of how life actually started, and it was verified by multiple experiments trying to do exactly that. Once I read this, I knew I had science on my side.

Before reading on, I would like to steer you towards my friend Ben’s blog, where he has posted an interesting article on the natures of science and religion (it is the article dated June 16, 2007).

You’ll see why I had you read that first later; for now, back to what I was saying.

Now – since this life-on-Earth notion can be given an estimated relative time stamp of a few billion years ago, it stands to reason that anything can be given a time stamp in terms of Earth years. Hence, the Big Bang, which is the current theory on how the universe got started, can be said to have happened at some point in the past, billions or trillions or superkajillions of years ago. (Of course, it wasn’t literally a “bang,” which would last only a moment, but rather a lengthy process of expansion.) Both can be represented as dots on a timeline.

What, I wonder, came before the Big Bang? What was there before the explosion? Where did all this hydrogen come from?

I have heard it said that it was always there, and no matter how far back we stretch we will always see bits of the universe that eventually morphed into what we have now. However, I cannot help wondering where it all came from. If matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but can only change its form – which is a law of the universe, so it’s true – when did the matter come to be? Where did we get all this hydrogen?

I accept that the human mind cannot grasp infinity. We can only define it as a concept. That’s the nature of it, that there is a beginning but no end. On a line, your “beginning” would have to be any point you choose and the line can go infinitely in either direction. Similarly, in space, you can pick one point and go in any direction infinitely. It works in a relative way.

But suppose there is an infinite amount of matter in the universe. You could continue counting hydrogen atoms into infinity, but it’s a quantity, not a direction, so you would have to start from 0 and increase that number forever. With this in mind, I cannot shake the feeling that somewhere along the timeline, way, way back, the amount of hydrogen atoms was at 0. What I want to know is what there was before that. No stars, obviously, infinite space, but where did the matter come from?

I can’t believe that “it was always there” is a sufficient answer. I mean, it will have to suffice for now, but I maintain faith that it will one day be explained scientifically, that a logical and rational explanation that can be tested and proven will arise. Perhaps never in my lifetime, but probably eventually. I like the TV show “House,” because House says things like “There is nothing in the universe that cannot be explained…eventually.” Which I believe is true.

Hopefully, you’ve read Ben’s article by now. If you haven’t, I’ll tell you this much: he makes a great point that science is the “how” and religion is the “why.” With that in mind, I will assert this: I am not a particularly religious person, especially when it comes to the physical science of the universe, but I can see how it would be argued that science is my religion. I do have blind faith that there is a rational, scientific explanation.

The difference is that I believe not in a higher power in this respect, but in fact the exact opposite. I refuse to accept that “Oh, well, God did that.” It doesn’t satisfy me. It doesn’t answer my question. It doesn’t matter if God did it or not. It doesn’t matter if God exists or not. There is an explanation; it’s just that no one’s told me yet.

(Ben also brings up the very true point that science is built specifically so that if you’re proven wrong, that’s totally okay, in fact it’s better that way, whereas religions tend to invent an answer, declare it to be absolute truth, and reject all further discoveries that might contradict them. I happen to agree, and I think that’s why I trust science more than religion.)

Anyway, like I was saying: I’m fine with time going backwards into infinity, because time is not physical. But where the fuck did we get all this hydrogen?

Filed by Bil at 9:08 pm under Religion, The Science