Noted physicist says string theory suggests we’re all living in God’s matrix

38
39900

By Mark Ellis —

Dr. Michio Kaku
Dr. Michio Kaku

Theoretical physicist, futurist, and bestselling author Michio Kaku has developed a theory that points to the existence of God using string theory.

String theory assumes that seemingly specific material particles are actually “vibrational states.”

His view about intelligent design has riled the scientific community because Dr. Kaku is considered one of its most respected and prominent voices. He is the co-creator of string field theory, a branch of string theory.

“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence,” he stated, according to the Geophilosophical Association of Anthropological and Cultural Studies.

Dr. Kaku has continued Einstein’s search for a “Theory of Everything,” seeking to unify the four fundamental forces of the universe—the strong force, the weak force, gravity and electromagnetism.

The very purpose of physics, says Kaku is “to find an equation … which will allow us to unify all the forces of nature and allow us to read the mind of God.”

Because string theory may provide a unified description of gravity and particle physics, it is considered a candidate for a Theory of Everything.

To reach his conclusions about intelligence behind the universe, Dr. Kaku made use of what he calls “primitive semi-radius tachyons.”

A tachyon is a particle that always moves faster than light. Many physicists believe such particles cannot exist because they are not consistent with the known laws of physics.

Kaku-BG1As noted by Einstein and others, special relativity implies that faster-than-light particles, if they existed, could be used to communicate backwards in time.

Dr. Kaku used a technology created in 2005 that allowed him to analyze the behavior of matter at the subatomic scale, relying on a primitive tachyon semi-radius.

When he observed the behavior of these tachyons in several experiments, he concluded that humans live in a “matrix,” a world governed by laws and principles conceived by an intelligent architect.

“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence, not unlike a favorite computer game, but of course, more complex and unthinkable,” he said.

“By analyzing the behavior of matter at the subatomic scale affected by the semi tachyon pitch radius, what we call chance no longer makes sense, because we are in a universe governed by established rules and not determined by universal chances plane.

“This means that, in all probability, there is an unknown force that governs everything,” he noted.

However, the unknown force – the first cause that set everything into being and holds everything together is actually a person, Jesus Christ, Christians believe by faith.

In Dr. Kaku’s understanding, the Universe is possibly a symphony of vibrating strings emanating from the mind of God, with His cosmic music resonating through an 11-dimensional hyperspace.

The Japanese-American physicist states “physicists are the only scientists who can say the word ‘God’ and not blush.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

 

If you want to know more about a personal relationship with God, go here

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

38 COMMENTS

    • SMH evolution is an observed fact. How did you get through medical school? We OBSERVE IT HAPPENING. Elephants are growing fewer tusks due to selective pressure; a certain lizard species in parts of the U.S. have grown longer legs and different behavioral response systems due to selective pressure from non-native fireants; another lizard species is developing placental birth before our eyes; ecoli have evolved the ability to eat poison in a lab; flue virus develop different protein shells enogh to make them resistant to shots every single year; humans have a chromosome that looks like two fused together chromosomes complete with vestigial telomeres; chicken embryos have been modified to allow existing dino-leg gene sequences to show; they’ve also been born with teeth. I’m not going to keep going because it would take months to list the many chains of evidence which back up evolution.

      But what’s hilarious about it is that EVOLUTION IS IRRELEVANT TO WHETHER OR NOT GOD EXISTS! Why do you people even bother with it? Your God is so stupid he has to interfere with the laws he created in order to produce life. My God was smart enough to get it right the first time.

      Please take your childish version of God and keep him to yourself.

      • What you are describing is MICROevolution. Of course things adapt to their surroundings. That’s how things were created. You cannot, not matter how vehemently or zealously you try, describe a single instance of one animal becoming another.

        Every farmer on the the face of the planet counts on evolution not happening.

        If you plant corn, it damn well better come up corn.
        If you put a bull on a heifer, she better have a calf!
        Has any evolutionary biologist ever seen a feathered creature hatch out of an egg laid by a reptile? ?
        Just askin’.

