in the realm of finite interrelationships with which science deals. If you try to do it, you are open to every catastrophe of such derivations which, with great probability, will follow once upon a time, earlier or later.

Therefore we must not be afraid if science goes beyond the principle of indeterminacy, and we must not rejoice if science discovers the principle of indeterminacy. And I will give an almost scientific, or perhaps really scientific, argument against the rejoicing: all this is going on in subatomic, microcosmic inquiries. Every scientist will tell you that the infinite probability for the macrocosmic consideration is that in spite of the incalculability of the movement of the ions and electrons, in the large consideration things will be quite much the same as they were before: when you turn your key, your car will run. And this simply means: in the macrocosmic consideration, the indeterminacy principle has little or no application. But this itself is a scientific argument, and there may be a counter-argument, and I will not go into this from a theological point of view. I use it only in order to warn theologians about rejoicing if something might have happened in physics which allays some of our fears—the fears must be overcome in the other dimension, but not in the dimension of science.

Another consideration, to which we must look, are the astronomical calculations of today and the principle of entropy, which as you know means that the water runs down the river and not up again, i.e., warmth, if it has been used, cannot be used any more but dissipates, so that there is a continuous waste of power which cannot be replaced in terms of physical necessity. Now this