By Mario Zoccoli *

1. Temporal vs. Non-Temporal

Most people, in particular those who are not theoretical physicists, have a very difficult time fully understanding and accepting the full implications of what it means to be "Non-Temporal."

In Einstein's theories of General and Special Relativity, Einstein concludes that space and time do not exist except in the presence of an occupant of the space and time. Since the time when Einstein first came to these conclusions, theoretical physicists have gone on to develop a now widely accepted view that the present universe originated from a singular point in a highly energetic explosion known as the "big bang". Further, theoretical physicists now widely accept a notion which is of great importance to our philosophical discussions and that notion is that:

Space and time did not exist prior to the big bang but rather were created as the universe expanded.

Focusing our attention first on what this means relative to the concept of space, General Relativity states, beyond a reasonable doubt, that there was no proximal space around the point from which the big bang originated and that the very space was created as the big bang expanded into it.

Again, restating, it is not that the universe expanded after the big bang to fill existing space, rather the big bang created the space as it expanded.

The exact same phenomenon is true regarding time. Time did not exist prior to the big bang but rather came into existence as our universe expanded, creating it as it went. If one accepts Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, that time is not a constant but rather bodies in motion at different speeds which will experience time differently (relative to an outside observer), then the above stated notion about time can be mathematically proven to be true. Unfortunately, this concept does not lend itself to pictorial representation and discussion of the mathematical proof is outside the scope of this paper. Suffice it to say that it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt by NASA when, during the Gemini Program, an atomic clock was sent into high velocity orbit on a Gemini orbital space mission while a pre-launch synchronized identical clock was kept on earth during that mission. When the Gemini returned to earth, the two clocks were compared and they were found to be different and the time difference was exactly that predicted by Einstein's theory for the velocity experienced by the clock during the orbital mission.

So if we accept that local space and time did not exist prior to the big bang and that space and time were created as the universe expanded to create them, then space and time do not exist outside of a physical universe. Time is no less a dimension of our universe than is length, width, and height. Time belongs to the physical universe and does not exist outside of it.

God exists outside of the physical universe, therefore God does not "experience" time. Let me explain what I mean by the use of the word "experience." Physical objects, both animate and inanimate objects, are capable of selected experiences. For example, if I take an ice cube out of a glass of ice water and throw it across a room, the ice cube will experience acceleration, that is, an inanimate object, namely an ice cube, is capable of undergoing acceleration. Acceleration is within the range of experiential possibilities for an ice cube. Now let us look at a different example. We all would have a general (although perhaps non-specific) understanding of the meaning of the word "love," and we would understand in general terms what is meant if a man says, "I love my wife" or "I love my children" etc. We all understand that a human being is capable of experiencing love. The words "Love", "Human", "Acceleration", and "Ice Cube" all have meaning, however, they can be combined in ways which are grammatically correct but meaningless. For example, it is meaningless for me to ask, "Do the ice cubes in my water glass love me?" It is meaningless because the ice cubes are incapable of experiencing love. Love is outside the realm of possible experience for an ice cube.

Time belongs to the physical world. God is not of the physical world. God, if he exists, does not experience time. Being now entirely certain that God, if he exists, does not experience time, we need only to briefly examine two other points which together with the above will lead any reasonable person to recognize the elegance of Dr. Adler's assertion that God is the non-temporal cause of the exnihilation of the universe.

2. The Temporal Relationship of Cause and Effect

In our everyday observations of the universe we see that the cause of an effect exists in time prior to the occurrence of the effect. That is, the cause of an effect must pre-exist the effect. For example, if the effect desired is to move a cue ball across a pool table with a cue stick, the cue stick must in fact exist, at least for some amount of time, prior to its execution of the effect by impacting the cue ball. Admittedly, its prior existence need be only infinitesimally small but the priority of its existence is recognizable. Even in sub-atomic physics where creation and decay of sub-atomic particles can occur in tiny fractions of a second, in every case the cause of their release and decay existed prior to the occurrence of the effect. Cause and effect relationships carry with themselves temporal sequences. Indeed, there are no true cause and effect relationships in our universe in which the cause does not pre-exist (if even only for an infinitesimally small amount of time) its effect.

Now, restating Dr. Adler's well defended position, all things in the physical natural universe have a cause and that which is caused is not capable of causing itself, thus the physical existence of the universe requires an exnihilating cause of its existence (including its continued existence) which is outside of the physical, natural universe, that is, it requires a non-physical, supernatural cause. Because of what was stated in section 1 above I am here at absolutely no risk of falling into an infinite regression of "caused causes" trap, as I will presently explain.

3. Avoiding the Trap

Since a cause must pre-exist in time (even if for just a brief instant) that which it causes, and since we have unequivocally shown that a being outside of our universe does not experience time, then it is meaningless to ask if a being outside of our universe has a cause since a cause would have to pre-exist that being and pre-existence is meaningless in a realm which does not experience time. It is as meaningless to ask if a non-temporal being (who therefore does not experience time) had a pre-existing cause as it was to ask if my ice cubes love me.

Therefore stated in simple terms,

A. If that which is caused needs a cause, and

If all things in the physical universe are caused, and

If that which is caused cannot cause itself, then

The cause of the physical universe must be outside of the physical universe.

