A dead end on the final frontier?

Feel better? The revolutionary insight that prompts Krauss and others to say things like this is the existence of “dark matter” and “dark energy.” I confess I don’t know much about these two things. What disturbs the sleep of astrophysicists today is that they don’t either.

According to the theory, 96 percent of everything in existence is made up of these “dark” things. They are not dark because they are unlighted but because they are inscrutable. In fact, physicists cannot even relate dark matter and dark energy to other types of energy and matter. They can only note that “something” is affecting observable matter in a way similar to the way energy and other matter might. The question of human significance comes up because everything we see that makes us seem so small is in fact only 4 percent of all that is. The rest is dark.

Here’s part of how the idea of “darkness” came about. In observing the speed and organization of how our galaxy spins, it was expected that stars and other bits would be slung off. That’s not happening. Something that acts like matter is exerting a gravitational effect on the coherence of our universe–something not observable or, as of yet, reproducible.

Dark energy was supposed after a series of calculations and observations indicated that the cosmos was expanding and accelerating, instead of slowing (as expected) due to the effects of gravity. Something that had an influence like energy was continuing to expand the stars and galaxies. Again, something unlike anything we can observe, reproduce, or understand.

It’s fascinating, even the little bit I understand of what the smart guys are saying. Some scientists find it troubling to think that such a huge portion of all things is so thoroughly mysterious that even the term they use to describe it is called a “placeholder” until they understand enough to give it a more descriptive name, if that day ever comes. They’ve likened it to gravity. We can describe the effects of gravity on a thing and even predict what will happen when gravity causes one thing to draw another to itself, but what is it? That’s a harder question, maybe a related one, some say.

One unnamed physicist quoted in the Times article spoke of hundreds of physicists going “off to do something else” if nothing breaks that will give a clue to the nature of dark matter. It sounds like a huge crisis for the professional observers of creation.

While I’m left to take the word of the experts regarding the potential revolution these discoveries portend, the human element is something I can observe and understand a bit more clearly. On that, I’ll offer some thoughts. First, maybe their evaluation is a bit pessimistic. If some cosmologists have trouble seeing the next step in their attempts to understand the universe, that doesn’t mean there is no next step. If we assume, as I do, that God made it all and gave us minds to understand a good bit of it, all the “ologists” will find something important to poke around in for the remaining years of time. I respect their honesty for saying they’ve found something they don’t know how to investigate. That doesn’t mean the mystery leaves us without a clue.

If, in fact, scientists are at a dead end, it might be that their assumptions, dare I say their philosophical worldview, are wrong. I maintain that God is the author of all true things. Our study of creation, to the degree we understand it rightly, will not lead us to despair unless we consider his sovereignty bad news.

Some attitudes of modern scientists are indeed starting to look like blind bias. The complete freak-out that occurs on a college campus every time a non-Darwinist is allowed on the premises seems contrary to the spirit of discovery and dialogue. Most recently, this occurred on the campus of SMU here in Dallas. The university rented an auditorium to an outside group sponsored by a student organization?all this is pre