Mega Genius® Intelligence Briefing 
Many people have used the “Ask Mega Genius®” option to challenge “the man with the perfect IQ”™ with philosophically perplexing questions. Although he handles all such questions in strict confidence, this Mega Genius® Intelligence Briefing consists of a few of the most popular questions that he has received about God and the universe — anonymously submitted — along with Mega Genius’® replies from beyond the top of the IQ scale.
Dear Mega Genius®: Does God exist?
Mega Genius®: It depends on how you define the word “God.”
Man customarily defines “God” as “the Being perfect in wisdom, power and goodness, whom people worship as creator and ruler of the universe.”
Let’s adjust that definition minutely.
No effect can exist without a cause. Consequently, nothing can exist in the absence of creation.
This physical universe exists and, therefore, is the result of creation.
Source of that creation is obviously infinite in wisdom and power with regard to the physical universe, and reflects total truth of the physical universe, and in infinite wisdom is also infinite in what man would consider goodness. So, let’s call source of that creation “God.”
Therefore, if we define God as “source of creation of the physical universe, infinite in wisdom, power and goodness,” we have a slightly different definition than what man customarily uses, but we have an accurate definition of what we can call God.
Accordingly, we can intelligently and truthfully say God exists.
Dear Mega Genius®: Can God create a rock so big that he cannot lift it?
Mega Genius®: The old conundrum is that if God cannot create a rock too heavy to lift, how can he be all powerful and be God? Conversely, if he can not lift the rock, again how can he be all powerful and be God?
The answer is that God can create a rock so big that he cannot lift it, because he chooses to consider at that moment that he cannot. At any time, however, God can change his mind and lift it.
An all powerful God has the power and freedom of all choice.
Dear Mega Genius®: How did the universe begin?
Mega Genius®: Unless one addresses that question with extremely superior intelligence, using the “Genius Formula,” it is an unsolvable riddle. Accordingly, it utterly baffles our most distinguished physicists.
For example, the British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University and author of the best-selling book “A Brief History of Time,” is currently the most famous living scientist of the twenty-first century. Yet he has written, “The actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics.”
Similarly, according to Professor Alan Guth, of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a highly acclaimed cosmologist, “The instant of creation remains unexplained.”
According to the Nobel Prize winning physicist Dr. Leon Lederman, Director Emeritus of Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, “When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up — we are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the very beginning.”
With all due respect to the Nobel laureate and his distinguished colleagues who have been unable to figure out what happened at the birth of the universe, I’m afraid that Dr. Lederman overstated the matter. Just because he and his associates don’t know the answer, doesn’t mean that someone of higher intelligence doesn’t know.
There is a significant difference between “being a certified genius” and merely “having a genius for mathematics or physics.” In addition, as Dr. Lederman admitted, the resolution of what happened at the very beginning falls within the parameters of an entirely different study — philosophy — a field with which Dr. Lederman, Professors Guth and Hawking, and most other celebrated physicists of our day have no meaningful expertise.
Nevertheless, since you have asked a certified mega genius how the physical universe began, here is the truth from beyond the top of the IQ scale.
The law of conservation of energy states, “Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it may be changed from one form to another.” This law appears quite workable, but actually is false. Energy can be created, as the very existence of the physical universe proves, and it can also be destroyed.
The law of conservation of matter and energy states, “The total amount of matter and energy available in the universe is fixed.” This law also is false.
If we had a law of conservation of space, it would be false, too. Matter, energy, and space are all increasing in quantity in the physical universe, at a slight rate.
Keep in mind that, as Professor Hawking said, the actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics.
There are many universes and sub-universes, which can and often do overlap, but this particular physical universe began as a result of seven basic decisions, interspersed with various considerations.
First was the decision to be the creator of a game.
Second was the decision to assume a viewpoint, which created dimension, thereby space. (In contradiction to quantum mechanics, there are only three dimensions in this physical universe: height, width, and depth. Time is not a dimension.)
Third was the decision that the space would endure.
Fourth was the decision that a particle of energy would exist in the space. (Again, the supposition that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed is false.)
Fifth was the decision that the particle would endure in the space, at which point time began. (Time is a decision. Awareness of the existence of time results only from particles changing location in relation to each other.)
Sixth was the decision that at least a second particle of energy would also exist and endure in the space. (The particles then could move in relation to each other, which resulted in the apparency of time.)
Seventh was the decision that numerous similar particles would also exist and endure in space, constituting more energy, and that those particles of energy could be grouped together to form various objects.
Accordingly, thought, and energy in the form of particles, and grouped particles in the form of matter, existed in space and endured (resulting in time), constituting all the basic components of this physical universe, which then increased in size as more dimension was viewed and additional particles of energy were postulated into existence.
Incidentally, at the point that the decision was made that the first particle would endure (the fifth decision), which began time, that decision (like the first four decisions) was made outside time — there was no time, yet. Therefore, the beginning and ending of this universe are both “the same time.” They are coincidental, because they are both in “no time.”
That is an accurate synopsis of what actually happened at the beginning of the physical universe, despite the fact that it is at some variance with some of Albert Einstein’s and Stephen Hawking’s theories, such as their contention that the physical universe is infinite. In truth, it is not quite infinite.
