Many researchers determine the question “Why anything rather than nothing?” as the most ancient and fundamental philosophical problem. Furthermore, it is very close to the idea of Creation shared by religion, science, and philosophy, e.g. as the “Big Bang”, the doctrine of “first cause” or “causa sui”, the Creation in six days in the Bible, etc.Thus, the solution of quantum mechanics, being scientific in fact, can be interpreted also philosophically, and even religiously. However, only the philosophical interpretation is the topic of the text.The essence of the answer of quantum mechanics is:1. The creation is necessary in a rigorous mathematical sense. Thus, it does not need any choice, free will, subject, God, etc. to appear. The world exists in virtue of mathematical necessity, e.g. as any mathematical truth such as 2+2=4.2. The being is less than nothing rather than more than nothing. So, the creation is not an increase of nothing, but the decrease of nothing: it is a deficiency in relation of nothing. Time and its “arrow” are the way of that diminishing or incompleteness to nothing.
Many researchers determine the question “Why anything rather than nothing?” as the most ancient and fundamental philosophical problem. Furthermore, it is very close to the idea of Creation shared by religion, science, and philosophy, e.g. as the “Big Bang”, the doctrine of “first cause” or “causa sui”, the Creation in six days in the Bible, etc.Thus, the solution of quantum mechanics, being scientific in fact, can be interpreted also philosophically, and even religiously. However, only the philosophical interpretation is the topic of the text.The essence of the answer of quantum mechanics is:1. The creation is necessary in a rigorous mathematical sense. Thus, it does not need any choice, free will, subject, God, etc. to appear. The world exists in virtue of mathematical necessity, e.g. as any mathematical truth such as 2+2=4.2. The being is less than nothing rather than more than nothing. So, the creation is not an increase of nothing, but the decrease of nothing: it is a deficiency in relation of nothing. Time and its “arrow” are the way of that diminishing or incompleteness to nothing.
Quantum physics is the golden child of modern science. It is the basis of our understanding of atoms, radiation, and so much else, from elementary particles and basic forces to the behavior of materials. But for a century it has also been the problem child of science as it has been overwhelmed by intense disagreements between its inventors, strange paradoxes, and implications that seem like the stuff of fantasy. To understand the universe, quantum physics explores the behavior of the smallest particles in existence like quarks, electrons, and photons and which revealing a world that defies our everyday experiences and expectations. On the other hand, quantum mechanics (QM) is a fundamental theory in physics that describes the behavior of matter and energy at the atomic and subatomic levels, where classical physics fails to apply. However, the phenomena observed in QM can seem nothing short of miraculous. Physicists are trying to explain miracles of physics of universe meticulously which governed by precise scientific principles and mathematical equations. It is serious to modern technology, as its principles as well as wave-particle duality, superposition, and entanglement form the basis for electronics, computing, and medical technologies. The truth of QM in a scientific context refers to its exceptional ability to accurately describe and predict experimental results, not a philosophical ‘absolute truth’. Interestingly, the scientific elucidation of creation through quantum physics does not refute and contradict spiritual or religious narratives, rather augments our gratitude of the universe’s complexity and towards Almighty or Creator. The Bible’s or Quran’s account of creation provides a spiritual and philosophical outlook, accentuating purpose and intentionality. The precise explanations of particle behavior and cosmic formation in quantum physics, offers a balancing view grounded in empirical evidence. The purpose of this investigative study is to explore the scientific reality of QM and its purpose to depict the technical advancement for the development of modern civilization along with understand of universe in more logical way.
