0
   

God vs. Quantum Mechanics: One and the same?

 
 
sarek
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 06:38 am
@Axis Austin,
Axis Austin wrote:

I agree with this statement and take it as evidence for God's temporality. Explaining God's timeless interactions (if God is timeless which you seem to assert) with a temporal world gets difficult. That is, the interaction between time and timelessness is difficult to understand, argue for, etc.


Yes, it is difficult. It is a metaphysical problem I am still working on.
Maybe we should not speak of direct interactions per se.
I can now envision two potential mechanisms for explaining the connection between the timeless and the timefull perspective.

1. The many worlds hypothesis of quantum mechanics. In short every quantum event leads to a new branch within the total space of all possible worldlines. All these worldlines actually exist in one big 'decisionspace' as it were.
But we live on only one of the many branches without ever knowing which one we're on. We will never know about the other timelines, they might as well not be there. We do know from which past timeline we originate. At every quantum decision point a little bit of known past is added to our timeline. But still that does not mean that the other past timelines do not exist as well somewhere out there. All we know is that we are not on one of those, only on our own.
2. The range of QM events resembles a long series of random numbers. If there were to be an inluence(or 'power') of sorts which ensured one of those strings of random numbers came up in preference to another, would we ever know about it?
Assuming a God throwing the dice ten times in a row, you get ten numbers. Now assume God repeats that experiment a thousand times and picks the best possible outcome. Can you detect that such a choice has been made? For you, inside the QM world everything still seems indeterminate. Every new day is a surprise.

And remember, if you have knowledge of the future and you can look back at us, all this quantum stuff disappears like a snowball in hell. From that point of view you receive absolute certainty.
Going back to the many worlds hypothesis it translates to knowing which worldline has been chosen.
Relativity tells you that travelling with the speed of light makes you travel forward in time relative to the rest of the universe at an infinite speed. You reach the end of time instantaneously.
One flaw: time's arrow only points forward. Bringing information back from the future remains impossible.

Axis Austin wrote:
Why does knowledge of all events necessitate a timeless God? Could not God be temporal and yet know past and present?


Only if God can simultaneously interact with every point on the timeline, past, present and future. Because from within your present position on the timeline itself you cannot predict the future.
Let say you were a prophet and God wanted to tell you what will happen in 2012. God will have to know what will happen. You can't predict it yourself because of the laws of QM and/or the laws of chaos dynamics.

God will have to be able to interact with a point in time in 2012 to bring that information back to you in 2008. He cannot follow the path of cause and consequence because then He will reach 2012 no sooner than you will. Prohets who only predict the present are rather useless.


Axis Austin wrote:
Finally to further explain my question about God & QM: scientific/religious people have had a difficult time fitting the two together. Where does God fit into a scientific worldview? I am asking whether or not the unexplained events of the universe (which scientists account for with the uncertainty principle of Quantum Mechanics) can't be better explained as God's actions in the world.


It is supposed to be difficult. If it were not, scientists could eventually prove or disprove the existence of God. That is why we have metaphysics.
So far, every event in the physical world that we see about us has been basically subjectable to the scientific method. It is theoretically still possible that one day we will know all there is to know about the physical world. There is no reason to think that any observable phenomenon should forever remain inexplicable.
And uncertainty is really no more or less than just that: uncertainty. As in throwing dice. The theory itself is crystal clear, and it predicts uncertainty as the outcome. No magic involved.
Axis Austin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 11:04 am
@sarek,
sarek wrote:
Yes, it is difficult. It is a metaphysical problem I am still working on.
Maybe we should not speak of direct interactions per se.

Quote: Only if God can simultaneously interact with every point on the timeline, past, present and future.

Quote: And uncertainty is really no more or less than just that: uncertainty. As in throwing dice. The theory itself is crystal clear, and it predicts uncertainty as the outcome. No magic involved.


1. Honestly I'm still a little confused about everything you mentioned relating to time and multiple timelines, but I'm sure it's due to a lack of understanding on my part. I did gather that you think God affects the timeline as a whole, and thus interacts with time not by interacting at a temporal moment, but by affecting all of time. I agree with you, and think this is a key step towards solving the metaphysical problem. However, I still feel that it doesn't adequately explain specific events in history that are taken to be the act of God (if you believe in that sort of thing as I do). Thus, for example, how would God talk to Moses in the bush, or send Jesus apart from acting temporally? I wrote my thesis on this topic and know there are answers, but am curious what you think. I think God acts temporally in the world.