Remember that the Swedish Royal Academy has never considered Albert Einstein worthy of the Nobel Prize for his theories of relativity. And keep in mind that physicists now consider Einstein to have been wrong about many issues, including quantum mechanics.
Remember, too, that the Nobel Prize has never been awarded to Stephen Hawking, because his work is also theoretical and remains unproved.
Regardless, you now know the truth of how this physical universe began.
Dear Mega Genius®: If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?
Mega Genius®: Yes, it still makes a sound.
Also, if the tree was absolutely dead and if there was no life of any kind in the vicinity, it would still make a sound.
If, however, there was no life of any kind in this entire physical universe that was agreeing upon the laws of physics that result in the sound that a tree makes when it falls, then when the tree fell there would be no sound.
The sound is not dependent upon life being in the vicinity, but, rather, upon life in this physical universe agreeing upon the laws of physics.
Dear Mega Genius®: What is God’s will?
Mega Genius®: This question has already been “answered” too many times.
As the British author and socialist George Bernard Shaw said, “There are scores of thousands of human insects who are ready at a moment’s notice to reveal the Will of God on every possible subject.”
To determine God’s will, one would need to identify God’s characteristics and intention.
The late British geneticist and biologist J.B.S. Haldane, one of the most influential scientists of the twentieth century, analyzed everything that biology revealed to him about God, and concluded, “He seems to have an inordinate fondness for beetles.”
I’m sure we can do better than that.
Due to man’s misperceptions, God has often been misdefined by man, followed by imperfect translations of all ancient religious writings. All those misperceptions, inaccurate definitions and alterations have resulted in multitudinous misunderstandings about God.
God is customarily misdefined today as “the Being perfect in wisdom, power and goodness whom people worship as creator and ruler of the universe.”
Therefore, worship would seem to be what God wants, since worshipping God is what people do, per their definition. That, however, is just one example of man’s numerous misunderstandings.
Perfect wisdom, power and goodness are admirable traits that induce respect and reverence; therefore, man considers them sacred. Man, however, long ago misinterpreted respect to mean worship, which no Being who is perfect in wisdom, power and goodness could ever need or, therefore, would have any reason to demand.
The more wisdom that one knows, the less respect he requires.
To require anything reflects a need, which is short of perfection, which violates man’s definition of God.
Only imperfect man, in his irrational arrogance, could conceive that any entity could so urgently need respect that it would require, much less demand, worship.
Only by entirely ignoring man’s own definition of the word “God” could one conclude that God’s will is to be worshiped. Any house devoted to the worship of God is, by man’s own definition, a house of misunderstanding of God.
Many would say that God’s will includes prayer, which, along with worship, people offer God continually, but that is another example of man’s various misunderstandings.
Communicating to God either aloud and verbally, or silently and telepathically, is called prayer. When God replies, it’s called schizophrenia.
By definition, a supreme being who is perfect in wisdom, power, and goodness is all knowing and, therefore, knows everything that is in a person’s heart, and his or her every feeling and desire, and the person’s every thought, at least by the instant it is formed.
God never needs to be told; God already knows.
Consequently, modern man’s belief that he needs to continually act out the appropriate steps of praying to somehow get his messages across to God again irrefutably reflects man’s misunderstanding of his own definition of “God.”
The call to worship and pray, however, helps funnel vast funds into the coffers of the many churches that blatantly fail to abide by their own definition of the word “God.”
Religious teachers who preach with the most anger, or instill the most fear, or incite the most judgment, or vocalize the most fervently about condemnation and “hell, fire and brimstone,” are the most deficient in wisdom and have the greatest misunderstanding of their own definition of “God.”
The eighteenth century French writer François Voltaire noted, “If God created us in his own image, we have more than reciprocated.” All our ideas of God being jealous, angry, vengeful, wrathful, and the likes, are all false attributes and human frailties assigned to God in error by man and are clearly inconsistent with perfect wisdom and goodness.
Imperfect humans may throw tantrums, but a perfectly wise, powerful and good God would have to be understanding. After all, having created the physical universe, God would have total understanding of it and everything in it.
God’s primary characteristic is total understanding, of you, and everyone and everything else, and of the entire physical universe.
God’s intention — and therefore will — is for each person to have total understanding of himself or herself, and of everyone and everything else, also.
Unfortunately, we have a long row to hoe, having gotten off on the wrong foot long, long ago. In the beginning was the word … and the word was misunderstood.
Dear Mega Genius®: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Mega Genius®: The egg came first. The first chicken hatched from its egg, which was laid by a bird not quite in the chicken classification.
Dear Mega Genius®: Why does God permit terrible things to happen to good people?
Mega Genius®: When two year-old Johnny accidentally drops his lollipop on the ground and gets dirt stuck all over it, it is a terrible loss to him; his heart is broken and he cries. Yet, watching him, the child’s father may laugh to himself, because the parent’s understanding of his child’s minor tragedy in the broad scope of things is vastly greater than his child’s understanding.
Later, when a tragedy occurs to Johnny’s father, a good person, it appears tragic only because one’s understanding of the grand scheme of things is severely limited. If one’s understanding of the “big picture” were great enough, he would realize that the tragedy that befell Johnny’s father is actually only “a much bigger lollipop that fell in the dirt.”
The only difference between the two heartbreaking losses is in magnitude.
1 March 2002
Copyright © 2002 – 2011 Mega Genius®. All rights reserved.