Is there room for God in a quantized universe?
The supposed proofs for the existence of a theistic God (0ne that intentionally created the universe and has particular interest in humans) have been resoundingly defeated over the years. There simply is no proof, logical or otherwise, for the existence of such a God. The fact that the strongest arguments ever made in support of the existence of such a God are so trivially easy to see through and defeat at the very minimum strengthens the skeptics’ argument.
Ultimately the nonexistence of a theistic God is a very positive thing. Faith in a theistic God has been more responsible for the dehumanization of humanity than any other historical crutch. It has given psychopaths, and power hungry individuals, a weapon by which they become able to control the masses and in effect get them to curtail their natural compassionate tendencies. The kind of faith that asks you to suspend your skepticism and curiosity is not, and has never been, a good thing. Blind faith may have been promoted as a beneficial by those that stand to amass or retain power by producing followers, but its promotion is nothing more than a goal-oriented lie that stunts the natural curiosities of those that fall for it, instead of encouraging them to wonder and explore new horizons.
To get a feeling for how ubiquitous this manipulation is we need go no further than Saint Augustine himself who said:
“There is another form of temptation, even more fraught with danger. This is the disease of curiosity. It is this which drives us to try and discover the secrets of nature, those secrets which are beyond our understanding, which can avail us nothing and which man should not wish to learn.”
St. Augustine
Or we can appeal to these worlds:
“Reason should be destroyed in all Christians.”
Martin Luther
Does this mean that our scientific knowledge leaves no room for any kind of God? If the eleven-dimensional map of quantum space theory is in fact an accurate map of physical reality, then is there any room left for God? Well, if we are talking about God in the theistic or deistic sense then the answer is a resounding no. Qst is a fully deterministic construction. It portrays a perfect fractal that continues into the infinities of increasing expanse and resolution. It leaves no room for a planner or organizer, in fact, it reveals that the structure of the universe is a result of the processes of emergent phenomena, which explicitly requires the absence of a central planner. It carries us beyond the outdated and flawed (may we say dangerous) notion of a theistic or deistic God but quantum space theory also ushers in a different notion of “God.” It takes us to the very door of Einstein’s God. Einstein did not believe in a theistic or deistic God. Instead he subscribed to a “cosmic religion” where “God” is what is revealed when we “lift a corner of the great veil.” This is accomplished by embracing our natural curiosities and actively participating in the scientific quest. overcoming our misconceptions one by one, and learning how to comprehend Nature as it truly is. Through this we become in touch with our “magnificent insignificance.”
Quantum space theory tugs on the corner of that great veil and opens our minds to the dimensions that have always been hidden from us. It takes us face to face with Einstein’s God and gives us the chance to start an entirely new conversation.
Loading ...
“It is not only faith that offers the perception of man’s personal dignity and of its decisive importance. Natural reason, too, can have access to it, since it is able to distinguish truth from falsehood, good from evil, and recognizes freedom as the fundamental condition of human existence.”
-Pope JPII
Because we cannot “prove” anything we cannot excuse faith from being a possible portal to truth. What is science but faith in our senses? As the physicist finds natural law to be worth focusing on so I find purpose to be worth my own focus. Determinism is without purpose.
This article misrepresents the approach of faith based searches for truth as being intolerant and separate from science/logic.
Saint Albertus Magnus 1206-1280:
“For there can be no fundamental conflict between a reason which, in conformity with its own nature which comes from God, is geared to truth and is qualified to know truth, and a faith, which refers to the same divine source of all truth. Faith confirms, in fact, the specific rights of natural reason.”
The catholic curch in particular has a long history of pioneering science and encouraging the discovery of truth through natural discovery, and for good theological reason. If God created nature then discovering nature is discovering God. Like any enormous organization there are individuals who say all sorts of things but the official policy of the church itself has never been anti-science.
QST is enormously interesting, revealing and worth our mental efforts. Thank you Thad for presenting it in such a way that even a layperson like myself can comprehend the basics of it. Unfortunately it doesn’t fill every curiosity in my own nature and regardless of how many physical laws we find to be concurrent with our perception, if our natures are left unfulfilled there is little value in our surroundings. While I am not a faithful person in any sense I am a hopeful person that sees the outward and the inward as valuable to our human search for truth.