        • No, because evolution never works that way. You seem to think evolution is an individual thing, but it isn’t. Evolution happens to populations, not individuals. A reptile will never give birth to a bird. However, over time, as favorable mutations build in the gene pool of a breeding population, a population of organisms will become so distinct from their ancestors that they can’t interbreed. Hence, they’re new animals. At no point is a child very different from their parents, but they will be very different from their distant ancestors.

          • (Forehead-slap) The problem with your little theory there is that _it’s never been observed in nature_. It’s just a _story_ told on the basis of a precommitment to naturalism. If you begin by prejudicially discounting a face-value reading of the Bible’s creation account, then something like what you’re describing is the _only_ alternative.

            All you’re doing is verbalizing your preference for the naturalism of worldly thinking over the supernaturalism of the Bible.

            But on an observational level there are simply _no observed data_ that logically require the conclusion you’re putting forward.

      • Ben, evolution(ism) is /very/ relevant to whether the God OF THE BIBLE exists, because He has said in His word that He /didn’t/ create lifeforms that way. If you want to posit some /other/ kind of “god,” then no, evolution(ism) is irrelevant to said other “god.”

        • @Ben: You said, “Your God is so stupid he has to interfere with the laws he created in order to produce life.”

          You demonstrate that you really don’t understand the biblical account of origins. (a) There’s zero reason to think the Creator should be subject to any “laws” He’s created.

          (b) You’re assuming that the “laws” of nature are just that: actual laws, “forbidding” certain things from happening. Why do you think about reality that way? The Bible teaches that God has designed nature to operate according to certain /patterns/, yes – but not inviolate “laws” (i.e., not inviolate to the Creator Himself).

          (c) You’re assuming that in the biblical scenario the so-called “laws” were in place from the get-go. They weren’t. The Bible is very clear that during Creation Week there were no established “laws,” as such, for the simple reason that God’s 6-day creational process was /still occurring/.

          Disbelieve the biblical worldview if you wish; that’s certainly your prerogative. What’s /not/ your prerogative is to make a /caricature/ of it, and then knock down the caricature as if you’ve actually knocked down the real thing. You haven’t.

      • That is ‘adaptation’ … evolution requires the missing link which has yet to be found. A giraffe doesn’t produce a horse. A zebra adapts into a horse (or vice versa). A wolf adapts into a dog. A moth adapts color in presence of pollution within 10 yrs. A single cell organism doesn’t produce a fish. Etc. You misuse the word evolution and replace your understanding of adaptation… Mutation is not evolution.

        from a well-respected U
        http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_31
        note under adaptation
        then note under macroevolution, the links simply don’t mesh.

  3. Physics is shwoing again and again that there is some great mysterious brain behind the universe. I think there has to be one supreme intelligence that designed the rules and the materials which we all know see and feel. Therefore, what I will do is that I am going to read all religious books – the Bible, Quran and all the other top books that claim to be from God. I want to check which book is actually from Him. He must have talked to us. I got to go. This is important.

    • While you do Mark, check out the findings of the late Dr. Ivan Panin, renowned mathematician and former atheist who traveled the world teaching evolution and maths before he became a Christian. He found a mathematical uniformity within the original tongues of the Holy Bible, which does not exist in any other “holy book.” He was proficient in Hebrew, Greek, and other tongues and being mathematically inclined, he decided to see if there was any mathematical pattern within the Scriptures. As you may know, the Hebrew language has a numerical value per letter of its alphabet. What he found was astounding, so he advertized in the New York Times for many years, challenging scientists to disprove his theory and offering a vast amount of money if they could. No doubt, many would have been up for the challenge, especially with respect of the reward, but in all those years none came forward.
      He tried a mathematical formula on all the other “holy books” but said they are all discordant.
      He said it was all to do with the number 7.
      Immediately that I read that, my mind went to a verse in the Bible:
      “The Word of the Lord is pure, as silver tried 7 times, in a furnace of earth.”
      I think you may find his mathematical find, in detail, in a site called, “Unleavened Bread,” then click on “Revelations and teachings,” then click: “Science Proves The Bible.”

      All the best with your quest!

      • I have read Panin’s books. It is true and amazing. The numerical features are more than convincing of a super intelligence.