B. If (as shown above) the cause of the physical universe must be outside of the physical universe, then

That cause must emanate from a being outside of the physical universe who does not experience time and thus cannot himself be caused, that is to say whose existence is necessarily without cause by virtue of the necessary realm of its existence.

4. The Realm of God

I wish here to define a realm which I will henceforth refer to as "the realm of God." The realm of God, for my purposes here, will simply be defined as a realm of entirely non-physical existence which is therefore also non-temporal as per my discussions in section 1 above.

5. Individuality

Each of us human beings is, in the common use of the word, an individual, a unique member of a class of physical things referred to as human beings. As Dr. Adler points out, we use proper nouns and addendum descriptions to easily, unambiguously identify individual members of this class. But what is it about us that makes us individuals, uniquely different from all other members of the class of human beings? Is it our names? No, since two different people could have the same name. Is it that we look different? Identical twins look the same but they are different individuals. So as not to belabor the point, let me cut to the conclusion of this line of reasoning and give one ultimate, definitive example. Conclusion: Names and physical attributes are insufficient as absolute determinants of individuality. Example: Suppose for a moment that I had a machine capable of producing an exact physical copy of you as you are now. Every molecule, atom, and sub-atomic particle, etc. being an exact duplicate of you in your present form. Your duplicate may even speak and act like you and, of course, would look identical to you in every way because as we said we have made it an exact physical duplicate of you. Once your duplicate came into existence would you allow me to kill you? In other words "is" your exact physical duplicate you or are you you and the physical duplicate someone else? Since I doubt that you would consent to allowing me to kill you, I will assume that you believe the latter. Then it follows that our individuality includes a necessary component that is beyond our physical make up, because an exact physical duplicate is still not you. You are you and the duplicate is someone else. We have seen from this example that individuality has a necessary component which is non-physical. If, as we have shown, a component of our individuality does not depend at all on the physical elements of our being then it is an independent, entirely nonphysical component of our individuality which by our previous definition resides in the realm of God.

6. Facts and Knowledge

In 1980 Mortimer J. Adler published How to Think About God. That is a fact. If every copy of the book were to go out of existence it would still be a fact that in 1980 Mortimer J. Adler published a book entitled How to Think About God. The fact of its having been published does not rest on the continued existence of a copy of the book and in fact it does not depend on any continuing physical existence. Similarly, my knowledge of the fact that in 1980 Mortimer J. Adler published such a book does not depend on the existence of any copies of the book. Facts and the knowledge which proceeds from facts are non-physical. The instrument by which we perceive facts and knowledge, namely our brain, is physical but the actual facts and the knowledge which proceeds from these facts is entirely non-physical, and by our previous definition, can be said to reside in the realm of God. Indeed, if we use the word "mind" as used by Dr. Adler in his book The Angels and Us we can even say that "the mind" can exist in the realm of God. This is an interesting case since our ability to apprehend facts and knowledge (which are themselves entirely non-physical) by our instrument of perception, the brain (which is physical) shows that we, in our current state of being have a real and demonstrable connection to the non-physical world. Although this is, of course, no earth shaking revelation, I mention it here so that I can restate it in terminology consistent with this discussion. Restating: Human beings through their acquisition of knowledge and perception of facts have a personal, demonstrable connection to the realm of God.

7. The Mind Alone

In Mortimer J. Adler's book The Angels and Us, Dr. Adler quite eloquently shows that it is not logically contradictory for minds to exist without bodies. A thorough discussion of this topic is too lengthy for this paper. The so inclined reader is directed to Dr. Adler's wonderful book on the subject, suffice it to say that it is acceptable to believe that minds can exist without bodies.

8. In Summary

Dr. Adler's work, with herein special attention to its consistency with Einstein's theories of General and Special Relativity and the theoretical physicists' notion of the origins of the current universe by the big bang, have led us to assert beyond a reasonable doubt that God exists.

In sections 4 to 7 we showed that there is an entirely non-physical component to our individuality. We also observed that through acquisition of facts and knowledge we have a current demonstrable connection to what I have called "the realm of God" (a non-physical, non-temporal realm). Therefore, consistent with Dr. Adler's demonstration that a mind could exist without a body (that is, it is not logically contradictory to so believe) then the realm of God, especially under the conditions of the existence of a benevolent God, would continue those non-physical, non-temporal aspects of our individuality and our mind upon the passing of our physical being.

These latter discussions are by no means conclusive, but they are at least persuasive, even compelling.

9. A Parting Note

An ancillary question raised by these issues has been: Can a nontemporal being interact with a temporal world? My answer is yes. It appears to me that a non-temporal being (who does not experience time) can interact with a temporal universe (which does experience time) in a way similar to the following loose analogy: If I imagine time to be flowing by as water in a stream and I as a non-temporal being stand on the banks of that stream, not directly experiencing the stream (as, for example, I would if I were standing in the stream) I can still observe the stream and indeed I could even perturbate the water in the stream by occasionally throwing in a rock. That is, you do not have to experience the stream "directly" to interact with the stream.

* Mario Zoccoli is a physicist and a member of the Center.

We reserve the right to edit all submissions for relevancy and concision and to publish them at our discretion.

The Great Ideas Online is published free of charge to its members by the Center.

Index to The Great Ideas Online

Home page Center for the Study of The Great Ideas