In Albert Einstein's formula E=MC2, the constant 'C' represents the speed of light as it travels through a vacuum, which is held to be 186,282 miles per second. This century old figure has in recent years become the subject of growing doubts. Experiments performed at many locations have shown that the speed of light not only changes, depending on the medium in which it travels, but that under certain circumstances it may even be infinite. Ernst Lehrs, in his 1950's book Man or Matter, was among the first to make this claim in print. He suggested that the speed of light was only finite when a front of light was establishing itself in a medium of optical density, rather like a construction crew drilling a tunnel through a mountain, and that once the tunnel was built the speed of the light moving within it became infinite. Einstein's constant has since been repeatedly challenged by work done in quantum physics. Bell's theorem, for example, in which the spin-reversal of twin particles is seen to occur instantly, no matter how far apart they are in the universe, caused him to use the word "spooky," because it directly contradicted the conclusion in his relativity theory that anything moving faster than 'C' would cease to exist.

Now a further intractable problem has arisen. Joao Magueijo, a young and talented Royal Society fellow in physics, has given the argument for a VSR (Varying Speed of Light) new momentum,[1] this time in the context of one of the chief difficulties being dealt with in so-called Big Bang cosmology, which asks how the extremely delicate balance between the forces of expansion and contraction governing the universe as a whole could have been accidentally reached and then maintained? Without going into detail on Magueijo’s theory, which requires a better mathematical mind than I have, he argues that during the Big Bang's very early stages the speed of light must in fact have been infinite, and that only later did it become "frozen" into the constant used by Einstein—see the cover article 'Was Einstein Wrong', by Tim Folger in Discover magazine for April 2003 (Vol. 24 No. 4). The problem is, of course, that modern scientific cosmology is almost entirely constructed upon the fixity of 'C', and if this falls then what, other than just plain ‘spookiness’, can take its place? Perhaps this is why the editors of Discovery, in introducing the above article, express the sincere wish “Please say it isn’t true”.

The relativity theory, though it remains problematic in very many respects (see Herbert Dingle’s Science at the Crossroads), allows for the primacy of physical causation to be maintained in scientific cosmology. It is doubtful that this could still be the case if the speed of light proves to be infinite. Photons, waves and ‘wavicles’ aside, a finite speed allows light to remain physical, whereas if Einstein is right then anything possessing an infinite speed would be non-physical (i.e. non-existent were science is concerned). If light before it “freezes” into ‘C’ is in fact a form of intelligence, as the ‘spookiness’ of Bell's theorem strongly suggests, then the means whereby the forces of expansion and contraction in the universe have reached so fine a balance need no longer be a mystery, because we are no longer looking at just a randomly-caused physical phenomenon, but rather at evidence of intelligent causation continuing still to operate at the very heart of matter. This would also do a lot to explain the mysteries of evolution in general.

The concept ‘God’ in the sense of an intelligent prime mover was used by Einstein, saying that He “did not play at dice,” and, when combined with the so-called anthropic principle it is respectable in modern physics, but only when placed before the Big Bang where no harm is done to materialistic causality. But if some evolved dimension of God’s being were seen to remain operative during that singularity, then potentially divine intelligence or ‘spirit’ could still be a causal force in the physical universe right up to the immediate present. This would unavoidably mean the end of materialism as a viable basis for scientific thought. The possibility that thought itself, which many believe is intimately related to light,[2] might exist in the universe independently of the human mind is repeatedly hinted at in quantum physics. In a developed form this thesis is best represented in Goethean science, which is the subject of the book by Ernst Lehrs mentioned above. It is also a central thesis in the vast works of Rudolf Steiner (1861—1925), for which he always claimed the status of science. This matter is further discussed in my own recent book, Evolution and the New Gnosis: Anti-establishment essays on Knowledge, Science, and Religion and Causal Logic, written with the aid of Robert Zimmer.

Don Cruse