Does God Believe in the God Particle?

A Physicist returns to Texas to fight in the War on Truth

Hello and welcome to my Substack! My name is Matthew Trump. I have been told by reliable sources that I am a distant relative of the 45th President of the United States. Our people—his Trumps and mine—came from the same small town in Germany along the Rhine. It seems we had a common Trump ancestor there in the 18th century. My Trumps left for the New World in the 1830s, a little earlier than his. But instead of New York, they went to New Orleans and became among the first white settlers in the Iowa Territory.

There are still Trumps in that corner of Iowa today, where the Des Moines River meets the Mississippi, and across the river in northeastern Missouri. That’s where my Trump great-grandparents are buried, where my grandfather and my father were born, and where some of my people still keep up the noble tradition of farming.

I grew up elsewhere in Iowa, and also in Colorado. Having lived in various places around the country, I currently make my home in Maricopa County, Arizona.

I have a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Texas, and I have worked in the past as a research physicist at several research labs. I taught physics for many years in the classroom, which is probably the most noble thing I’ve done along the way.

Like my distant relative John G. Trump, the President’s uncle who was charged with handling the famous inventor Nikola Tesla’s papers after his death, my speciality in physics is electrodynamics and particle physics, although the scale of my contributions is nothing like those of John Trump. I would have loved to have been able to sit down with him and talk about his research.

I feel greatly honored to share my last name with President Trump and his family. I’ve been a fan of his since the early 1980s. I supported him out of the gate when he ran for President in 2015. I love being able to make people’s eyes shine with joy by showing them my ID or telling them my last name. People always want to know the same question about me, even the liberals.

That’s pretty much all you need to know about me for now.

Let’s get on with what I came here to say.

First let me comment on the potentially blasphemous title of this article, “Does God Believe in the God Particle?” I will address this question, but in the meantime I assure you in the strongest manner that an insult to the Holy Immortal is the very last thing I intend. I desire to honor God as much as possible in all things I say here and below, and in all future posts.

The title of this article is identical to the title of a talk I gave earlier this month at the Threadfest 2 conference in Southlake, Texas. Threadfest is a gathering of patriots, freedom lovers, and truth-seeking dissidents organized by Patrick Gunnels, a video streamer and political commentator who has built a sizable following as an outlet for discussion of topics ignored or ridiculed by the mainstream media. Gunnels was one of a group of such video broadcasters and online writers who stepped forward in braveness after the 2020 election debacle, when almost every media outlet was denied to us, to gave us a voice when it seemed as we would have none at all.

I am lucky to call Patrick a friend, having followed him online for several years as a listener, and later meeting him in person last year at another patriot event. Threadfest came about in part because of the desire of several of us to have our own gathering where we could discuss topics freely among likeminded individuals without the stress of confrontation. We have all felt this with family members, coworkers, and friends—even ones who might be labeled “normie” conservatives but who still get their information from mainstream news.

This recent Threadfest was the second so-named event organized by Gunnels, coming six months after a wildly successful debut edition in Nashville last April. I was greatly fortunate in being able to attend both, and moreover to give a talk at both.

In Nashville, I chose to speak about American cultural history using a subject with local flavor, and which is popular and beloved by many people—country music. The title of my talk was “Nashville and Narrative”.

If you’ve been following the great thinkers on our side, then you know that the word “narrative” is one that is highly charged with connotations about the status of truth and knowledge. I intended to use the history of Nashville as a country music recording center to show people how narrative, including mass media storytelling, has been used to both entertain us and also to mold us as a nation towards certain social and political ends, both overtly and behind the scenes.

Most of the people at the conference were already acutely aware of this. In Nashville I wanted to give people a fresh historical perspective, to to show how the evolution of communications technology since the early days of the American Republic had produced an inevitable centralization of the levers of influence.

In many ways we embraced this process because of our love and enjoyment of the art and cultural products we received through these centralizing media technologies. But there has been a cost, as we know.

We have come to realize that we have been fighting a war over the very meaning of Truth, even on a spiritual level. What is at stake is nothing less than the concept of meaning itself, that is, logos.

I got a fantastic response from my Nashville talk. Unfortunately the audio did not record during that first day at the first conference. Later I recorded an expanded version and uploaded it to my Rumble channel (link).

At Threadfest 2 in Southlake, I wanted to follow the same general line of thought as in Nashville—the War on Truth—but in a context appropriate for our new conference venue in Texas outside Fort Worth (which is one of my favorite cities in Texas).