Awesome website BTW
OK. I can give you some of what you say.
When ever I teach an introductory class in philosophy I am very clear that every person, scientist, atheist, whatever, necessarily must have at least a tiny nugget of faith. This faith, you correctly point out, allows us to believe in our senses despite the overwhelming fact that we cannot prove in a strict way their veracity. This minimal amount of faith allows us simply to believe in an external world. This is very different though from the kind of faith a person has that believes in the old man in the sky kind of God.
I think it fair to say the Catholic Church’s record on scientific stewardship and tolerance is conflicted to say the least. Let us not forget the forced recant of Galileo as a prime example. The church plays “nice” with science when it has no other choice but to do so. Rationality is touted by the apologists as a treasured gift from God, but then condemned as a tool of Satan by the less progressive. The church’s official policy, for most of its history, has been at least antagonistic with the sciences and their big theories, the ones that show contradiction to the church’s necessary dogmas.
I think it is important to separate spiritualism from mysticism. Mysticism denies the rational component, while spiritualism embraces it in a monism of being. Attending just about any service preformed by an organized religion is almost always an exercise in mysticism.
Thank you for your comments!
“The irony of religion is that because of its power to divert man to destructive courses, the world could actually come to an end. The plain fact is, religion must die for mankind to live. The hour is getting very late to be able to indulge in having key decisions made by religious people. By irrationalists, by those who would steer the ship of state not by a compass, but by the equivalent of reading the entrails of a chicken. George Bush prayed a lot about Iraq, but he didn’t learn a lot about it. Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking. It’s nothing to brag about. And those who preach faith, and enable and elevate it are intellectual slaveholders, keeping mankind in a bondage to fantasy and nonsense that has spawned and justified so much lunacy and destruction. Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don’t have all the answers to think that they do. Most people would think it’s wonderful when someone says, “I’m willing, Lord! I’ll do whatever you want me to do!” Except that since there are no gods actually talking to us, that void is filled in by people with their own corruptions and limitations and agendas. And anyone who tells you they know, they just know what happens when you die, I promise you, you don’t. How can I be so sure? Because I don’t know, and you do not possess mental powers that I do not. The only appropriate attitude for man to have about the big questions is not the arrogant certitude that is the hallmark of religion, but doubt. Doubt is humble, and that’s what man needs to be, considering that human history is just a litany of getting shit dead wrong. This is why rational people, anti-religionists, must end their timidity and come out of the closet and assert themselves. And those who consider themselves only moderately religious really need to look in the mirror and realize that the solace and comfort that religion brings you actually comes at a horrible price. If you belonged to a political party or a social club that was tied to as much bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, violence, and sheer ignorance as religion is, you’d resign in protest. To do otherwise is to be an enabler, a mafia wife, for the true devils of extremism that draw their legitimacy from the billions of their fellow travelers. If the world does come to an end here, or wherever, or if it limps into the future, decimated by the effects of religion-inspired nuclear terrorism, let’s remember what the real problem was. We learned how to precipitate mass death before we got past the neurological disorder of wishing for it. That’s it. Grow up or die.”
Closing Comments from Bill Maher’s “Religulous”
Very curious article. IS there room for God or any religion for that matter, in QST? I don’t think so. One has to put aside any type of religion that might cloud the mind of science. This go’s back to the question of science versus faith. We can explain what we can not see with math, but how do you explain a “God” that mastered a design on a universal scale? This can not be proven in math, and blind faith brings not the answer OR the truth to light. It’s at this point that we enter the realm of philosophy, and that’s a whole other matter all together. Well written piece Mr. Roberts, you made me think.
You might be interested to know Einstein studied Christian Science and attended (did not join) Christian Science churches and visited Reading Rooms throughout New York City and in Princeton. Because of the way Mary Baker Eddy talked about matter, Einstein was particularly intrigued, and a remark he made once, after a church service was: “if only these people knew what they had!” I’ve talked with friends who saw Einstein on many occasions; and one who knew him quite well. He invited her to visit him in Princeton.
Note: It was Mary Baker Eddy who discovered Christian Science which she defined as the laws of One Mind, God.
great blog thank you