About Us
"Magis" (pronounced mah-jis) in Latin means "more." In some contexts it can mean "the even more" – the furthest frontier – frontiers of reason, knowledge, the universe, and reality itself.
Our Mission: To explore and share the close connection between reason and faith as revealed by new discoveries in physics and philosophy.
MCRF'S GOAL: To explain the consistency between faith, physics and philosophy.
In the last ten to fifteen years, implications of transcendence in physics,
philosophy of mathematics, and metaphysics have become more pronounced. Indeed,
no other decade in history has revealed more or better evidence for God. So,
what is this evidence?
In physics, there are several recent, major discoveries pointing to a
beginning and creation of the universe by a transcendent source. Three
discoveries are very significant here:
- The likelihood that our universe is inflationary. (more)
As will be explained in the website, the classical Big Bang model did not
account for a hyper accelerating initial moment of the universe. Alan Guth
theorized that such a moment would solve a large number of unanswered questions
and problems in the classical model. Most astrophysicists and cosmologists today
believe that our universe had an inflationary period, which is important because
all inflationary model universes, according to the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin theorem,
have a beginning of past time which implies a creation.
- The strong implication that inflationary universes have a beginning of time.
- The extremely high improbability that our universe would be able to sustain
any kind of life form without extraordinarily complex fine-tuning.
(more)
As will be explained in the website, a constant is a fixed quantity which
gives quantitative parameters to the equations of physics (for example Planck's
constant, h, the speed of light constant, c, the gravitational constant, G, the
weak force constant, gw, the strong force constant, gs,
etc.)These fixed quantities govern the laws of physics, and determine what kind
of universe will result from an initial singularity. These constants are
necessary so that the laws of physics will be consistent over the course of
time, which is needed for any evolutionary process (if the laws of physics
changed every few moments, evolutionary processes would be impossible). The fact
that there are any constants at all is truly remarkable, and the fact that these
constants have values which will allow for a universe capable of sustaining any
life form is even more remarkable. Indeed, it is exceedingly, exceedingly
improbable. This exceedingly high improbability has been articulated by Roger
Penrose, Brandon Carter, William Fowler, Fred Hoyle, Paul Davies, and many
others between 1988 to 2005.
As you will see in this website, if you put all this evidence together, it
strongly leads to the conclusion that the universe was created by a
trans-universal (supernatural) power. The evidence also indicates that this
trans-universal power is exceedingly intelligent. Fred Hoyle, one of the world's
most prominent astrophysicists, who was an ardent atheist, completely changed
his mind about God when he examined some of this evidence. Hoyle declared:
Would you not say to yourself, "Some super-calculating intellect must have
designed the properties of the carbon atom, otherwise the chance of my finding
such an atom through the blind forces of nature would be utterly miniscule?" Of
course you would.... A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology,
and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers
one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this
conclusion almost beyond question. (Fred Hoyle. "The Universe: Past and Present
Reflections." Engineering and Science, November, 1981. pp. 8-12)
Yet, in the midst of this mounting evidence, popular agnosticism (uncertainty
about the existence of God) seems to be increasing, particularly in North
America. This might be attributed to the personalities and media presence of
certain popular atheists. However, when one considers that they almost
completely neglect all the above-mentioned evidence in their emotive
denunciation of religion, we must ask why this evidence has not come to light
from other sources. Perhaps it is ignorance of the above-mentioned evidence or
perhaps a culpable unwillingness to acknowledge it. In either case, it is giving
rise to a false impression about the dichotomy between faith and science.