Texas is where I came as a young man in the late 1980s to work around the greatest physicists of that era. To me, Texas means physics. So I knew I had to talk about science.

That being said, just what do I mean by the “God Particle”? The phrase is taken directly from the title of a popular book published back in 1993 by a well-known American particle physicist. It refers to a supposed not-yet-observed phenomenon in nature that physicists were looking for at the time the book was written. They believed that finding this particle would answer many deep and fundamental questions about nature. Among other things, it would open the door to what is commonly called a “Theory of Everything.”

The “Theory of Everything” refers to a yet undiscovered mathematical framework that would supposedly explain all motion and matter in the Universe, down to the smallest scale, and from the origin of the Universe forward until the end of time. Finding the “God Particle” would not automatically yield this theory, but it would presumably allow great advances towards it.

The author of this book on the “God Particle” is the late Leon Lederman, a physics professor who for many years served as the director of one of the existing particle physics laboratories known as Fermilab, which is outside Chicago in northern Illinois.

At the time the book was published, Fermilab had for many years been the largest and most powerful particle physics research facility in the world. Powerful means power in the sense of the energy required to run the experiments there, which involve cranking particles up to high speed. During the years that Fermilab reigned supreme, the U.S. had the speediest (i.e., most energetic) particles. Fermilab remains the largest facility of its type in the U.S.

Lederman, who passed away in 2018, had previously won the Nobel Prize in Physics for his collaboration in experiments at Fermilab. These experiments had supposedly proven the existence of other fundamental particles besides this “God Particle” everyone was looking for. If I say supposedly here, it is not to disrespect Lederman. I am being as neutral as possible while I launch this discussion. I don’t want to take anything for granted until I can look into it myself and make a definitive judgment. A great thing about physical science is that it is supposed to be able to stand up against relentless re-examination without damage to the Truth.

I mention Lederman’s collaboration because in particle physics, every significant experiment of recent decades has been a huuuuge team effort. I could hardly put enough u’s in that word to convince you of the number of co-authors of recent famous peer-reviewed articles in the field. It’s comical to scroll for page after page in the pdfs, of the listing of the separate teams from all over the world that played a part in the results. The list of names is longer than the whole text of landmark articles from earlier eras of particle physics. Even in the 1960s, it only took one person’s name on a paper to convince the world of scientific Truth. Now it takes thousands. This is a point we will come back to.

In regard to the undiscovered but elusive “God Particle”, why was it so important to theory in 1993? The short answer is that without it, the entire rest of particle physics theory built so far, which people had spent so much time putting together over the course of many decades, would fall to pieces. All of it would have to be rethought from the ground up. That’s a brutal scenario.

Everyone knew that the existing quilt of overlapping theories could not form a Theory of Everything, but at least they provided a “Theory of Some Things” which was valid in certain areas of nature. Even before we could think about a Theory of Everything, we had to make sure this partial version was not logically inconsistent. Discovering the “God Particle” would at least provide this reassurance.

We knew from mathematical guesswork that finding this elusive God Particle would be impossible with current lab facilities. The particle collisions to find it would require the construction of bigger and more expensive particle physics apparatuses than the ones that existed. Many billions of dollars would be contributed by governments and international organizations. They would be maintained with large staffs for years, dedicated only to this one purpose. Lederman’s book was in part an attempt to explain and justify this to the general public.

The term “God Particle” is not a term that physicists use among themselves, nor with the general public outside of the kind of discussion I am having here with you. If you read the Wikipedia article about Lederman’s book, you might get the idea, as I did at first, that the name “God Particle” was suggested by Lederman’s publisher. Lederman writes that he wanted to call it by the profane name of the “Goddamn Particle”. One must realize that Lederman is a joker. He often writes in the style of a Borscht Belt comedian, and he clearly takes credit for the monicker God Particle in his book. For the record, physicists call it the Higgs boson.

Despite his profanity, Lederman implies that the “God Particle” is in many respects an appropriate label. He does so in a way that I think is understood by other physicists, even ones who are not believers in God.

They may not believe, as Christians and others do, that God exists as a Person. Nevertheless we can agree upon the common understanding of what God supposedly would know if He did exist. This includes the knowledge of all things and their motions from the beginning of time forward. This concept of knowledge is one that can be transferred over to a materialist picture of the universe in which instead of God, a mathematical theory can be assumed to account for the things of nature.

