Life after death seems at first glance to be an outlandish, ridiculous idea, but today it is an idea that is supported by the latest findings in modern physics and astronomy.  Preposterous?  Well, let us see.  Let's begin by asking what has to be true for life after death to occur.  There are two major versions of immortality upheld by the world's major religions and philosophies.  The first one is the survival of the soul, and the other is survival of the soul reunited to a resurrected body. 

Right away we see that in order for life after death to be viable, a formidable set of conditions is required.  In the Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity and Islam—the afterlife occurs in eternal realms beyond the universe and beyond space and time.  So this conception requires the existence of realms or universes not limited by the constraints of space and time.  Moreover, the Abrahamic religions also affirm that after a final judgment we will all possess reconstituted bodies that are in material in some sense and yet imperishable.  For this to happen, matter must be capable of qualities that are radically different from any matter that we have experienced.  What does modern physics say about all this?

Philosopher Bertrand Russell contemplated these issues and emphatically rejected the possibility of life after death.  Russell noted that all our experience is bound up with space, time and matter.  We have tested laws that show us what matter is and how it behaves.  Since this is how we define experience, it makes no sense to talk of experiences following death that are not like this.  "All experience," Russell contended, "is likely to resemble the experience we know."  And if we cannot even imagine a human type of experience continuing after death, well, then we have to say that there is no life after death.

Even in the mid twentieth century, when Russell wrote these words, this was a very dubious argument.  The preceding decades had witnessed a revolution in science, no less epochal than the Copernican revolution, that involved a complete reformulation of the laws of space, time and matter as they had previously been understood and as they still seem to us in everyday experience.  This strange new world of relativity, quantum mechanics and string theory offers a whole range of new possibilities.

Space and time:  Einstein's theory of special relativity shows that space and time are very different from how we experience them.  They are not absolutes, but relative to each observer.  Einstein's general relativity showed that we experience space in three dimensions and time in one, but nature functions in a four-dimensional framework of space-time.  So our normal experience is not a reliable guide to these phenomena.

The real significance of the Big Bang—the primordial explosion that brought the universe into existence—is not that nature had a beginning.  It is that space and time also had a beginning.  Modern astronomy shows that the universe didn't begin in space and time; it began with space and time.  In Newtonian physics, space was presumed to extend indefinitely in all directions, and time to stretch infinitely into the past and the future.  The evidence of modern science is that these presumptions are wrong.  Space and time are properties of our universe.  "Before" our universe, there was no time.  "Beyond" our universe, there is no space.  Suddenly the Jewish and Christian concept of eternity—which is to say, of existence outside of space and time—becomes scientifically coherent.

Matter: Today we know that most of what we call "matter" is actually empty space.  How do physicists know this?  By probing the structure of the atom.  The  nucleus of the atom contains almost its entire mass, and yet the nucleus is only a tiny fraction of the size of the atom.  If the atom is envisioned as Wrigley Field, the nucleus is about the size of a baseball in the center of the field.  Beyond it there is mostly nothing except for a few electrons.  Probe the nucleus and you find it's made up of quarks.  But no one has seen a quark; its properties are inferred from complex experiments.  Quarks and electrons are often pictured as tiny objects but they are better understood as mathematical concepts or probability distributions.  We think of matter as solid, massy stuff, but for the most part there's nothing there.

Even more remarkable than matter behaving weirdly is the existence of matter that we can't detect at all.  Yes, this is spooky invisible matter that physicists call "dark matter" and "dark energy."  Dark matter is inferred to exist because the galaxies hold together in clusters yet the gravitational force of ordinary matter is not strong enough to make this happen.  Therefore, scientists say, there has to be some other kind of matter that we don't see.

Dark energy was discovered in a similar way.  The universe is expanding at an accelerating pace.  The Big Bang can account for the expansion, but it cannot account for the acceleration.  To see why, imagine a big blast that sends a stone flying into the air.  However fast it goes, it can be expected over time to slow down.  But what if it goes faster and faster?  Well, some other force must be pushing it.  Scientists say that dark energy is the force that explains the increasing pace of the universe's expansion.

So how much of all the matter and energy in the universe is dark?  The figure is an astounding 95 percent.  Ordinary matter and energy make up a mere 5 percent of all the matter and energy in the universe.  Dark matter and dark energy cannot be observed or detected by any instruments and have qualities radically different from any matter or energy that we can see or measure.  The existence of dark matter and dark energy pretty much renders all generalizations about matter irrelevant.  How can you make statements about something when you can only claim to understand 5 percent of it?

