Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Philosophia Christi

Quantum Mechanics, Chaos Physics and the Open View of God

John C. Beckman, Evangelical Philosophical Society

Published Jan 1, 2002• 2 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.5840/pc20024117

Related papers

What God, Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness Have in Common

John Horgan

Scientific American•Oct 1, 2021•0 citations

Foundational issues of Chaos and Randomness: "God or Devil, do we have a Choice?"

Prabhakar G. Vaidya, Nithin Nagaraj, B. V. Sreekantan

This article is about two competing paradigms to explain the nature of our physical world. The prevalent paradigm is ‘Randomness’, which is intrinsic in Quantum Mechanics (QM) and regarded as essential to our universe, an attribute that led to the famous remark by Einstein – “God does not play dice

•Jan 1, 2006•1 citation

Quantum Physics and Divine Action

Robert John Russell, Nancey Murphy, Christopher John Isham

•Jan 1, 2001•3 citations

God in a quantum world

John Breck

St. Vladimir's theological quarterly•Jan 1, 2011•0 citations

Dirac's open theories and the reciprocal correspondence principle

Alisa Bokulich

… in apprehension, how like a god! The beauty of the world … Shakespeare , Hamlet, Act 2 Scene 2 Open theories When it comes to the issues of reductionism, scientific methodology, and theory change, the views of Werner Heisenberg and Paul Dirac diverge in fundamental and interesting ways. They revisited their disagreements over these philosophical issues many times throughout their careers, and their disagreements can be most succinctly described as a debate over whether physical theories are “open” or “closed.” As we saw in the last chapter, Heisenberg's belief that classical and quantum mechanics are closed leads him to view these theories as perfectly accurate within their domains, inalterable, and correct for all time. Although Dirac never uses the term, his own views on classical and quantum mechanics can be fruitfully understood as a rival account of “open theories.” Dirac argues that even the most well-established parts of quantum theory are open to future revision; indeed he takes no part of physics to be a permanent achievement, correct for all time. Instead of viewing classical mechanics as a theory that had been replaced, he sees it as a theory that should continue to be developed, modified, and extended. Unlike Heisenberg, who views physics as a set of consistent axiomatic systems, Dirac sees physics as a discipline much closer to engineering.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 2, 2008•0 citations

Nonviolation, quantum mechanics, and chaos

Jeffrey Koperski

The model of special divine action based on quantum randomness tends to get more attention than the rest. In the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, some events are not merely unpredictable but also truly indeterministic. This would allow God to work within such ontologically random events without violating any laws of nature. An unappreciated weakness of the model is that quantum fluctuations are not readily amplified into the macroscopic realm. Dynamical systems theory, continuum mechanics, and condensed matter physics show that such fluctuations are prevented from bubbling up within macroscopic systems. While some look to chaos theory for help, chaotic systems are not nearly as prevalent as the popular literature indicates. Once all the relevant physics is considered, models of divine action based on quantum randomness and chaos are far more limited than they are generally assumed to be. Unless some sort of new physical mechanism is discovered, the amplification problem cannot be solved. This means that there is little that God can accomplish by way of quantum randomness.

Routledge eBooks•Nov 28, 2019•0 citations
… in apprehension, how like a god! The beauty of the world … Shakespeare , Hamlet, Act 2 Scene 2 Open theories When it comes to the issues of reductionism, scientific methodology, and theory change, the views of Werner Heisenberg and Paul Dirac diverge in fundamental and interesting ways. They revisited their disagreements over these philosophical issues many times throughout their careers, and their disagreements can be most succinctly described as a debate over whether physical theories are “open” or “closed.” As we saw in the last chapter, Heisenberg's belief that classical and quantum mechanics are closed leads him to view these theories as perfectly accurate within their domains, inalterable, and correct for all time. Although Dirac never uses the term, his own views on classical and quantum mechanics can be fruitfully understood as a rival account of “open theories.” Dirac argues that even the most well-established parts of quantum theory are open to future revision; indeed he takes no part of physics to be a permanent achievement, correct for all time. Instead of viewing classical mechanics as a theory that had been replaced, he sees it as a theory that should continue to be developed, modified, and extended. Unlike Heisenberg, who views physics as a set of consistent axiomatic systems, Dirac sees physics as a discipline much closer to engineering.
The model of special divine action based on quantum randomness tends to get more attention than the rest. In the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, some events are not merely unpredictable but also truly indeterministic. This would allow God to work within such ontologically random events without violating any laws of nature. An unappreciated weakness of the model is that quantum fluctuations are not readily amplified into the macroscopic realm. Dynamical systems theory, continuum mechanics, and condensed matter physics show that such fluctuations are prevented from bubbling up within macroscopic systems. While some look to chaos theory for help, chaotic systems are not nearly as prevalent as the popular literature indicates. Once all the relevant physics is considered, models of divine action based on quantum randomness and chaos are far more limited than they are generally assumed to be. Unless some sort of new physical mechanism is discovered, the amplification problem cannot be solved. This means that there is little that God can accomplish by way of quantum randomness.