    • I hope Quran , communicate with us in a convincing manner . In fact String theory , and computer simulation theory and all lead us to a Designer , who designed everything.

      However , it seems a very good decision you took to go through the scripts which claims as from the God

      Regards
      Iqbal
      Indian

  5. Where is any of this coming from? All googling seems to be some echo of an identically worded article, and there is nothing on Michio Kaku’s twitter or website mentioning this. I find the theory quite fascinating, but there are some problems. Namely, not only that tachyons have never been detected, but also that to the best of my knowledge, no theory exists to explain how they COULD be detected.

    I would think if this were accurate, there would be an immensely larger media response than a few websites saying that “God had been proved.” Can you provide a source Mark Ellis?

    • Tachyons have never been detected or proven, but so hasn’t evolution and much of the world believes in that trash too.

      • Evolution has been observed in laboratories and observed countless times in the world. Simply denying it changes nothing.

        The problem is people like you don’t even understand the theory in the first place. Any moment you’ll say “well I’ve never seen a dog become a lion” and smugly think that somehow disproves evolution. Meanwhile evolution says that is IMPOSSIBLE, and all you’ve torn down is a ridiculously inept childish butchering of the theory.

        • Why is proving the THEORY of evolution the one pursuit in all of science that doesn’t have to conform to the LAW of entropy?

          No other branch of science is given such leeway to break what we take as fundamental in psychics.

        • I would ask this. Why with all of science’s vast knowledge of chemicals, proteins and enzymes. Have we not been able to make a concoction that would spring forth instant life? A bacteria or cells with their own genes and genetic code. A genetic code that in an instant is programmed into the organism. Evolution did it apparently by mere accident.

          • Your comment betrays a complete misunderstanding of the Theory of Evolution. The Theory of Evolution does not explain how life first appeared on earth – rather, it describes what happened AFTER that life first appeared. That being said, life did not appear on this planet by accident, and no scientist will say that it did. Science teaches us that life occurred for a reason – that there’s a mathematical, scientific explanation behind everything in the universe(s). Science DOES NOT teach us that life appeared by chance, or that our universe appeared by chance, or that we evolved by chance. There is a reason for everything – that’s why we have scientists, to help us uncover those reasons, and the explanations behind them. I completely agree with Ben Watson…It’s the small-minded people in these comments, who keep berating the Theory of Evolution (despite not even understanding it in the first place), who are wrong. YOU are the ones trying to say that everything happens by chance. YOU are the ones attempting to claim a past for which we have no evidence. YOU are the ones trying to fault a beautiful theory (and the word ‘theory’ does not mean the same thing scientifically as it does in our everyday vocabulary), for which we have a tonne of evidence. YOU are the ones trying to explain that that evidence just ‘happens to exist for no reason’. YOUR God is small-minded. The God of String Theory, evolution, mathematics, and science…is not.

            I must admit, I came here as an atheist. I discovered this page because I had been googling an article by Michio Kaku, and I clicked on this article by mistake. It piqued my interest, and I couldn’t help but read the article. At first, I didn’t even realise that I was on a religious site. When I did, I was, initially, pleasantly surprised. Upon reading the article and the comments by people such as Ben Watson, I thought to myself, ‘This is a God I could believe in – a God that doesn’t reject science, but IS science. A beautiful, eloquent God, one who created the multiverse, with it’s beautiful, mathematical complexity.’ And then I read the comments where people seemed to rehash the same old debunked arguments about evolution that make so many of us science-lovers cringe (and which cause so many of us to reject theism altogether). It’s a real shame. As Ben Watson has pointed out, you people don’t know the first thing about evolution. You’re tearing down a theory that only exists on creationist sites. The Theory of Evolution as it stands is beautiful, and eloquent…and there is a tonne of proof for it, infinitely more proof than there is for the literal God of the Bible. I truly hope that the Ben Watsons and Zachary Mittens are the religious of the future…how amazing it would be to see a world where science and religion are finally compatible.

          • I really appreciate your comments. I think you would appreciate Hugh Ross’s book, “Creator and the Cosmos,” which demonstrates some of the beauty and mathematical complexity in the finely tuned universe. His efforts to fuse God and science have put him at odds with more traditional creationists.