Other realms: String theory is a powerful new approach to physics that seeks to unify Einstein's relativity with quantum mechanics.  In its most famous form, so-called M theory, scientists tell us that reality is divided not into four but rather eleven dimensions, ten of space and one of time.  So where are the other dimensions?  Well, string theorists say they are hidden dimensions, somehow positioned so they are invisible and inaccessible to us. While we can't see them, they help to account for the things that we do see.  As physicist Lisa Randall puts it, "We live on a three-dimensional slice of a higher-dimensional world."

From multiple realms, we now move to multiple universes.  In recent years, physicists have sought to account for the special properties of our universe by positing the existence of multiple universes.  Astronomer Carl Sagan noted that we might never be able to verify the existence of these universes because they are likely to have "different laws of nature and different forms of matter" than our universe.  Even so, scientists say that there may be an infinity of universes other than our own.  A second possibility is that our universe may be a small part of a supersized multiverse, each part with its own modes of being and operating according to its own laws.

In this context, the Harvard astronomer Owen Gingerich considers the Christian notion of heaven.  "It is a totally other place…where the inhabitants never grow old.  It thus cannot be our present world remodeled, for the remodeling would strike at the heart of all our physical understanding.  To suspend the rules of our cosmos would be tantamount to being in another universe."  Gingerich's point is that if our universe were the only one, then the Christian scheme of heaven would seem impossible.  If there are multiple universes, however, it is quite conceivable that one of them operates precisely according to the guidelines of the Christian empyrean.  Heaven now becomes a real possibility under the existing diversity of laws that govern multiple universes.  Certainly it is not contradicted by anything that we know about modern science. 

Indeed the discoveries of modern physics and astronomy show us that the kind of experiential objections that Russell offered to life after death carry no weight at all.  They are based on a kind of common sense that is itself based on the physics of earlier generations, and which has now been shown to be an unreliable guide to reality as a whole.  The proposed scenarios for life after death are entirely consistent with respectable science, and stand proudly alongside the most important and cutting-edge ideas and discoveries, from relativity to quantum physics to dark matter to multiple universes. 

Atheists can no longer ridicule as unscientific the idea of eternal places beyond time, or of invisible matter that isn't like any matter we know, or of realms that have their own laws and their own modes of being.  Heaven?  Incorruptible bodies?  They all make sense today in a way that they didn't before.  Modern physics has expanded our horizons and shown how life after death is possible within an existing framework of physical reality.

U.S. and Welsch researchers obtain detailed image of early universe using a telescope in the Antartctic

The researchers led by Professors Walter Gear of Cardiff University and Sarah Church of StanfordUniversity said their measurements of the cosmic microwave background provide further support for the standard cosmological model of the universe.

They said their findings confirm the model's prediction that dark matter and dark energy make up 95 percent of everything in existence, while ordinary matter makes up just 5 percent.

"When I first started in this field, some people were adamant that they understood the contents of the universe quite well. But that understanding was shattered when evidence for dark energy was discovered," Church said. "Now that we again feel we have a very good understanding of what makes up the universe, it's extremely important for us to amass strong evidence using many different measurement techniques that this model is correct, so that this doesn't happen again."

Space Daily

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Early_universe_supports_dark_matter_theory_999.html

Among the most astounding, unexpected, and important achievements of the past century (or even more) have been the discoveries of dark matter and dark energy, collectively dubbed the "dark sector."

physorg.com

A Theory of Dark Matter

"A whopping 96% of the essence of our universe lies in the dark sector, where essence refers to everything that controls evolution and large-scale properties of the cosmos. Dark matter is unseen matter -- unseen in the sense that it emits no detected electromagnetic radiation (light, radio waves, etc) -- but it has been definitively spotted nonetheless because its gravity has measurable effects on stars, things that we can see. Of all of the matter in the universe, an incredible 90% is dark matter, with galaxies and stars being only minor constituents. We do not know what dark matter is, only that it is almost surely made of kinds of elementary particles unlike those that comprise normal atoms.

Dark energy, on the other hand, is not a form of matter at all (nor is it literally 'dark' -- that is just a poetic way of saying that it is mysterious). It is the source of the outward acceleration of the cosmos, and, based on reasonable assumptions about our current understanding of elementary particle physics, may arise from the vacuum, which has quantum properties that provide energy to the cosmos. Alternatively, dark energy may be a feature of gravity that produces cosmic repulsion on a large scale.

