Wednesday 14 December 2011

Higgs Boson

Why does stuff have mass? One would have thought it just does, but wow, there is a reason that things bind together, to make 3D stuff. Apparently the Higgs particles are part of the answer. What they won't answer is the question why there is stuff at all, because that question can be applied to the Higgs particles. Questions about ultimate origins of anything, including the particles with no mass, which would whizz about at the speed of light forever were it not for the Higgs particles, still remain. Scientists are still scratching their heads about gravity, dark matter, anti-matter and matter and the relationship between these last two. Isn't theoretical physics wonderful?
In the spiritual realms, the great question is, why is there evil if an all powerful perfectly good God exists? The traditional answer from the Christian stable has to do with the gift of love and free will. Love, which I believe is the divine attribute alluded to in Genesis 1.26, needs free will to be love at all. Free will is the very thing which can undo love, by choosing not to. Not even God can work logical impossibilities, like making love independent of free will. The consequence of the choice to depart from the high ground of love is charted in Genesis Chapter 3. But some like Martin Luther, see in that chapter a promise to fix at least the damaged relationship between people and God: Ch3.15, where God, speaking to the Serpent says that the offspring of the woman will crush his head, while he will strike at his heel. Some see this as a promise to deal with the power of evil and as alluding to Jesus Christ. Admittedly this is hotly disputed. I like to read it as the instant response of a distraught God to the catastrophic consequences of sin. I hear him say, "I will fix this" in that moment. Christmas in my opinion, is to theology what the Higgs boson might be to Theoretical Physics. Christ has come. God keeps his promises.

Tuesday 13 December 2011

Kyoto

2 degrees celcius. If the average temperature of our planet increases by just 2 more degrees, we will be outside zones previously known in the entire history of mankind, and we have been around for around 200,000 years or so, according to science. This means a scale of unpredictability of unprecedented size. No-one knows quite what exactly this might mean for planet earth and humanity, and all life. Massive population shifts are certainly predicted, but these do not come about alone, or without conflict. Quarrels over diminishing and less accessible fuel resources and other naturally occurring necessities would be highly likely too. Quite a doomsday kind of scenario. All the more so when you listen to the experts talk with apprehension about the fact that agreements are not likely to really kick in until 2020. They talk of a tipping point beyond which it would be impossible to reverse the heating up process, because the warming itself unlocks more greenhouse gasses which in colder conditions are trapped in the seas and forests of our planet. They worry that the tipping point will be reached well before we get our act together to stop the process.The process, by our chronological standards seems slow, although the momentum is vast, but by Earth's own chronological standards we are positively hurtling into a new era. Our 200,000 years is a drop in the ocean of Earth's time frame. David Attenborough has even made his own plea, using evidence gleaned from his massive experience of globe trotting and observing the planet.
So, Kyoto, and what it represents could be as important as life and death. Unfortunately, for as long as it is not this generation's power wielders' lives and deaths, no-one is going to hit the absolute panic button. I think it probably is too late to stop us going into uncharted waters. (No pun intended.) So what is left for humanity? Well, the uncharted waters need not, might not, mean an end for humanity, nor even some kind of apocalyptic doomsday scenario, but what will be needed is a spirit of co-operation and mutual help and sharing on a scale the like of which we have never seen. History does not give us much cause for hope. However, a changed landscape and planet just might give us the motivation to give up fighting for individual national survival, to co-operating for corporate international survival. We can but hope, for the children of our grandchildren.

Monday 12 December 2011

26-1

As soon as I heard that David Cameron had faced off 26 European leaders and vetoed their agreement last week, I felt that this was indeed blogworthy. You have to hand it to him, it takes some degree of courage to face a whole roomful of people, particularly when they are heads of governments, and stand your ground and disagree with them to the point of becoming isolated from them. His cool acknowledgment of Sarkozy as he brushed past him in the meeting room spoke volumes. I was reminded of one of my favourite verses in the Bible by all this: Exodus 23.2 "Do not follow the crowd to do wrong". Now, please do not take this as a ringing endorsement of Cameron's politics in all this. It might well be that in following this crowd, he would have been doing right. I am only expressing my admiration for one act of boldness, which is not admiration of the matter about which he was being bold, nor is it even agreement about the correctness of his stance, and to be even more brutal, I shall shortly take away some of the praise I have just lavished upon him. But, to hold my theme for a moment more, I have always thought that people put more weight on what the majority do, than whether what they do is right or not. Indeed for some people, the principle of democratic decision making is so strong, that for them, the rightness of a decision almost depends on how that decision has been made. If by democratic means, then it is right. Peer pressure is a powerful thing. I had a parishoner write me on the subject of inviting the congregation to decide matters pertaining to church policy, on the grounds that democracy was self evidently the right way to do this. If this were the case, the government would hold referenda on every law change they were proposing. But within church circles, the argument which runs, "People say", or, "A lot of people are saying..." is a powerful tool.
Anyway, back to Cameron. The man vetoed the move to tighten up banking regulations because he was concerned about safeguarding the English financial and banking institutions, many of which do their main business from within the City of London. The Tory party receives over 50% of its income from the City Institutions. A moment ago I said peer pressure is a powerful thing. One might also reflect that, money talks.