Re: 論第一因

[hvariables (Carl)]

劍橋大學盧卡斯數學教授史蒂芬‧霍金所著的「時間簡史」123頁到124頁提到：

如果歐幾里得空間──時間延伸到無限的虛時間奇點開始，我們就有了和在精典理論中指
定宇宙初態的同樣問題：上帝可以知道宇宙如何開始，但是我們不能給出任何特別原因認
為它以這種方式而不是另外的方式開始。另一方面，量子引力論開闢了另一種新的可能性
，在這兒空間──時間沒有邊界，所以沒有必要指定邊界上的行為，這兒就沒有使科學定
律失效的奇點，也就是沒有在該處必須訴求上帝或某些新的定律給空間──時間設定條件
的空間──時間邊界。

人們可以說：「宇宙的邊界條件是它沒有邊界」。宇宙是完全自足的，而不被任何在它之
外的東西所影響。它既不被創生，也不被消滅。它就是存在。

If Euclidean space-time stretches back to infinite imaginary time, or else
starts at a singularity in imaginary time, we have the same problem as in the
classical theory of specifying the initial state of the universe: God may
know how the universe began, but we cannot give any particular reason for
thinking it began one way rather than another. On the other hand, the quantum
theory of gravity has opened up a new possibility, in which there would be no
boundary to space-time and so there would be no need to specify the behavior
at the boundary. There would be no singularities at which the laws of science
broke down, and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to
God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time.

One could say: "The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no
boundary." The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected
by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It
would just BE.

[Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 136.]


拿破崙曾經問數學家Laplace說：「你寫的宇宙論裡面怎麼沒有提到上帝？」
Laplace回他：「我不需要這個假設。」

Laplace的話是對第一因最好的回答。

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.169.138.35
※ 編輯: hvariables      來自: 118.169.138.35       (08/15 13:06)
推 Cid:Laplace的機械式宇宙論其實是根植在牛頓力學對
→ Cid:於時間具有反轉對稱性的觀點, 意即倘若時間反
→ Cid:轉行進, 整個宇宙看起來一點違和感也沒有. 但
→ Cid:這與佛教談的因果是無法相容的, 即無明緣行不
→ Cid:可能變成行緣無明. 而因此佛法對因果的看法已
→ Cid:經隱含了宇宙中時間有一個固定運行方向的看法,
→ Cid:這正是Laplace的年代中物理學尚未完整探討的領
→ Cid:域-熱力學, 熱力學一個重要的結論正是指出宇宙
→ Cid:中時間的方向.