Book Review: Escaping the Beginning by Jeff Zweerink

Introduction 

In Escaping the Beginning: Confronting Challenges to the Universe’s Origin, astrophysicist Jeff Zweerink tackles the question of whether or not the universe ever began to exist. The structure of the book is fairly simple. It is broken down into seventeen chapters. Most of these chapters are strictly scientific. With that said, the question of the universe’s beginning is not merely scientific. It is also philosophical and theological, and therefore Zweerink makes sure to address these aspects as well. While some of the discussions are technical, overall each chapter is short and concise in order to allow for easy digestibility by the reader. It is also worth noting that each chapter ends with a brief summary and a set of discussion questions to help the reader solidify understanding.

The Science

Zweerink introduces the book by explaining why we ought to care about the beginning. That is, if the universe has a beginning, then something caused it to exist, and therefore something exists beyond the universe itself. But why think the universe began to exist in the first place? Lucky for us, Zweerink wastes no time before answering that question in the very first chapter of the book. After a brief summary of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, he outlines how scientific discoveries in the early twentieth century revealed an expanding universe, which when projected backward in time, results in a singularity in the past, which means the universe had a beginning.

Next, Zweerink dives into some more technical details about the current prevailing model, known as the inflationary big bang. As indicated by the name, this model includes a big bang singularity, followed by a period of rapid inflation from that singularity. But that wasn’t always the prevailing model. Other models, such as oscillating universe models and steady state universe models, also gained traction during the twentieth century, and Zweerink clearly outlines the timeline of when these models entered the discussion and what scientific discoveries came into play at that time.

Taking a more philosophical turn, Zweerink ventures into discussing what time actually is. Scientifically, time is dynamic, dependent entirely on an observer’s reference frame. Philosophically, some have argued that the past, present, and future are all equally real, and that the passage of time is illusory. The key point that Zweerink makes here, however, is that for any stable universe to hold, there must be governing principle of causality.

In the next chapters, Zweerink discusses what we can learn about our universe through observation. He summarizes the experimental data pointing to a roughly 14-billion-year­-old universe. He also walks through how astronomers estimate the shape and sizes of the observable universe as a sphere with a radius of 46 billion light-years.

Zweerink then dives deeper into the technical details challenging alternative models of the universe. Steady state models require some mechanism for continuous creation of matter, otherwise the overall density of the universe would decrease indefinitely over time due to expansion. These models proved inconsistent with the discoveries of the twentieth century (eg. Cosmic Microwave Background radiation). Oscillating models required that the universe would reverse its expansion and contract back into a singularity, at which point another mechanism is required to cause a rebound and subsequent emergence of another universe. But these cycles can’t go on forever since each successive universe will be larger than the next, meaning at some point in the past, and absolute beginning still exists. With that said, Zweerink identifies some modern cyclical models, such as the Ekpyrotic Model and the Conformal Cyclic Cosmology Model, as potentially viable models, but further research is needed to see if they actually avoid a beginning.

The following few chapters focus on one topic: the multiverse. Zweerink provides important technical distinctions regarding the different types of multiverses and the evidence in their favor. Some have the same physical laws, with different initial conditions. Others have same laws, with different particles. Both of these types are probable given the leading inflationary mechanisms. Some models are based on a many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. And others still allow for any mathematically coherent structure to be a physical universe. Regardless, provided inflation occurs, multiverse models still involve a beginning to the universe. Zweerink further discusses philosophical problems with multiverse theories. For example, if the multiverse exists, then it is likely we are Boltzmann Brains, and therefore cannot trust what we observe about the universe.

Zweerink then turns to the tensions created when attempting to reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity and the proposed models to overcome those tensions. String theory is the most popular. According to string theory the singularity doesn’t exist because the universe encounters a minimum size, at which point the universe expands forever in the past. Zweerink also discusses loop quantum gravity, which has the benefit of being independent of any coordinate system of space-time. No alternative models, however, are stable at this time.

Next, Zweerink addresses the suggestion that the universe came from nothing. This most popularly comes from Lawrence Krauss. Zweerink demonstrates how Krauss has taken it upon himself to define “nothing” to mean “zero net energy.” But even so, the information content of the universe constitutes “something,” which means Krauss fails to actually explain a universe from literally nothing. Nevertheless, Zweerink grants that, if true, Krauss’s proposal would not require a supernatural cause. With that said, Zweerink highlights the need for tested predictions before Krauss’s proposal can get off the ground.

Following Krauss, Zweerink addresses Stephen Hawking’s proposal the universe exists because there is a law like gravity, as found in his book, The Grand Design. Zweerink points out that Hawking isn’t literally talking about gravity, but rather some unknown unified theory of physics. Specifically, Hawking proposed M-theory, a variant of string theory. While Hawking argues that his model eliminates the singularity, and therefore the beginning of the universe, Zweerink demonstrates that even Hawking’s model is subject to the singularity.

The question remains, if Krauss and Hawking are correct, does that even remove God from the picture? Zweerink notes that even if their proposed models are correct in explaining the origin of the universe, if there are things within the universe that cannot be explained by other things within the universe, then that still necessitates something outside of the universe. Zweerink appeals to consciousness as an example of something that cannot be explained by what is within the universe. Furthermore, when comparing properties of the proposed mechanisms of Krauss and Hawking, Zweerink suggests that they would look a lot like the Christian’s understanding of God.

Zweerink then addresses a common objection: who created God? He argues that some aspect of reality must be a brute reality that does not depend on something outside of itself for its existence. He compares three alternatives: the law of gravity, the cosmos, and God. While he outlines the arguments for and against the three alternatives, ultimately, when it comes to the Christian God, God is understood as a brute reality whose existence explains the rest of reality.

Zweerink closes out the book with a discussion of the significance of the beginning. The Bible clearly states that the universe had a beginning. In contrast, there is no shortage of models being produced that attempt to explain the universe either without a beginning or without the need for a creator. Nevertheless, Zweerink stresses that whenever data exist to discriminate between models with a beginning and those without, the data have always validated that the universe had a beginning. He expects the trend to continue and therefore urges that we ought not fear claims of beginningless models of the universe.

Final Thoughts

Escaping the Beginning is an essential text for those engaging in the science/religion dialogue, especially if relying on the beginning of the universe as part of an apologetic argument. This book is appropriate even for those with little physics background, but Zweerink doesn’t shy away from technical discussions. This is significant because it prevents him from oversimplifying eternal universe models. Furthermore, Zweerink’s modesty is refreshing. Even though models proposed by Krauss and Hawking are in opposition to Zweerink’s position, he is careful to highlight the aspects that make these opposing theories possible, and even plausible in some circumstances. So despite having a bias himself, Zweerink treats the topic fairly on all fronts.

Type at least 1 character to search
Catch the AP315 Team Online:

The mission of Apologetics 315 is to provide educational resources for the defense of the Christian faith, with the goal of strengthening the faith of believers and engaging the questions and challenges of other worldviews.

Defenders Media provides media solutions to an alliance of evangelistic ministries that defend the Christian worldview. We do this by elevating the quality of our members’ branding to match the excellence of the content being delivered.