Francisco González de Posada, Full Professor of Physics at the Polytechnic University of Madrid(UPM) and member of the Royal National Academy of Medicine, directed the November seminar of group of research Science, Reason and Faith (CRYF) of the University of Navarra.

He began by specifying the meaning of what can be understood as a problem: that which lacks a solution and pointed out what, from his point of view, can be considered the fundamental problems for human beings. In the scientific-philosophical field they are: the universe, man, God, the knowledge and life, all of them object of study since antiquity (pre-Socratic) but still present in today's scientific research.

Regarding the problem of the universe, he explained that the question arises as to the concept itself - what is understood by the universe - and what is its origin. Until Einstein, the word universe was used in reference letter to "everything" that exists, it was a totalitarian conception of the term: the universe is all that is, all that exists. From the theory of relativity and the verification of its permanent expansion, a dynamic conception of the universe is introduced as that which is continuously being made, which entails the impossibility -from the scientific point of view- of a perfect knowledge of it, the impossibility of knowing "how" it is.

Regarding the origin of the universe, he made a quick presentation of the historical path in scientific research until arriving at what is considered the most commonly accepted cosmological model : the Big Bang. This is not the only one but, in the words of speaker, it is a "very plausible hypothesis without which we can explain practically nothing and with which we can explain almost everything". In line with what was said above regarding the impossibility of a complete knowledge of the universe, he drew attention to the current state of science, which lacks the physico-mathematical tools to describe the initial singularity that, according to the Big Bang theory, gave rise to the present universe.

Regarding the philosophical and theological implications of the Big Bang he made reference letter to the disputes originated between those who pretend to use this model as scientific justification for the need of a creator -the intervention of an external agent that, in an initial instant, would have set the whole process in motion- and those who refuse to admit its existence.

In the subsequent colloquium he mentioned other cosmological models currently proposed by science in which no initial instant is required at which the universe begins, although it is true that these are not yet experimentally corroborated and, in this sense, can only be admitted as hypotheses. When referring to the conception of God, he spoke of what could be called cosmic attributes: omnipotence, omniscience, eternity and creative power. Understanding that there is no literal interpretation of the Genesis account of creation, he emphasized that the reference letter to a seventh day in which God rests indicates a perfection in the creative work as a perfectly finished task and affirmed that this image of God is perfectly compatible with the image that physics gives today of the universe.