Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Science is confusing

"This could be one of many universes" headed Todd Whitcombe's article, which appeared in The Citizen on May 25.
let--McKay.09_682017.jpg

"This could be one of many universes" headed Todd Whitcombe's article, which appeared in The Citizen on May 25.

How I have the audacity to comment on the subject of quantum mechanics, a subject about which I know absolutely nothing, is more than a little pretentious on my part.

Mr. Whitcombe states that "...having been tested and retested numerous times over a period of 100 years... scientists accept it as the best theory we have to explain the universe."

He then discusses the randomness of quantum mechanics creating a "...great deal of contention amongst scientists..." over these years and asks what all this means if our universe is random.

A wonderful quote I happened upon some time ago (from whence I cannot recall) states: "Man: an organic accident in a meaningless universe."

Now that would be pretty random. Mr. Whitcombe then gets into more quantum mechanics and physics and billions of years and huge amounts of time - all very impressive and to be greatly respected but all very confusing to the non-scientific mind such as mine.

He suggest that if each universe (randomly "produced" I would assume) evolved its own way, anything would be possible thus making these vast heavenly dormitories "...a great place for science fiction and fantasy literature" which indeed a vast number of planet Earth's inhabitants believes it is already.

"Who knows," writes Mr. Whitcombe, "Somewhere in one of the many multiverses, there might even be Guardians of the Galaxy."

Well there already is, sir. His name is God.

Joan McKay

Prince George