2. I must disagree. I don't think God needs to interact with 2012 to be able to foreknow what will happen in 2012. Maybe from a temporal perspective he has no ability to interact with 2012 when it's 2008, but he can know what will happen, just like I know tomorrow I will go to work, the sun will rise, etc. Of course, God's knowledge would be very much greater than mine indeed.

3. I think having uncertainty as a scientific outcome is a bit dodgy. Science is suppose to provide reasons, and uncertainty really means that we don't yet know the reason (and may never know). So why can't metaphysics step in at this point (and people could employ the notion of God if they so choose).
psi
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 03:19 pm
@sarek,
sarek wrote:
That is thinking in the old paradigms. Science is science and religion is religion and never the twine shall meet.
Science knows and religion believes.


I believe it was Einstein who said...'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.'
I can never understand why they should be at opposite ends of the spectrum. Surely any 'scientist' should be open to all possibilities especially in light of the revolution Quantum Mechanics caused.
0 Replies
 
sarek
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 02:15 am
@Axis Austin,
Axis Austin wrote:
1. Honestly I'm still a little confused about everything you mentioned relating to time and multiple timelines, but I'm sure it's due to a lack of understanding on my part. I did gather that you think God affects the timeline as a whole, and thus interacts with time not by interacting at a temporal moment, but by affecting all of time. I agree with you, and think this is a key step towards solving the metaphysical problem. However, I still feel that it doesn't adequately explain specific events in history that are taken to be the act of God (if you believe in that sort of thing as I do). Thus, for example, how would God talk to Moses in the bush, or send Jesus apart from acting temporally? I wrote my thesis on this topic and know there are answers, but am curious what you think. I think God acts temporally in the world.


My conclusion is indeed that God does not merely interact with all of the timeline, God is all of the timeline. Alpha and Omega, 'I am'
All the futures that can ever be from our temporal POV are already known from God's POV.

Axis Austin wrote:

2. I must disagree. I don't think God needs to interact with 2012 to be able to foreknow what will happen in 2012. Maybe from a temporal perspective he has no ability to interact with 2012 when it's 2008, but he can know what will happen, just like I know tomorrow I will go to work, the sun will rise, etc. Of course, God's knowledge would be very much greater than mine indeed.


You think you will go to work and you think the sun will rise. But that is only because it has always been like that and you expect tomorrow to be the same. It is an expectation, not a certainty. You can't predict the weather next month. Not because your technology is lacking, but because the laws of physics limit the inherent 'knowability' of indeteminate processes.

Axis Austin wrote:
3. I think having uncertainty as a scientific outcome is a bit dodgy. Science is suppose to provide reasons, and uncertainty really means that we don't yet know the reason (and may never know). So why can't metaphysics step in at this point (and people could employ the notion of God if they so choose).


Science provides ample reason to why things go as they go. What you may have a problem with is the acceptation of indeterminism as a basic fact of life.
Why would God dislike indeterminism as an underlying principle in the world of the mortals? If our world would be inherently deterministic it would be a meaningless machine and free will would not be possible. Your choices would be irrelevant, in fact they would not even be choices but the outcome of blind physical processes.
Note: indeterminism does not prove free will as such, it only makes it not impossible. Whereas determinism makes free will permanently impossible.

Partially also in response to psi:
In my own metaphysical ideas I view the timefull and the timeless as merely perspectives of the same whole. Just like particles and waves you can't see them both at the same time, but both are valid perspectives. Science need not bite either religion of philosophy. Together they are needed to form a complete picture of everything.

And maybe our universe is purposely designed to make it impossible to physically prove or disprove God.
0 Replies
 
Icon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 08:00 am
@Icon,
So what if, and this is purely hypothetical, but what if god were inherently a quantum events?

It would fit with everything we know about god. He is everywhere in everything. Neither male nor female. Able to alter the world as we know it. conscious on a whole new level. What if god were nothing more than the personification of a quantum consciousness which maintains the balance of quantum states in order to keep the universe from ripping itself apart.
0 Replies
 
click here
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 12:41 pm
@Icon,
Icon wrote:
The one thing that I could never fathom is that they all state that God is "perfect in every way". My first observation of this was that "God" could not be perfect in EVERY way because that would force him to be perfectly flawed.


Do you have a verse that you could show me in the Bible?
Icon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2009 01:00 pm
@click here,
click here wrote:
Do you have a verse that you could show me in the Bible?

Matthew 5:48: "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2022 at 02:59:27