Albert Einstein's famous equation, E=mc2, remains difficult for me to grasp fully. But I feel I have come to understand something of the man -- his expansive spirit, his relentless curiosity, and his reverence for the beauty and order of nature and thought. I was daunted as I began, but delving into Einstein was a delight.
And there is a logic of sorts to that, as humor was an aspect of Einstein's genius. Freeman Dyson suggests that his ability to make light and to laugh, even at himself, was one key to the magnitude of his scientific accomplishment. Science is often about failure. Einstein himself proposed that he made so many discoveries because he was not afraid to be proven wrong, repeatedly, on his way to all of them. But Einstein also employed humor to philosophical and ethical effect, weighing in trenchantly on mankind's foibles.
Einstein held a deep and nuanced, if not a traditional, faith. I did not assume this at the outset. I've always been suspicious of the way Einstein's famous line, "God does not play dice with the universe," gets quoted for vastly different purposes. I wanted to understand what Einstein meant as a physicist when he said that. As it turns out, that particular quip had more to do with physics than with God, as Freeman Dyson and Paul Davies illuminate.
Einstein did, however, leave behind a rich body of reflection on the "mind" and the "superior spirit" behind the cosmos that has never made its way into popular consciousness. He didn't believe in a personal God who would interfere with the laws of physics. But he was fascinated with the ingenuity of those laws and expressed awe at the very fact of their existence. Throughout his life, he thrilled to all he could not yet understand. He was more than content with what he called a "cosmic religious sense" -- animated by "inklings" and "wondering," rather than by answers and conclusions. Here is a passage that comes close, I think, to a concise description by Einstein of his quintessential "faith":
A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty -- it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves ... Enough for me the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvelous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavor to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature.
With Paul Davies, I was able to pursue how Einstein changed our view of space and especially time, a subject that has always intrigued me. Before Einstein, as Davies describes it, human beings thought of space and time as fixed and immutable, the backdrop to the great show of life. But we now know they are elastic and intertwined, part of the show themselves. Einstein described our perception of time as an arrow -- traversing linear and compartmentalized past, present, and future -- as a "stubbornly persistent illusion." Such language is evocative from a religious standpoint. As Davies discusses, it echoes insights that run throughout Eastern and Western religions and ancient indigenous cultures. Davies finds an affinity between Einstein's view of time and the religious notion of a reality "beyond time," and of "the eternal." And because he speaks as a person conversant in current advancements of Einstein's science -- cosmology and the Big Bang, black holes, even the search for life beyond this galaxy -- his insights carry for me a special weight of authority and, yes, wonder.
I came across many wise and touching pieces of writing by the spiritual Einstein while preparing for these conversations. Einstein was a passionate letter writer. He wrote to fellow scientists, friends, and strangers. He loved responding to the letters of schoolchildren. One of his correspondents for a time was Queen Elisabeth of Belgium. He had struck up a warm friendship with her and her husband, King Albert, just before World War II. In one tragic season in the midst of already tumultuous political times, her husband died suddenly, as did her daughter-in-law. Einstein wrote to her:
Mrs. Barjansky wrote to me how gravely living in itself causes you suffering and how numbed you are by the indescribably painful blows that have befallen you. And yet we should not grieve for those who have gone from us in the primes of their lives after happy and fruitful years of activity, and who have been privileged to accomplish in full measure their task in life.
Something there is that can refresh and revivify older people: joy in the activities of the younger generation -- a joy, to be sure, that is clouded by dark forebodings in these unsettled times. And yet, as always, the springtime sun brings forth new life, and we may rejoice because of this new life and contribute to its unfolding; and Mozart remains as beautiful and tender as he always was and always will be. There is, after all, something eternal that lies beyond the hand of fate and of all human delusions. And such eternals lie closer to an older person than to a younger one oscillating between fear and hope. For us, there remains the privilege of experiencing beauty and truth in their purest forms.
I emerged from these discussions with a new sense of Albert Einstein -- not just as a great mind, but as a wise man. He was fully human and flawed, certainly in his intimate relationships. But he was undeniably an original, and not just as a scientist. If past, present, and future are an illusion, as he said, none of us ever really disappear. We all leave our imprint on what is now. I have a profound sense of Einstein's imprint, and it comforts me. I suspect that if he heard he was the subject of a program called Speaking of Faith more than fifty years after his death, he would make a funny, kindly, self-deprecating joke. But if he could listen with twenty-first-century ears, he might be intrigued by how his generous, questioning, "cosmic" religious sense is deeply kindred with the religious and spiritual yearnings of our age.