Thus the concept of God, and our beliefs in such a being, can be said to point the way to what we want our Theory of Everything to describe. Along these lines, Einstein himself spoke of wanting to know “[God’s] thoughts”. It is still debated to what degree Einstein himself believed in God.

As part of this virtualization of God’s mental processes, the Theory of Everything would also account for the creation of the Universe and its subsequent dynamical evolution in time and space, or for its eternal existence without beginning and end. It would solve all the mysteries of the Big Bang. It would give us a complete self-consistent scientific cosmology.

Did Lederman believe in God? I can’t tell from his book. I can certainly tell what he thinks about religion. He was raised Jewish but apparently did not practice any religion except the forms of worship he had to perform as a child. Whenever he mentions God in his book, he does so without reverence, and uses the pronoun “She” in reference to the Divine Person.

He quotes Pope John Paul II, but most of his discussion about faith is about how it has retarded the search for truth at various times since the Ancient Greeks. We had the truths of particle physics in our grasp even in Antiquity, he says, but we threw it away because we needed to know the big cosmic why instead of settling for the practical how. Lederman tells us in his playful manner that at least the Catholic Church has learned to mind its own business when it comes to scientific topics.

One of the perks of winning the Nobel Prize is that you get to write tongue-and-cheek books about weighty subjects for popular audiences and be taken seriously. I have no such perk, as I told my audience in Southlake. But I have plenty of experience being around people who did have that kind of privilege back when I was in graduate school at the University of Texas in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s.

I went to Texas because it was the place to be for advanced physics, as far as I could see. I wanted not only to study physics—one could do that anywhere. I wanted to become a physicist, in effect making myself an apprentice among the greatest thinkers on the planet. To my credit, I took great advantage of that opportunity once I got there, all the while struggling to keep my head above water learning advanced theory. I loved the intense intellectual milieu while sitting in my tiny graduate student office, shared with four other people with our desks crammed together on the seventh floor of Robert Lee Moore Hall, the home of the physics, math and astronomy departments.

My little office, where my own students came to see me to talk about their grades, was surrounded on the same floor and the ones above it by the offices of multiple Nobel Prize winners, and by the offices of many who thought they should have won the Nobel Prize. More than a few would have known Leon Lederman personally. For all I know, he came to U.T. as a visitor, although I don’t recall it. Austin was a key stop on the world physics circuit back then, and still is. I was lucky to spend a lot of time around these wonderful people, for whom I have nothing but the greatest respect and admiration. I could tell you many wonderful stories about them.

I thrived on the idea that among them, I had absolutely no excuse to give anything but my complete and best effort. I felt enormous gratitude to the people of Texas for building up the physics department in Austin, and letting me pursue my passionate dreams there, even as I wondered at times if I’d made the right choice, or if I’d ever finish my degree. It sounds corny, but I even liked the idea that “the eyes of Texas” were upon me, as in the lyrics of the school alma mater. I wanted to live up to that and more. Why else bother doing it?

Southlake was the first time I’d given a talk about physics in Texas since those wonderful days. It felt like coming home. I wanted to share that joy with the people at the conference, while giving them new insights about the War on Meaning, as I had done in Nashville.

Nobody in the audience was a physicist, as far as I knew. That was fine by me. In Austin, and afterwards in New York City, I had taught physics for non-majors, many of whom were trying to fulfill their one-semester natural science requirement for graduation. The UT students who came into my classroom were typically either wide-eyed freshmen away from home for the first time, or were jaded seniors who had put off their science requirement until the last possible moment. More than a few were UT student athletes, including one very tall fellow on the football team who went on to play in the Super Bowl, and another guy who won one of the major golf tournaments. I recognized his name in the New York Times. I was pleased that I had used golf as an example in my lectures to demonstrate certain principles of physics.

At the time I was barely older than most of my students—a slightly older model of Gen-Xer than them. I could make a reference to Gilligan’s Island and I knew they would all get it. Knowing at the time that taking a physics class was not at the top of the list for many of them, I felt a pressure not only to educate and inform them but also to entertain them.

Grunge had just hit the music scene and the band Nirvana had become megastars. Here we are now, entertain us. That felt like the anthem of our entire generation. Leon Lederman’s book came out during those years. His schtick about the “God Particle” is not unfamiliar to me, as a way to keep people’s attention.

