On several levels there is now a debate whether or not the concept of God can be made compatible with modern science. In an attempt to elucidate this debate, I give an account of my own experiences from writing a book on the foundation of quantum mechanics. It turns out that one can give two independent arguments for the existence of God by taking as departure an epistemic (knowledge-based) interpretation of quantum theory. Nevertheless I argue that any religious belief should be the result of an existential choice governed by each individual’s own context (history, personality, culture). My own faith is that God is greater than Christianity, and that Christianity is greater than the dogmas claimed by the Church.
On several levels there is now a debate whether or not the concept of God can be made compatible with modern science. In an attempt to elucidate this debate, I give an account of my own experiences from writing a book on the foundation of quantum mechanics. It turns out that one can give two independent arguments for the existence of God by taking as departure an epistemic (knowledge-based) interpretation of quantum theory. Nevertheless I argue that any religious belief should be the result of an existential choice governed by each individual’s own context (history, personality, culture). My own faith is that God is greater than Christianity, and that Christianity is greater than the dogmas claimed by the Church.
On several levels, there is now a debate whether the concept of God can be made compatible with modern science. In an attempt to elucidate this debate, I give an account of my own experiences from writing a book on the foundation of quantum mechanics. In my opinion, one can give two independent arguments for the existence of God by taking as departure an epistemic (knowledge-based) interpretation of quantum theory. However, I also argue that any religious belief should be the result of an existential choice governed by each person’s own context (history and culture). In particular, I give my account of Christianity as a religion connected to our western culture, how one as a scientist can relate to the relevant dogmas.
A recent approach towards the foundation of quantum mechanics is described in some detail. This requires some mathematics, but it is claimed that this approach is easier to understand than the usual formal quantum foundation. Several consequences of the theory are described, consequences that for example also lead to a simpler and deeper understanding of Quantum Decision Theory, which has bearings both on our daily decisions and on the decisions made by political leaders. Another consequence is in the form of arguments for the existence of God, a God that is perfectly rational and has infinite knowledge. To understand these consequences, it is not necessary to understand all the mathematics, but simply to appreciate the fact that the theory is derived from 6 postulates, postulates that can be interpreted in several different directions. Two of these postulates, when interpreted in a very general setting, form the basis for my theological arguments. Finally, it is a hope that by reading this article, and then further discussing the mentioned consequences with other people, one may contribute to a better understanding between groups of people, groups that partly may have their basis in different cultures. These cultures may be of many kinds, also based upon different scientific communities. Or upon different religious groups.
I sketch the foundation of quantum mechanics as it is presented in various books and articles. Then a new approach to quantum foundation is described, a foundation that relies on 4 simple postulates related to the mind of an observer or to the joint minds of a group of communicating observers. One of these postulates may appear to be strong, but it turns out to be more natural when it is placed in a religious setting. This assumes the existence of an omnipotent God. These arguments are further discussed, and they are shown also to give a foundation of Quantum Decision Theory.
The author explores the consequences of a new approach towards the foundation of quantum theory. The final aim of this approach has been to try to build a bridge between modern physics and other scientific disciplines, in particular statistical science. One aspect of the approach is first that arguments for a God which has arbitrarily large knowledge can be given. Secondly, that God can be seen as being perfectly rational. One of the consequences is a theory of decisions, a theory that also is valid for decisions made by political leaders. Some implications are sketched.
The main idea consists in researching the existence of certain characteristics of nature similar to human reasonability and purposeful actions, originating and rigorously inferable from the postulates of quantum mechanics as well as from those of special and general relativity. The pathway of the “free-will theorems” proved by Conway and Kochen in 2006 and 2009 is followed and pioneered further. Those natural reasonability and teleology are identified as a special subject called “God” and studyable by “quantum theology”, a scientific counterpart of classical theology as far as the latter endeavors to justify rationally God (without quotation marks) postulated by religion, but meaning in the present study, first of all, Christianity. The suggested “quantum theology” is situated in the historical opposition and conflict of science and religion in Modernity and its reflection in Heidegger’s conception of “ontotheology”. The conception of “ontomathematics” introduced in previous papers to unite and unify physics, mathematics, and philosophy is reinterpreted in the present context to be conservatively generalized in a way to include “quantum theology”. Two conceptions, “locality” and “nonlocality”, originating initially from physics and especially, from theory of entanglement and quantum information, are also generalized ontomathematically, and thus in relation to the newly introduced “quantum theology”. The “quantum theology” subject of “God” is juxtaposed with God of religion and billions of believers all over the world. Husserl’s conception of “philosophy as a rigorous science” is considered to be generalized now to theology as quantum theology, particularly by the phenomenon (in the sense of his “phenomenology”) of “God”, or by an “epoché” to whether God exists or not. The research of the phenomenon of “God” is extended to the conception of the “totality” being inherent for philosophy, especially for classical German philosophy preceding Husserl’s phenomenology. Those sequences for philosophy implied by the introduction of quantum theology are investigated further, on the pathway of ontomathematics, also in relation to what “God” should mean for today’s physics and mathematics. The option and research field of “experimental quantum theology” is discussed as a direct corollary from quantum theology though being sacrilegious as for classical theology. The concluding section reflects in a more loose way on the relation of “God” for quantum theology to God for religion and billions of believers all over the world.
Abstract In this book the author looks at the continuing debate about the meaning of quantum theory. The historical development of the theory is traced from the turn of the century through to the 1930’s, and the famous debate between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein. The book examines in detail the arguments that quantum theory is incomplete, as made by Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen; the development of Bell's theorem; and crucial experimental tests performed in the early 1980’s. Alternative interpretations - pilot waves, quantum gravity, consciousness, many worlds, and God - are described in the closing chapter. This book is aimed at graduate and senior undergraduate students of physics and chemistry taking quantum chemistry or quantum theory courses, and other scientists interested in the subject.