How "I" lost my faith in light, and then in science.

This story is purely fictional, but I hope it sheds some light on how I think the world handles contradictions in the religious space.

When I was in 9th grade, I took a physics class, and my life was forever changed.  You see, this was the begging of my journey of discovery that led to me eventually losing faith in science.  This is how I came to know that science was not true.

It all started in the first few weeks of class.  We began our unit on light, and I was enthralled.  I had always loved light, and found it rather fascinating.  Light was all around us, but I really knew very little about it.  I would soon learn that my teachers and other great prophets of science were just as clueless.  They had been making things up for years.

One of the first experiments we conducted with light involved passing a light through two thin slits of paper.  When I saw what happened I as amazed.  The light passed through the slots, but rather than casting two slits of light on the other side, they produced dozens of thing bars of light.  Those bars in the center were the brightest, those further out where increasingly dim.  It was really cool.  My teacher then explained that light is, in fact, a wave.  All waves, it turns out, have this "diffraction" behavior.  We spent the next few days exploring the wave-ness of light.  One experiment after another proved, without any doubt, that light was a wave.  My faith in light's wave-ness grew, as did my faith in science and in my teacher.

Then the ball dropped.  One day, I was reading on the internet, and I found a website that declared they would uncover the hidden secrets of light wave believers.  They claimed, and it seemed so absurd, that light was not a wave at all.  It was actually a PARTICLE.  My first reaction was to laugh.  I'd just spent weeks proving that it was a wave.  My second reaction was to congratulate myself on being more intelligent and pious than these fools.  I, of course, disregarded them entirely.  But, over the next few weeks, a few things happened which made me think more about the issue.

One afternoon, I found out that one of my good friends was a light particle believer.  I couldn't believe it.  He was smart, well rounded, and very scientific.  How could he believe such an absurdity.  Well, after talking for a few hours, and trying to bring him back to reality, I discovered that he had a lot of evidence too.  So I went home and started reading.  I found out that there were dozens of experiments you could do that would prove that light was actually a particle, and not a wave as I had been taught.  For example, you could put a thin plate on a special piece of equipment that was very sensitive to contact forces.  You would then point a bright light at that plate, and you could actually measure the light particles pushing on the plate.  Not only that, but scientists had built a "sail" that had actually been used in space to push things around with light.

I was dumbfounded.  Apparently, all the "real" scientists already knew that light was a particle.  They'd proven it time and again, and they'd done real practical things with it.  So I went to my teacher and told him what I'd found.  His reaction surprised me.  He said that it was all a big conspiracy.  The particle scientists were just offended by something and had left the wave scientists in protest.  "Notice," he said, "that all of their 'experiments' require special equipment that you could never get access too."  They claim the science is very complex, because that ensures that simple minded persons can't question them.

Well, I was relieved for a time, but the more I thought about the issue, and the deeper I looked, the less comforted I was.  I became increasingly convinced that the particle experiments were not fake.  I didn't know where to turn.  I had witnessed the wave experiments first hand.  I couldn't find any real flaw in them.  Yet the particle experiments were sound too.  I was stuck in two parallel contradictory worlds.  Both were correct, yet they fundamentally contradicted one another.  What was I to do?

Eventually the answer was simple, I must abandon science.  After all, both theories rested solidly on the scientific method.  If both were "true" by this method, and both were contradictory, then science itself was flawed.  It was so obvious and clear.  Science was simply unreliable.  No longer did I live in a split world.  Of course, I still had no idea if light was a particle or wave.  And I could no longer reason with things in a "scientific" way, but at least I was free of the lie that was the scientific method.

---

Now, I think we can all agree that this is INSANE.  After all, there is no reason that light must be either a particle or a wave.  There is no real contradiction, as one does not negate the other.  That said, I do still find it funny that scientists have yet to really resolve the matter.  They simply coined the term "wave-particle" to describe the phenomena.  At least once per generation they come up with a new, but inadequate, explanation for the behavior.  But I digress.