Most of my UT students were bright and respectful. They responded with enthusiasm to the material whenever I chose to put in the effort. I don’t recall a single problem with any of the student athletes. I felt great joy whenever I felt I had succeeded in connecting with my students, especially about the love of Truth. I could tell when they got it. The audience in Southlake brought that back to me.

So what did I talk about in my lecture there, other than to share stories about my experiences with brilliant minds and bright achieving students decades ago? That question had loomed over me before my talk.

I had big matters to discuss concerning science and how its use and misuse relates to our current political struggles. We have all felt the disgust at being confronted by folk who are ignorant—some of them comically so—concerning what “the Science” supposedly says, and why that gives them license to tell us what to do. What on earth does that weaponized phrase even mean—“the Science”? How does “the Science” differ from just plain Science without the definite article?

Somehow we know this is phony, even if we don’t know how, because of the rank ignorance of the people hurling it at us. Like the tools of mass media and entertainment, we know that it is being used in an attempt to control us, even to the point that we have felt enslaved it.

In Southlake I spent the first two days of the conference chatting with people to get their reactions to various approaches I might take in my talk. I asked people if they had heard the term “God Particle” or any of the other names it goes by, like the Higgs boson. Almost no one had heard those terms.

Fortunately I found one name that when I mentioned it made people’s eyes light up with recognition and excitement. The name summed up just about everything I needed to say about particle physics in one word. It was a subject I could speak at great length about. The name that got people’s attention was CERN.

What is CERN? You probably know that it refers to a high-energy particle physics laboratory. It was founded in the mid 1950s and is located in the French-speaking part of Switzerland just outside Geneva. In the last two decades it has risen to become the premier facility for particle physics research in the world, eclipsing Fermilab where Lederman was the director. It is the subject of much speculation about advanced theories of physics, as well as numerous spooky legends and conspiracy theories.

The term “high-energy” as applied to CERN is not meant as a description of the intensity of the research there, but rather it is a technical term used by physicists to mean “accelerated to the highest possible speeds.” That means getting as close as possible to speed of light, which is the ultimate speed limit as far as we know.

In principle nothing stops you from getting as close as possible to the speed of light without reaching it, say to 99.9% or 99.99% of the speed of light, and so on. But according to our current understanding and experience, each additional nine costs ever more amounts of energy, requiring a theoretically infinite amount of energy to boost up to light speed. The speeds achieved by subatomic particles at CERN’s main accelerator ring reach 99.9999991% of the speed of light before they are sent crashing into each other. That’s high-energy, in both the particles and the collisions.

It is worth mentioning that the name CERN refers not only to the research lab, but also to the international organization that runs it. This organization is not owned by the Swiss government as one might guess, but by a consortium of twenty-three mostly European nations (including Switzerland) which provide the major funding for the project, and which elect the board members and the scientist-administrators who oversee the lab and its research.

This places CERN in a similar category to other famous institutions also located in or near Geneva, which of course has long been the location of the headquarters of prominent globalist-oriented institutions. The World Economic Forum and the International Committee of the Red Cross come to mind, to pick two purely random examples. It probably surprised no one at Threadfest when I mentioned that CERN itself was granted observer status at the United Nations in December 2012, putting it in roughly the same category as the Vatican and the European Union.

CERN is a big deal by anyone’s measure. The campus is right along the French-Swiss border near the Geneva Airport, and recently when I was there I pictured the high-level dignitaries and scientists from many nations flying in and out of the airport. Except these folk would not be using the overcrowded and antiquated public terminal that the masses like me had to use, but instead would be escorted to and from their private jets. Personally I preferred to be in the regular folks terminal.

High-energy. High-level. Somehow they go together.

As I mentioned, Lederman wrote that the search for the “God Particle”, and by extension the Theory of Everything, would require bigger and more expensive facilities than the ones that existed at the time. This new mother-of-all-particle-accelerators was already in the works in 1993. It was supposed to be built in the United States, to continue the dominance of the U.S. in high energy physics that had begun with the Manhattan Project and continued through the Apollo Program to Fermilab and beyond.

The billions of dollars necessary to build it had been authorized by Congress in the 1980s. Construction was well underway. But one year after Lederman published his book, the project was canceled.

Many, many particle physicists were bummed out about this at the time. Thankfully for them a few years later in the late 1990s the European consortium that runs CERN stepped in to build a new accelerator that although was not as big as the aborted U.S. one, would be big enough to continue the hunt for the God Particle. CERN (and Europe) would wind up stealing the glory in the hunt for the Theory of Everything. Many in the U.S. bemoaned the end of U.S. dominance in cutting edge science.

