Science can’t do that
We can say with a modicum of confidence that if science doesn’t get it right about the basic elements of nature-the constitution and behavior of matter, energy, and spacetime for example-then there are good reasons to doubt what it says about such “unobservables” as God, angels, demons, the soul, and the afterlife... Monton writes, “The history of science is full of seemingly insoluble gaps in our understanding that have never been filled in naturalistically. For example, we don't know what the nature of consciousness is, or how conscious mental activity arises out of physical brain activity. We don't know why the universe exists-we don't know why there is something rather than nothing. We don't know why the universe has three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. We don't know what the nature of mass is. We don't know what the universe is made of (most of it seems to be "dark matter," but we don't know what dark matter is). We don't have a single fundamental theory of physics (the two theories we do have, general relativity and quantum theory are incompatible). The list could go on. . . Thus, it's reasonable to be cautious in assuming that any new gap we discover will be naturalistically filled in as well.” [Monton] When it comes to the laws of the universe, it simply isn’t within the purview of science-not even cosmology and particle physics-to explain the origins of these laws. We can say that the universe behaves this way or that way, but just why it behaves this way is something science isn’t equipped to handle.
~ Mitch Stokes