Why is it that this story seems so absurd, yet we see the same thing in religious contexts all the time.  I see people lose faith when the learn that scientists "know" humans came from apes.  Or that the world is older than "the Bible says".  Seeming contradictions result in a loss of faith, rather than a deeper search for truth.  Personally, I have found that most contradictions between the gospel and science (or even within the gospel itself), are the result of a lack of understanding of one, the other, or both.  In most cases, there was never a contradiction at all.  When there was, it was generally because I didn't understand one side well enough.  In other words, the facts did not contradict, but my understanding of them did.

There are still many situations where I have not yet resolved contradictions.  Things I do not understand.  But they do not hurt my faith.  I see no need to chose a side simply because two things I believe are in contradiction.  When I can't find an explanation, I simply file the data away in a special part of my brain.  I revisit from time to time, and see if new information helps, but I can't deny the huge quantity of data in favor of each side, simply because of contradictions in a tiny subset of that data.

Contradiction, Doubt, and Finding Greater Knowledge

Abraham Chapter 1 presents to us a man who is driven from his home by dual motivations.  First, he "saw that it was needful for me to obtain another place of residence" - as anyone would after their own father offered them up as a human sacrifice.  Second, he says that he was "desiring also to be one who possessed great  knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge".  In the next several entries in this blog, I want to talk about that quest for Greater Knowledge.  

I have long been a knowledge seeker.  Throughout my life, many have seen me as little more than argumentative.  I've been told I can argue any side of any discussion, regardless of what I actually believe, and that sometimes I seem to accept the exact opposite of whomever I am talking to.  This view of me is simply a reflection of my quest for knowledge.  I discovered young that contradiction is critical to finding "greater knowledge".  If we simply settle for conformity, we rarely dig deeply enough to see greater truth.  However, contradiction is scary.  It makes us question what we thought we knew, and for some, that leads to doubt.  

Doubt is the enemy of the quest for knowledge.  Satan has carefully tried to craft the world into a mindset that contradictions should breed doubt, rather than learning; this principle has gained wide acceptance outside of the wold of science.  In particular, the world has been taught that when religious matters are contradictory, the only resolution is to either reject both views outright, or to abandon one in the face of the other.  Interestingly, we do not take the same approach to scientific contradiction.

In science, contradictions are considered opportunities for discovery.  The principles of relativity, which contradicted newtonian physics, did not cause scientists to declare newton a fool; nor did they abandon the time tested theories and formulae he had developed.  Rather, they realized that there was more to the puzzle, dug deeper, and came out the other side with a more complete set of tools.  They realized that newton wasn't wrong, but his system was a simplified version of reality.

Why do we insist that religious contradictions should breed a loss of faith, which scientific contradictions should bree discovery and knowledge?  Worse, when it is science that contradicts faith, we are taught to universally discard faith for science.  
"O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God." - 2 Nephi 9:28-29

My next post will be an analogy of sorts.  What if scientists took such a foolish approach to knowledge?

Insights on Christmas

Some time ago, I was at a stake holiday party.  We were watching a video about the birth of Christ, and as the Shepherds arrived to see the new child I saw something I'd never considered before; Marry and Joseph seemed surprised to see them.  Of course, this made perfect sense; why would they have been expecting anyone to help celebrate the sudden birth of their child, in a far away town, in a stable.  Not even their closest friends and family could have known where to find them.  This got me thinking, what else had I taken for granted in the Christmas story.  So I decided to tell Joseph's story, from his own eyes.

At first, I thought I'd tell it first person, but as I considered what I'd say, I realized that I'd have to make many assumptions.  Eventually, I decided it would be best to keep the story third person, but still write it with Joseph directly in mind.  Well, time went on, and I completed my review, and decided that the story format just wasn't going to work for me.  So here are some nuggets, take them for what they are worth (which may not be much).

Spiritual Maturity

I was particularly struck by the manner in which the various actors in the nativity learned of the Savior.  I will use the word, revelation, to refer to any spiritual manifestation of truth. See if you don't detect a pattern:

Mary

Mary was a young woman.  Though the Bible does not give an age, tradition as well as culture suggest she was between 12 and 16.  While she was, no doubt, among the most righteous, worthy, knowledgeable, and sanctified of our Father's daughters, she lacked earthly experiences.  Yet, she was "highly favored among women", and wise enough to submit herself to the will of God.  Mary was told of the Savior by an Angel, prior to his being conceived.  This is the only revelation that I'm aware of Mary receiving. 