The particle accelerator that was supposed to be located in the U.S. was to be called the Superconducting Super Collider—SSC for short. The superconducting part refers to superconductivity, a term you may have heard in regard to advanced material sciences.

Superconductivity was discovered by experiment in 1911, and it took many decades more to develop a theory of it, but it turns out to be a very useful concept with many practical applications.

One such application of superconductivity is to create the most intense magnetic fields possible. These magnetic fields are used at accelerators to bend the particles in a giant circle. This is part of an ingenious method to crank particles up to almost the speed of light. This trick of nature was discovered in 1930 by an American particle physicist named Ernest Lawrence. Two famous particle physics labs in California, at Berkeley and Livermore, are named for him.

Lawrence’s first accelerator in 1930 could sit in the palm of your open hand. Today accelerators are dozens of miles long and are buried in huge underground tunnels. But the principle is the same.

The term “collider” here refers to the fact that in order to find obscure things like Lederman’s “God Particle”, you ultimately have to slam these high-energy particles into each other head-on, like a particle physics version of a crash-test dummies experiment, but without being able to witness the crash directly. One can gather data only after the collision, and—after running it through much computer code—make forensic conclusions about what happened in the crash. In the case of particle physics, this debris typically consists of the smallest shards of matter imaginable.

It is not uncommon to hear that the collisions produced by contemporary particle accelerators like the one at CERN “duplicate the conditions of the Big Bang”. Of course this refers to our current scientific origin story of the universe. I can’t vouch for that particular claim about the Big Bang, as I was not around at the time of the Creation of the Universe except in the all-knowing mind of God. This may sound flippant, but it is an important point to which we will have cause to return.

If one searches through the popular scientific literature on CERN, or even performs a Google search, one will find almost nothing but universal acclaim and praise for what happens there. Its achievements are considered by many today to be among of the greatest in the history of mankind. In the peer-reviewed journals, one would have to look hard and long for any dissident voices hinting otherwise.

What about the spooky stuff that supposedly goes on at CERN? One can easily find videos purporting to show pagan rituals and even human sacrifices on the CERN grounds. Are they real? What do you think?

What about the claims made by some that the high-energy Big-Bang-level collision events at CERN may be capable of creating, say, a black hole that will swallow and destroy the Earth?

Or what about the popular speculation that the experiments at CERN will split reality into multiple universes with different timelines? I refer here to the so-called “Mandela Effect”, to which CERN is often connected. What about the weird stuff like this? Could all of that just be an urban legend?

I knew those things had no doubt been part of the reason people’s eyes had lit up when I mentioned CERN. Who wouldn’t want to know about those fun things? I did not want to disappoint them, so I decided to address those things right away in my talk.

The videos of the rituals are certainly hoaxes. People sometimes conflate CERN with the Swiss railroad tunnel that opened in 2016, and for which a bizarre opening ceremony was held.

But there is a little more to the story than that, as it turns out. For example, what’s with that statue of the Hindu god in some of those CERN videos?

As far as a black hole possibly swallowing the Earth as a result of the experiments at CERN, I went straight for the most authoritative source I could imagine on this, which was the CERN web site itself. As you may know, this happens to be the original world wide web site on the Internet from 1989.

According to CERN, one need not worry about a black hole swallowing the Earth. They reassure us that the only type of black holes that might possibly be created at CERN are tiny quantum black holes, and never the kind that would devour the Solar System. Good to know.

All of these topics I breezed through quickly at the beginning of my talk. I knew the audience wanted to hear about them, but they were not my main focus. I wanted to talk about something more serious. It was not about the conspiracy theories, as interesting as they may be, but about the official peer-reviewed scientific results coming out of the scientific teams at CERN. Notice I said teams.

I had come to deliver what I considered to be a sobering message, one that has a lot to do with the reason that we had gathered in Southlake as a rendezvous in the Culture War. The real problems at CERN had everything to do, I told my audience, with the War on Science, the War on Truth, and the War on Western Civilization.

The political war, of which we are currently in the midst, is a facet of this bigger struggle. This wider War for Truth will continue even as we win our political victories. The stakes, as I see it, are nothing less than the continuing existence of American liberty and the future of humanity. In that regard, I wanted to tell my audience that in my best opinion, the truth of what was happening at CERN was far worse than any of us could have imagined.

