Omphalos by Ted Chiang

Tree growth rings = a sign of God's creation?

Regardless of genre, the more I read from Ted Chiang, the more convinced I am that he is one of the greatest short-story writers of our time. A bold claim, for sure, but honestly, nearly everything he writes is mind-blowing. I can't really say that about many other contemporary authors. Having recently revisited Star by Arthur C. Clarke, I realized that Omphalos by Ted Chiang makes for a fascinating comparative analysis, as both stories explore the tension between science and religion.

SPOILER ALERT: Please go read both stories and then come back here...Okay done? Great. 

Let's continue.

Both stories follow protagonists who experience a profound crisis of faith. In Clarke’s Star, the narrator is a Jesuit priest and astrophysicist who embarks on a space expedition to study the remnants of a supernova. He initially sees no conflict between faith and science; in fact, he views scientific discovery as a means of better understanding God’s creation. However, his faith is shattered when he realizes that the supernova that destroyed an advanced alien civilization was the same celestial event that formed the Star of Bethlehem—a moment traditionally seen as a divine miracle. Instead of reaffirming God’s benevolence, this discovery makes the narrator question divine will, forcing him to confront the possibility that God’s plan is indifferent to human suffering.

Similarly, in Omphalos, Chiang presents a world where scientific evidence confirms God’s existence. The protagonist, an archaeologist, lives in a universe where physical artifacts such as tree rings without previous growth cycles and human remains without umbilical cords (hence the title Ompahlos has multiple meanings in this context) is clear evidence that Earth was created in a divine act. However, her faith is tested when new astronomical findings suggest that Earth is not the center of the universe. While she never doubts that God exists, she is devastated by the revelation that Earth may not have been God's primary focus. This realization mirrors Clarke’s priest, whose belief in a purposeful, benevolent Creator is deeply shaken by the implications of scientific discovery.

Time and historical evidence play a crucial role in both stories, though in different ways. Clarke’s Star relies on astronomical time scales such as the vast distances of space and the unrelenting passage of time that render human suffering insignificant in the cosmic scheme. The destruction of an entire civilization millions of years ago is a mere footnote in the universe's history, overshadowed by the biblical significance of the same event on Earth. The priest struggles with the idea that a seemingly random, catastrophic event was instrumental in a moment of religious importance for humanity.

In contrast, Omphalos examines time through archaeology and natural history. The protagonist’s work revolves around studying these physical remnants that serve as divine fingerprints marking the beginning of creation. However, the discovery that Earth is not the center of God’s attention reframes these findings, making her question their significance. Chiang's focus on material evidence and deep history serves as a counterpoint to Clarke’s cosmic scale, but both stories ultimately suggest that scientific discoveries can challenge rather than reinforce religious belief. The inherent paradox enhances the tension between science and religon where it all comes to faith. 

Chiang structures Omphalos as a prayer, with the first-person narrator addressing God directly. This framing adds a deeply personal and introspective quality to her reflections, making her struggle with faith feel more intimate. While Clarke’s protagonist arrives at a shaky conclusion, Chiang’s archaeologist does not reject God outright. Instead, she shifts her perspective, acknowledging her disappointment but continuing to seek meaning in a universe where humanity may not be at the center. Ultimately, both stories challenge the idea that science and religion must always be in harmony. They suggest that faith, when confronted with new knowledge, is often forced to evolve or be abandonded under the irrefutable evidence of scientific discovery.