Joseph

Joseph was a carpenter, and the fiance of Mary.  Like Mary, we have no real information on his age.  Some accounts indicate he was a widower and perhaps as old as 80 or 90.  Others seem to suggest he was a teenager.  Frankly, it is not a critical issue, but I tend to lean toward his being a younger man.  Joseph, like Mary, was likely foreordained to the role of Jesus's earthly father (or adopted father if you will).  It is likely that he was selected for his unique abilities, talents, and personality.  If, like Mary, he was still quite young, we could also say that he lacked the wisdom and experience that comes with age.  He received several revelations regarding Christ.  The first was some time after Mary was "found with child".  We'll talk more in a minute about how he may have felt to discover his fiance was pregnant.  Nonetheless, as he pondered on the mater of her pregnancy, he was visited by an angel.  The angel told him not to worry about the pregnancy and to follow through with the wedding.  The implication of Mathew 1:24 is that he officially married her very quickly after this visitation, and Luke 1:39 implies that she left shortly thereafter to visit her cousin Elisabeth.

Elisabeth

Elisabeth was the "cousin" of Mary, though probably not an immediate cousin.  Unlike Mary, who was of the house of Judah, Elisabeth was of the house of Levi.  She was not a young woman, and had long given up hope of having a child of her own.  Nonetheless, it was through her husband that she learned she would, in fact, see such a blessing.  She was, it appears, afraid of loosing the child (understandably) and thus hid herself for the first 5 months of pregnancy.  (yes I'm making a huge assumption as to why she did so, but it makes sense to me).  In any case, it is during the 6th month of her pregnancy that Mary learns of her own impending pregnancy.  We do not know how, exactly, Elisabeth learned of the identity of Mary's child, but when Mary arrives at her home, Elisabeth is well aware of who she carries.  She feels her son leap within her when she hears Mary's voice, and testifies "whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" 

Shepherds

We know little about the shepherds, though I've heard they were actually tending to the temple flocks (meant for sacrifice).  It sounds cool, but I can find no real evidence of it.  Nonetheless, they are visited by an angel and told of the birth of the Savior.  

Simeon

Simeon was a just and devout man.  We are led to believe that he was old, though I suppose it doesn't directly say so.  He had received a promise "by the Holy Ghost" that he would not see death until he had seen "the Lord's Christ".  When Christ comes to the temple at 8 days old to be blessed and circumcised, Simeon immediately recognizes him and pronounces a blessing and prophecy.  

Anna

Anna was a prophetess.  I love that title, though we don't have a detailed understanding of what it means.  She is interesting to me in that she "departed not from the temple" and "served God with fastings and prayers night and day".  I would imagine her as a modern day "temple worker" were it not for the fact that she was of the tribe of Aser, not Levi.  Not that we have any evidence of women working in the Levite temple anyway.  Nonetheless, she was a very old woman.  A widow of 84 years, and having been married for seven.  If I understand the customs of the time, that means she was no younger than 103, which was a rare age in those times when life expectancy was in the 40-50 year range.  Anna is nearby when Simeon makes his declaration, and immediately joins him.  Like Simeon, she speaks to anyone who is there to listen and testifies of his divinity and mission.  Like Simeon, she appears to simply recognize him without the need of an angel to tell of his identity.

Wise Men

We know little about the wise men other than that they came from the East and that they had seen a star that somehow indicated his birth.  I believe that they had scripture, possible books we know nothing of, that provided a detailed prophecy regarding the birth of Christ and came to worship him.

What interests me in all of these is the variety of manifestations.  Some saw angels, others seem to have used scholarly skills, while a few simply knew by the power of the spirit.  Also interesting is that the older (and more experienced) did not see angels, while the younger ones did.  I think there is something to that, and it gives me hope.  I've met some amazing people in my life, people who I would believe have seen and spoken with God.  I've often wondered how one can become that amazing, and I've come to understand that years have a lot to do with it.

OK.... So I guess I'll leave the rest for a part 2, because this is already pretty long.