Without going into detail yet, I would describe my thesis as follows. It is as if the world community of particle physicists—to whom we look to give us the most fundamental truths about the universe—had ceased doing natural philosophy. That is, particle physics had ceased being a continuation of the scientific search for the objective and permanent truths about nature as revealed through reason and experiment. Instead it had become something else which was not science at all.

If this sounds similar to the kind of criticism you may have heard about, say, “climate science”, or about such health science fields as microbiology, immunology and virology, then it should. In some ways, it is exactly the same underlying problem, as I have come to see it.

How can I make such a bold and startling claim about the most advanced physics theories, as well as the people researching these theories and performing these experiments? In my Southlake talk, I tried to explain the reasons for my opinion in as simple a way as I could while still doing justice to it. Of course I was barely able to scrape the surface. This is one of the reasons I have started this Substack—to explain what I mean by these bold claims, and what it has to do with the War on Truth.

A year ago, this troubling issue in particle physics was barely on my radar screen. I had long known about the rot in climate science, as I used to work in that field too. Years ago, after becoming curious and going through a red-pilling phase of scientific research, I had come to my own heretical but solid conclusions about climate science. To my horror what I found made me think that we had moved beyond science to pure science narrative.

The dominance of science narrative over science has given us those people who tell you what “the Science” says with that glazed look in their eyes, as if channeling some phrase they have instructed to say by remote control.

I never expected to be coming to the same horrifying conclusion about what is going on at CERN, and in particle physics in general. I had cast a jaundiced eye towards some of the recent proclamations coming out of CERN, especially concerning the discovery of the so-called “God Particle” back in 2012. Like others, I was disturbed by the haste at which the community of physicists seem to embrace the new “consensus’ that their long-sought “God Particle” had been confirmed by experiments. The evidence had struck me as weak.

But until last spring I had no inkling that I might come to suspect CERN of being the world’s largest and most powerful manufacturing facility of bullshit.

And I don’t mean what comes out of Swiss cows.

Notice that I was careful here to use the verb suspect. If I told you I knew this, and had proven it, then I wouldn’t be doing science either. I am a detective with a strong hunch and a trail of evidence. I know I have the ability to follow this trail to its conclusions if I am diligent. I can see where it seems to be going. But If I am going to help fix this problem—and apparently that is what I am supposed to do—then I have to hold myself to the highest standards of truth.

I walked away from an academic career years ago because, in part, I saw this coming. The good thing is that I now have nothing to risk as far as a scientific position or reputation. Believe me when I say that I personally know physicists who agree with me, but who are afraid to speak out.

Amazingly when I resumed thinking like a physicist after many years, not only did all my previous knowledge come back to me, but I found myself being able to understand material, old and new, with a lucidity of mind that was like having mental superpowers.

I can tell you why this happened. Partly it is because all physics material becomes easier on a second and third pass, etc. I figured out that secret when I was an undergraduate. That’s why physics always seems hard when you first hear it. That never goes away!

This new Neo-in-the-Matrix ability to understand advanced theory went far beyond that principle. I had struggled for years trying to put particle physics theory together in my mind. It was very frustrating and humiliating. Even then the pieces of the puzzles seemed mixed up and incompatible to me—even the parts that I thought were absolutely true.

Now it was coming together in my mind as if by some divine gift. The key is that when I walked away from physics years ago, I did not yet fully believe in God. Now I do.

God is meaning. God is logos. If this is the only post I ever write, I will deliver this testimony above all else: it was not until I accepted the existence of God that particle physics, as well as any other advanced science, made any sense at all to me. Of course, just because one understands something doesn’t necessarily mean that it is true. Many people lose sight of that.

Why should a belief God be necessary to put the pieces of natural science together? To the rational mind, it seems like it shouldn’t work that way. Many would remind us that God has never been necessary as a hypothesis in science. Don’t all scientists agree upon this? Aren’t all scientists thus atheists? No and no.

God isn’t just an axiom upon which we deduce further knowledge in the way of geometric theorems. It is far more subtle than that.

The way I’ve come to see it, a belief in God seems to work, on a personal level but moreover on a civilizational level, like the architectural capstone of an arch which bears the load of a heavy stone tower above it. The tower is ordered knowledge and truth. The effect of this capstone may go unnoticed to the visitor of a cathedral, but without its presence, the whole structure would come tumbling down. With God, we may glimpse soaring beauty. Without God, ultimately we get disordered pieces of rubble that never rise above the first floor, and which are incapable of revealing great beauty. At least that is my personal experience.

