LHC & The Big Bang Theory

I've been intrigued by the stories of the Large Hadron Collider for some time now. Here's an excerpt from a report from NPR in 2008 just before the LHC collided with catastrophe:

It will be weeks before circulating beams are made to collide with each other. But Oddone said sending the first beam around is an important step toward full operation of this giant, complex machine. Then, he said, "we can create particles that haven't been seen since a trillionth of a second after the big bang."

Physicists hope a particle they call the Higgs (once referred to as the "God Particle") will emerge. It would help explain why things in the universe have mass. They also hope to manufacture particles of "dark matter" — that mysterious invisible stuff that astronomers believe makes up a quarter of the mass of the universe.

Some models predict that the collider could even create miniature black holes. Physicists say that is a long shot, and certainly nothing to worry about. The black holes, they say, would evaporate — not devour the planet.

"The universe is full of high-energy particles that are much higher in energy than anything we could conceivably make with our puny little accelerators," said John Cramer, a physicist at the University of Washington in Seattle. Very high-energy cosmic rays are slamming into the moon all the time, he said. If this were a problem, "the moon probably wouldn't be there. The fact that it is, probably means that we are safe."

Thanks to multicolored fonts I've already given a clue as to where this monologue is headed. Let me say at the outset that I personally am not the least bit concerned that scientists will destroy the earth with the LHC or any other man made device, unless the LHC is used as sort of an anti-ark, in which case I suppose mankind would have a hand in it. But it wouldn't be by our choice. Besides, I have way too much confidence in scientist's abilities to believe they could do such a thing.

Since I'm not a scientist, I'll ask you to bear with me while I attempt to discuss the Big Bang.

Pretend with me for a moment that a big explosion occurred a long time ago. Bigger than any explosion known to man. And longer ago than any time known to man. The explosion was so big that even though it happened so long ago, it is still occurring (expanding universe). Now the LHC was conceived to try to recreate conditions that occurred just fractions of a second after the Big Bang detonator went off. If you're a believer in the Big Bang story, what do you think? Is this a good idea? I mean should we be trying to recreate conditions that haven't existed since the most explosive stages of the biggest explosion of the entire universe?

Regarding the long shot of the LHC creating black holes, given the payback should you strike it rich with this long shot, would you go for it?

And is it me or is that last sentence a bit disturbing? The use of the word "probably" is what haunts me.

I would like to give scientists a break and imagine that the reporter spoke with a non-scientist, like myself. In that case it would be entirely acceptable to speak of potential catastrophic consequences of playing with laws of physics that might place all of humanity at risk, for the sake of putting down once and for all this mythological notion of a Creator of the Universe.

Unlike me, my wife has a strong sense of justice. But even with my small desire to see the scales settle to level I think that credit should be given where credit is due. That's all I think most people of faith want in this issue of science versus faith. Give credit where credit is due.

Much has been learned and much good has been gained by scientists in their pursuit of the holy grail of a Godless universe. No one can deny that. But the day will come, and perhaps sooner than we imagine, that the community of science will realize that in their quest for pure scientific knowledge and truth, they have all the while been bumping into God Himself.