Cosmology is defined as:

The study of the universe as a whole, of the contents, structure, and evolution of the universe from the beginning of time to the future.

It is indeed a very interesting scientific and philosophical area of study, especially in regards to today’s environment of secular science. As today’s society continues to polarize itself into the ‘atheist’ and ‘theist’ camps, it becomes ever more important to take note of the congruencies present with religion and science.

Consider the example of George Ellis, professor of applied mathematics and cosmology at the University of Cape Town. An accomplished academic, he is a winner of the Templeton Prize and has co-authored work with Stephen Hawking, one of the most famous cosmologists of today.

On the origin of the universe George Ellis has some interesting viewpoints. He demonstrates in numerous ways the idea that the key factors, constants, and laws which defined our universe are unusually set at values which support the creation of life.

One thing which must be kept in mind is that, according to cosmologists, when the universe was first forming the constants and laws which we take for granted today were very much flexible. This means that during the “Big Bang” many numbers could have easily been set at values which would have created a universe with too little matter, too much matter, too much gas, or too strong an affect of gravity. The current set of constants is “unusual” because given the vast possibile values for these constants and laws, it is odd that we live in a universe where everything is set ‘just right’ for life. It is clear that even the smallest changes to certain variables would have resulted in a universe where there were no galaxies, no stars and no planets.

George Ellis (British astrophysicist): “Amazing fine tuning occurs in the laws that make this [complexity] possible. Realization of the complexity of what is accomplished makes it very difficult not to use the word ‘miraculous’ without taking a stand as to the ontological status of the word.”

Before it seems we begin to repeat the Intelligent Design (ID) argument, it is important to realize that there are specific questions raised in analysis of the Big Bang that are not raised in the ID argument with evolution. Of course, there are still possibilities and explanations that atheists can stick to (religously?) for each of the questions and concerns raised by theistic cosmologists, but there is something else I found in George Ellis’s approach which was most fascinating.

Not only does Professor Ellis discuss the possible explanations for such precision (parallel universes, an unknown theory, God), but he does take it a step further to by emphasizing the importance of ethics in relationship to the universe.

As a scientist, he raises the interesting question: were ethics, aesthetics, and “meaning” something hard-coded into the universe, just as some of these cosmological constants have been? If so, they seem to be well outside of science’s boundaries of collection, examination, and definition (much less experimentation). This is, George Ellis says, the very important place for religion and it’s sciences.

It is in defining treatment of man to his fellow man, and living in a congruency with the universe that we find a place for religion. And is this not the Shariah and Islam itself?

Although Ellis takes an extremely pluralistic approach to this topic (regarding various religions), I found the discussion to have special consequences for Muslims. Specifically, I find the concept that ethics and “meaning” are hardcoded into the very definition of the universe (gravity) as directly Islamic. Is it not our belief that the natural state of man is to recognize God and know the generalities of right and wrong? Ellis notes the combined understanding of ethics from all three major faiths to be extremely similar, another pointer to the idea that we have all been receiving the same information. For Islam this is simply a manifestation of the continuing communication between God and man.

The topic itself brings up the interesting point of how society without religion would define ethics, if it even could. It seems clear that even today’s atheists struggle with an ethical standard imposed by cultural and legal limits. It should be made abundantly clear that such vague ethical standards have strong religious roots, owning to centuries of religious influence on their surrounding environment. As atheists become further distanced from those roots we will see new and strange ethical standards become adopted (or could they end up with no ethics at all?)

Having changing ethical standards has many consequences. For example, what does this mean to the moral standards of our forefathers? Can we excuse slavery, apartheid, the holocaust because we begin to define morality for each society, for each generation? Indeed, what does it mean to the morals of any generation if they can simply be superseded by the next? In a godless, ethically malleable society, will the only recognition of our forefathers be of scientific accomplishment, and not of their moral steadfastness? If we can already assume that our ethics are not necessarily universal, then do we have to be ethical at all?

Interesting questions indeed. Of course for the Muslim, awareness that the proper, ethical. way to live has been transmitted to us is a comforting notion.

It is even more comforting (for this Muslim) is knowing that God created every single thing, from all these scientific laws to the laws of right and wrong.

George Ellis is the co-author of “On the Moral Nature of the Universe: Theology, Cosmology & Ethics“