These are the issues and themes I intend to explore here. I do not intend to limit myself to talking about particle physics. I am giving myself license to discuss all topics in science as they pertain to the War on Truth, including the other scientific fields I have mentioned.

But as in my talk, I am going to use CERN as a starting point. I intend to dig deep into the questions I’ve already raised, and explain my reasoning and as I push my suspicions forward. I will talk about the spooky and uncanny stuff too, because it turns out there is more to the story than hoaxes and whimsical fringe theories. The “God Particle” as Leon Lederman imagined it may not have been the key to the Theory of Everything as he hoped, but in some ways it may be the key to exposing the corruption of science that has brought us into this mess. The God Particle may turn out to be a Divine gift in its own ironic way.

Don’t expect mathematical proofs of God, or proofs by experiment, or by pure logic. They don’t exist, although St. Anselm’s famous argument for the existence God comes close. That is by design, apparently. Those who demand material proofs will stay forever on the ground floor of reality, believing themselves sophisticated while failing to see the essential nature of the Cosmos staring at them in the face.

According to the wisdom of the Church fathers, reason is our aid in understanding God, but we will always have that gap between our reason and the Almighty, like the gap in an electrical circuit. Reason can narrow that gap, squeezing it together, but it can never close it. Crossing it ultimately requires the spark called faith.

Why am I calling this blog Quantum Epistemology? I will explain that as I go on. For now, let us just say that I am using the word “epistemology” according to its dictionary definition (link) as the theory of knowledge. Epistemology is the discussion of how we know anything at all that can be asserted as the truth.

As for quantum, well that’s more complicated, and I will explain this crucial word as best as possible as we go on, since it seems to be on everyone’s lips in some form or another. For now, let’s just start with the fact that here it means nature on the level of the very small—the level of atoms, nuclei, and, of course, particles.

Does God believe in the God Particle? After my talk someone reminded me that I hadn’t given an answer. Of course I don’t dare claim to speak for the Almighty, and it seems absurd to me to speak of what God “believes". But depending on what one means by that question, as a physicist I will say that the answer could be yes or no.

For various reasons, both spiritual and scientific, I don’t want to give a definite answer now. I hope to find a solid answer at some point, if not by reason and experiment here on Earth, then by direct knowledge in God’s presence.

In the meantime, I am a detective on the case. I want to be fair. I have no desire to build a lawyerly case for things I want to believe because I have an axe to grind. Of what use to humanity would I be? If evidence forces me to completely change my mind from what I have implied about CERN so far, I will become CERN’s bulldog and lend my voice to those trumpeting its righteous virtues.

I have no problem lauding the valid achievements of great scientists of the present and past when they deserve it, even if they turn out to be globalist assholes. But if not, and my suspicions turn out to be correct, let’s just say I can hardly wait to start to going to physics conferences again. The best is yet to come.

As a preview, I can tell you one—but by no means the only—reason behind this apparently disastrous position we now find ourselves in the War on Truth. It is not even the biggest reason, but it is one that also plays a key role in “climate science” and apparently the contaminated health scientific fields. It can be encapsulated by something that Dr. Lee Merritt of America’s Frontline Doctors said in her own talk in Southlake. It’s all about computer modeling.

This is where I will pick up next time. Among other things, I will talk about that other monster particle collider I mentioned that was under construction but was never finished. It was a big deal for years. It would have been the “holy temple” for research in particle physics and the search for the God Particle. It would have eclipsed anything at CERN built before or since. Physicists all of the world would have come to work there, seeking to build a Theory of Everything. It would have been hailed as the crown jewel of American experimental science.

In an alternative timeline, this unbuilt collider would have become the subject of urban legends and conspiracy theories about black holes. It would presumably be the place I would now be talking about as possibly the biggest bullshit factory ever, that is threatening the very foundations of Truth.

The last time I checked the abandoned buildings are still there sitting in the open prairie, no doubt faded in the sun after three decades of neglect. The unused accelerator tunnel—its massive superconducting magnets long-since removed—passes under a major freeway on which drive thousands of motorists every hour, oblivious to the would-be landmark construction underneath.

It is just south of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, smack in the middle of Texas.