This post is excerpted from my book Einstein's God: Conversations About Science and the Human Spirit (pp. 15-18).
Albert Einstein: Quotes on God, Religion, Theology
Did Albert Einstein Believe in a Personal God?
Albert Einstein: Thoughts of a Freethinker
Einstein proves God in an encounter with a professor-Fiction!
Does God not exist, becuase you never heard his voice?
If some wrongly believe they know the truth, can we blame them for that?
He couldn't talk really but I'm sure was smart enough
Nothing is eternal except for nothingness and hopefully somethingness as well
But it is a non-theistic God, not the theistic creator God of Christianity. Einstein's God more closely resembles the god of Mahayana Bhuddism or some form of modified pantheism. We must also note that Einstein spent much of his life in search of a unified field theory, which would be consistent with his theology.
I think he was very clear. "There isn't a God" I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves
This is a guy who is invited into the White House on a regular basis. What else is he going to say?
Keep in mind, the guy was a player. He kept a few girlfriends while he was married.
In this sense, Einstein was deeply "religious"; a discerning "spiritual" being. But averse to the idea of a "personal god". And, rightly so. His 'expansive spirit' was 'relentlessly curious'. Open to "Time-less" and "Eternal" Structure of The Ultimate Reality.
This is The Way of Yogis and Free Mystics of India.
The "view" of GOD as a "person", is a "lower" belief. Yet, this "lesser" idea of “TRUTH” exists as a tangible "reality" in East and West alike. Millions believe and die with it. None the wiser.
It is not The Way of A Free 'Spirit'. Of intelligent people.
Seek and Find. Is The Name of The Game. Of Mysticism.
Yet, much as one may respect "intelligent" minds, such as that of Einstein; to "get" THE TIMELESS REALITY, beyond "stubbornly persistent ILLUSION”, the MIND as we know it, must be transcended. Why? Because "stuff" that "mind" is made of is not "brain" but SPIRIT.
Our mind may "perceive" or "conceive" A SENSE OF REALITY. But most of us never get "IT" as a virtual "SELF"-Experience. Failing to “get” IT, a visible section of human society becomes atheist; anti-religion. Then, ANTI-GOD.
Both "Believers" and "Infidel" Non-Believers worship an "ISM".
A "scientific" mind should not "believe" or disbelieve "blindly" any truisms. Einstein did not. Was OEPEN-HEARTED and OPEN-MINDED to WHAT IS. Thus, was more "spiritual" than most of us ever are. Or, shall ever be!
We can not depend on mind because there's no way human mind could contain all of the facts about the universe. Mankind has a predisposition to argue and complain - that's the main religion.
Fossils exist and are observable.
Who cares? Many have seen religion lead to worrisome acts, ranging to the denial of the science of evolution to denying gay persons their civil liberties to flying planes into buildings. Indeed, who does care about the world around us and the people in it. Well, some people like Richard Dawkins do care, they happen to care very deeply about other people, the world, and the honest truth.
You might rather enjoy your life without a care for the world around you. But I am glad some people care.
Also, just because someone is passionate about a position does not make them a bad person nor does it mean they lost their marbles.
Scientists care about religion only when it encroaches their field. Things like creationism vs. evolution are a highly relevant and important, and it is people like Dawkins who fight for the side of science and reason.
Here's another that spread by the internet...an argument by Einstein with a professor regarding God, evolution, and other issues, and which is so obviously false by its specious arguments which Einstein would never have made.
http://blog.sweet-dick.com/?tag=snopes
The problem with critiquing expansive writers like Einstein is that the 'spiritualists' seem to have difficulty differentiating theology from mere rhetoric.
Every time a Founding Father or historical figure is recorded invoking the blessings of the diety some theist pounces on on the line as *proof of religious sensibilities*. Other commonly made classsical references to the goddes Fortuna for instance, or Cupid, the Greek practic of augury, or to Baccinallian feasts, are immediately discounted as mere rhetorical flourishes. But rhetorical flourishes are not limited to just referencing Greek and Roman cult practices.
I've got no complaint if somebody describes an appreciation of the natural world and its order as "spiritual", assuming they understand the broad meanings of the word. In Einstein's case, his "spiritual" feelings had absolutely nothing to do with "religious" feelings in any sense related to religion as the vast majority understand it.
E=MC^2 is a very simple concept, assuming that you've got average intelligence and make a modest effort to find out what it means. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised that an author who can't grasp it fully would be confused by his other writings.