  7. “In the beginning was the word.” All this science only to get to John 1:1 and Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God.

    Someday maybe science will find the conclusion to all physics. “And the Word became Flesh.” John 1:14

    • There was water before light shone on earth. Genesis 1:2 And now the earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the face of the deep.

  10. You say he used “primitive semiradius tachyons?” Yeah, this is a hoax story. Tachyons are a purely theoretical particle. We have no idea if they exist, so if he’d done this experiment, he’d first have to discover a particle that moves faster than light and therefore BACKWARDS IN TIME. That would be a HUGE story, one of the biggest discoveries of our time, being able to detect and manipulate them, because we could revolutionize communications technology and potentially apply it to interstellar travel, and yet I have checked and tachyons are still totally theoretical. What I’m saying is, it sounds like someone threw a bunch of technical words together in front of a scientific term like tachyon to confuse laymen who are unfamiliar with particle physics into believing that someone has found God (although even if this experiment were true, it wouldn’t point to the Christian god or even a deity at all. It could be an intelligent race of perfectly natural beings running simulations.)

    • Quentin, have you bothered to read what Doctor Kaku has written, or listened to him speak on it? This has nothing to do with whether or not a given god exists – you, and those like you, offend me more than I can say. You don’t like what another scientist (and one of our best ones) says or thinks, so you attack – bang “its a hoax” – no its not a hoax. That is what he said. YOU cannot understand what he said, you think you are familiar with the terminology – so you attack. You know what that’s called? – that’s called attempting to silence other views. I’m sure you don’t believe that, or like that someone would call you out on it – but I am sick to death of some people in the scientific community acting far more like religious fanatics than most religious people. When you cannot discuss, have to call names and have to be right that NEVER proves your views, but always the opposite.

      Regards.

  11. The statement begins by one and says “I do not believe in absolutes!” Well then I ask the one who makes this statement, “Do you believe in your statement, as an absolute? If you say no, then what does this mean? a possibility that absolutes exist? If you say yes, what does this mean? Hypocrisy are you not contradicting yourself? the foundation of a non belief in absolutes ceases to exist therefore making the former statement null and void. Yet nothing is impossible, and at the same time there are many things that are quite impossible. The idea of there being a void, nothingness,zero is impossible. As I said, nothing is impossible. The absence of space is not possible because nothing is impossible. Not one person can fathom the meaning of nothing, the concept of there not being anything. The famous question we ask all the time, what exists beyond the expansion of the universe? Further more if that was established then what exists beyond that and so on and so fourth. We can all imagine the most massive numbers our minds can muster, a Googleplexian? So many zeros that if each zero represented one single electron and the entire universe was one gigantic chalkboard, could all these zeros fit on this chalk board? Not even close, not even if you multipled a googleplexian of universe size chalkboards still not enough room. I will stop imagining massive numbers because no matter how massive a number our minds can imagine there is always another much larger hoarde of numbers waiting in the background ready to dwarf our last concept of what we thought was a huge number. But this number of zeros equating to electrons on multiple universe size chalkboards is a silly tiny miniscule number when compared to “infinity” infinity looks at all these numbers and laughs.

  12. Dr. Kaku is an absolute genius – and String theory is getting some empirical evidence now, as is multiversal theory. However, to jump from his excellent presentation on this topic to argue that it “must” be the Christian god, or even the Abrahamic god is a leap of unbelievable proportions. It could be any god, or it could be many gods. I choose to accept everything that harms no one and helps everyone. I spent several years in evangelical Christianity – and I absolutely reject their extremism and absolutism. They are destructive, particularly the Reconstructionist branch – as is much of Islam and even some of Judaism. Find a loving, caring, worthwhile faith construct and stick to it – or live as atheists if you prefer – most atheists I know are very good people.

    • Reynolds, I appreciate your point of view and will agree that Dr. Kaku’s ideas do not necessarily prove the existence of the Christian God.
      The fine tuning and mathematical precision of the universe all point to the existence of God, generally speaking.
      I am sorry for the experience you had with evangelicals. The most important thing to me is having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, who will never disappoint.

Comments are closed.