CfA scientist Douglas Finkbeiner, together with three of his colleagues, has published a new paper in Physical Review D with a possible explanation for dark matter.

They are able to approximately describe this astonishing dark matter by making an equally astonishing proposition: the existence of a new force of nature. There are only four known forces in the world: the familiar gravitational and electromagnetic forces, and two forces whose domain is at the scale of the atomic nucleus and are less commonly appreciated, the so-called strong and weak forces."

physorg.com

http://www.physorg.com/news171640779.html

Physicist Stephen Barr examines scientific discoveries that increasingly confound expectations of the materialist and confirm those of believer's in Modern Physics and Ancient Faith

Barr begins his book by pointing out that the methods and discoveries of modern physics can and must be separated from the philosophical doctrine of materialism, which so often serves as a dogmatic and, as Barr goes on to show with great power and effectiveness, unsubstantiated faith among physicists. According to Barr, it was never obvious that physics implied or presupposed a materialistic view of the universe, but the existence of such a connection has been rendered downright implausible by a series of developments in twentieth-century physics. In a series of lucid chapters, Barr addresses the question of whether the universe had a beginning, looks at the issue of whether the universe exhibits any evidence of design or purpose, and examines what contemporary physics (and mathematics) has to say about the nature of human beings—specifically on the question of whether our behavior is determined by physical laws and whether we have an immaterial nature. At each point, Barr shows that “recent discoveries have begun to confound the materialist’s expectations and confirm those of the believer in God.”

Understanding Barr’s main contention is key to judging the cogency of his arguments. If the reader approaches Barr’s book in the hopes that it will provide a scientifically defensible proof of the central claims of biblical religion—such as, at a minimum, that God exists—he will be disappointed. As Barr repeats at several points throughout the book, he seeks merely to demonstrate that numerous discoveries in science confirm the expectations of the believer more than they do those of the materialist. For instance, Barr prefaces his discussion of so-called anthropic coincidences—that is, the fact that many of the laws that govern the universe seem to be fine-tuned for life to exist and thrive—by noting that this evidence has not “succeeded in ending the old debate between religion and materialism.” Nonetheless, he also notes that it has “dramatically changed the terms of the debate. It is no longer a question of whether one can find any evidence in nature that we were built in. Such evidence abounds. It is now a question of whether that evidence should be taken at face value, whether it really means what it seems to mean.” Throughout the book, Barr seeks above all to counter one of the main arguments materialists have offered for their position—namely, that science confirms a materialist worldview rather than a religious one.

First Things

http://www.firstthings.com/article/2007/01/modern-physics-and-ancient-faith-1

Life After Death is a New York Times Bestseller!

Even noted atheist Christopher Hitchens admits, "Dinesh D’Souza here shows again the argumentative skills that make him such a formidable opponent."

In Life After Death, D'Souza uses the scientific method - rather than divine revelation or sacred texts - to make the case for life after death. In clear and compelling language, D'Souza shows that life after death is not a naïve, faith-based notion, but a rational and reasonable conclusion - supported by the same evidence and logic atheists have used to discredit the idea of an afterlife.

Featuring a foreword by Rick Warren, author of The Purpose Driven Life®, Life After Death shows:

• How modern science lays the groundwork for a science-based belief in life after death
• How the theory of evolution, far from undercutting the idea of life after death, supports it
• Why the Christian view of the afterlife is the most compelling and best suits the evidence
• The evidence of Near Death Experiences - what it tells us, what it doesn't
• What the probability of life after death means for our lives before death

http://www.amazon.com/Life-After-Death-Dinesh-DSouza/dp/1596980990/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258488834&sr=8-1

Making his case about The End

"What I'm trying to say to Christians is, 'Look, we don't have to be scared of any of this,'" he [D'Souza] said. "A Christian looking at science will see that there's thrilling support for some of the core premises of Christianity."

Too many evangelicals, D'Souza said, cling to a "crayon Christianity" - including childlike images of heaven as a place of cherubs and God as Santa Claus on a throne.

"That makes us vulnerable to ridicule," he said, especially from atheists like Hitchens, who has compared this traditional view of heaven to North Korea."

charlotteobserver.com

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/timfunk/story/1054146.html

Send your letter to the editor to feedback@tothesource.org.