Deepak Chopra: Scientific Proof of God?

If you’re a regular Deepak Chopra reader and listener, you have probably come across the term “space time.” It may sound nonsensical – it’s either space or time, right? But in physics, “space time” is a real measure used to describe the four-dimensionality of the Universe. In this episode of “Ask Deepak” on The Chopra Well, Deepak Chopra sits down with Menas Kafatos, a physicist and professor at Chapman University, to discuss space time, matter, and the generative nature of the Universe.

As Deepak and Menas discuss, all matter in the physical universe springs from the curvature of space time, bending outward from a vast dark field where things like space and time have no relevance. This isn’t a field of nothingness, though, because it contains the potential for everything in our observable reality. In this way, as Deepak points out and Menas confirms, the Universe is more mind-like than machine-like. It doesn’t have a real “substance,” Menas says, yet creates everything that does.

What it comes down to, then, and what science helps us consider, is that there is an omnipotent, omnipresent force in the Universe that creates everything we see, touch, taste and experience. It is nonlocal and non-physical, yet everywhere present and infinitely powerful. Ladies and gentlemen, it sounds like we have ourselves a “God.”

What do you think? Subscribe to The Chopra Well, and check out Deepak Chopra’s book War of the Worldviews: Science Vs. Spirituality!

Related
Can Spirituality Heal Suffering?
This 9-Year-Old Will Blow Your Mind
Can Skeptics Have Faith?

By The Chopra Well

194 comments

Dot A.
Dot A.3 years ago

God cannot be tested.
Faith is not a mathematical problem.
How we treat others during our lifetime is the 'matter' of enlightenment.

Many fail the test.

Jake S.
Jake S.3 years ago

Test your faith. Read entire link. You may never believe in God again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAURq_ouYLc

Dot A.
Dot A.3 years ago

I like Darren's post! [ couldn't send another Green Star :( ]Whatever intellect humanity has thus far evolved to entertain, cannot entertain the "awe" of this creation.

Teresa Wlosowicz
Teresa W.3 years ago

thank you

Darren Woolsey
Darren Woolsey3 years ago

The universe is rather like an organic mechanism, way beyond the realm of science and scientists who try and reduce it to their understanding of mathematics or physics...

Philip W.
Philip W.3 years ago

Continued:
The god of the bible is supposed to be omnipotent, yet can't defeat those with iron chariots (Judges 1:19), god is supposed to be omnipresent, yet has to travel to certain places (Genesis 11:7), god is supposed to be omniscient, yet doesn't know where Adam is (Genesis 3:9), that Adam and Eve ate the fruit (Genesis 3:11), that Cain killed Able or was going to kill him (Genesis 4:9). Matter of fact, you will notice this pattern throughout the bible (Genesis 6:6; Job 1:7, satan even uses a mind trick on god in Job 1:7-12). The bible also teaches that god created the grass and trees on day three then creates the sun and moon on day four, this is not science (Genesis 1:11-19). The bible teaches that it took god four days to create the earth and its contents but he creates the entire, complete, complex universe in a moment of time, this is not science. The whole atmosphere of the bible is ludicrous, in the majority of the scenes god is absent then emerges only to discipline man, usually in some unjust incompetent way. God appears to be limited, impotent, murderous, petty, confused, unknowing, a drama queen, and at times stupid. Jesus believed the Old Testament, what does that say about him?

For those who would like to understand how utterly impossible "Noah's Ark" would be, there is a great resource by the National Center for Science Education located here: http://ncse.com/cej/4/1/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark

Philip W.
Philip W.3 years ago

Continued:
Another example is an infinite, perfect, loving god who has no need of anything and therefore could not experience loneliness or lack creating a people knowing that ninety percent will suffer an excruciating torture for an eternity. If you were all-knowing and knew you were going to have ten children but eight or nine of those children would suffer not only in this world but for an ETERNITY in a hell, I doubt you would ever have children. I wouldn't do it if only one of my ten children were to suffer. To experience loneliness and satisfy it knowing that it would cause unimaginable suffering would be the ultimate in selfishness, to be all-loving and do it would be the ultimate in cruelty.

Philip W.
Philip W.3 years ago

"People gave ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus] who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us [Joshua 10:13] that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." - Martin Luther, "Works," Volume 22, c. 1543

"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." - Martin Luther

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD" - Isaiah 1:18

An omniscient god cannot have emotions. For example, if you came home to find that your spouse has been having an affair. You would become angry or sad because it is new information, something you've now learned. If you had all knowledge there would be nothing for you to learn, you would have known everything for as long as you existed. An emotional omniscient god nullifies itself. So an omniscient god repentant of previous actions that eventually destroys everything in a flood because of anger is ridiculous (Genesis 6:6). This would be like feigning surprise at your surprise birthday party that you already knew about.

Dot A.
Dot A.3 years ago

- had to smile with your comment regarding reaching those '30s' and how the information settles into something much more meaningful, and deeply personal as well, Ron~ {even Jesus travelled to taught in his 30s}
I agree that making choices determines our passage, and I know what you are saying regarding the steps of Jesus while he joined us here on Earth. I do. I keep opening the breadth of the concept for greater comprehension than the rather narrow interpretation of many 'humanly devised religions' - for, as you explain so well, it is humanity which botches the message. Love is clear in the ultimate sacrifice. Greatest love. Light. And the goodness of the spirit. It isn't declared by words, and therefore only the heart can read the silence. -and therein, there is no argument, because this is not a debate- In a couple of minutes I leave this desk, but, for sure I wanted to respond to your always thoughtful and caring comments. Deepak is adding a venue for those who wish to investigate. It always good to let the ideas flow - and to know that all things evolve, including our Faith~ Thanks again, Ron~

Philip W.
Philip W.3 years ago

Skepticism or debunking often receives the bad rap reserved for activities -- like garbage disposal -- that absolutely must be done for a safe and sane life, but seem either unglamorous or unworthy of overt celebration. Yet the activity has a noble tradition, from the Greek coinage of "skeptic" (a word meaning "thoughtful") to Carl Sagan's last book, The Demon-Haunted World. [...] Skepticism is the agent of reason against organized irrationalism -- and is therefore one of the keys to human social and civic decency. [...] Skepticism's bad rap arises from the impression that, however necessary the activity, it can only be regarded as a negative removal of false claims. Not so [...]. Proper debunking is done in the interest of an alternate model of explanation, not as a nihilistic exercise. The alternate model is rationality itself, tied to moral decency -- the most powerful joint instrument for good that our planet has ever known." -- Stephen Jay Gould