When the concept of Zero is analyzed, it is frequently related to another equally deep and complicated concept – Nothing. If in science, Zero is closely associated with mathematics, then Nothing is primarily related to the material world. The question of whether Nothing can be found in the real physical world is often discussed in relation to the vacuum which, at some point in the history of the development of physics, is thought about as an empty space. Nevertheless, theories of modern physics have demonstrated that even in a vacuum, when all the matter is evacuated from a certain region of space, and this region is isolated from ordinary fields – gravitation field, electromagnetic fields etc – there still remain physical fields called vacuum zero fluctuations that can not be removed in principle. These vacuum fields are properties of space. In this chapter I will analyze another physics theory – namely, Quantum Physics – and will consider its less discussed relations to the concept of Nothing. One of the very first Greek philosophers, Thales (624–548 BCE) from Miletus, declared that Something can not appear from Nothing and it can not disappear, turning into Nothing. This idea, in some aspects, was further developed by Zeno from Elea (495–430 BCE) when he created his paradoxes of motion. These paradoxes can be understood as an analysis of the possibility of infinite division of time and space intervals. When we come to Quantum Physics, the very first appearance of the idea of the smallest possible portion of energy, quantum, was stimulated by the analysis of the spectrum of radiation of heated body – black-body radiation. German physicist Max Planck (1858–1947) demonstrated in 1899 that if we assume that there exists a smallest portion of radiation energy that can not be further divided into smaller parts, we arrive at the description of spectrum of the black-body radiation that perfectly matches the observable reality. In contrast, if we assume that radiation energy can be divided an infinite number of times and there does not exist the smallest possible portion, we arrive at the radiation spectrum which is in a sharp contradiction with observable reality. This contradiction is so strong that it has acquired a special term – the ultraviolet catastrophe. Certain parallels in Zeno’s reasoning and approach used in Quantum Physics can clearly be seen and will be discussed. In the conclusion, I will briefly touch on a similar situation in another field of physics when at the other extreme, departure from the idea of the possibility of the infinitely large quantities, this time velocities of motion, gave birth to another theory of modern physics – Einstein’s theory of special relativity.
The philosophy of physics is continuous with physics itself. Just as certain issues in the Foundations of Mathematics have been discussed by both mathematicians and by philosophers of mathematics, so certain issues in the philosophy of physics have been discussed by both physicists and by philosophers of physics. And just as there are issues of a more epistemological kind that tend to concern philosophers of mathematics more than they do working mathematicians, so there are issues that concern philosophers of physics more than they do working physicists. In this brief report I shall try to give an account of the present state of the discussion in America of both kinds of issues, starting with the problems of quantum mechanics, which concern both physicists and philosophers, and ending with general questions about necessary truth and the analytic-synthetic distinction which concern only philosophers. The problem of ‘measurement’ in quantum mechanics Quantum mechanics asserts that if A and B are any two possible ‘states’ of a physical system, then there exists at least one state (and in fact a continuous infinity of states) which can be described as ‘superpositions of A and B ’. If A and B are the sorts of states talked about in classical physics – definite states of position, or momentum, or kinetic energy, etc. – then their superpositions may not correspond to classically thinkable states.
Since Dirac’s paper from 1930 on the theory of electrons and protons, the question about nothingness has pervaded the right conception of reality at large in the framework of physics. Quantum Mechanics (QM) both allows and demands, at the same time, a highly counterintuitive take on the universe and the world. However, science at large remains cautious about the issue of nothingness. Apparently a referential and objectivistic view of the universe and things is preferred. This paper argues in favor of nothingness based on non-classical logics (NCLs) in general, and free logic, in particular. The crux of the issue is about thinking without presuppositions, or also, thinking about phenomena, systems and behaviors free of existence and, moreover, of reference.
Reality, and the pursuit of understanding it, is a fundamental core shared by both scientific inquiry and religious and spiritual belief. In the science of quantum mechanical theory, there has been a radical shift in the way that we recognize and conceptualize the reality of the world around us. A world once considered determinate and complete at the subatomic and constitutive level is now viewed as essentially probabilistic. Furthermore, the tenets of quantum theory introduced by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg in their Copenhagen Interpretation assert that world is essentially unknowable in a complete and whole sense. Relative-State quantum mechanical theory, a contemporary topic of philosophical debate, is predicated on an ontology in which the breadth of reality is a unified, superposed wave function. Within the metaphysics of the Advaita Vedanta school of Hindu thought there exists a similar affirmation of fundamental unity. Shankara, the prominent figure in Advaita Vedantic thought, affirms that all has its being in Brahman, the Ultimate Reality. Both relative-state QMT and Shankara?s philosophy entail a dual-hierarchy of truth. Our own experiences and sense have their own truth, but pale in comparison to the truth of reality as it truly is. Each also describes reality in a way that is essentially unknowable through our sensory experience. This project explores the metaphysical claims that each of these philosophies makes. Furthermore, it analyses their intersections as a basis for pursuing a synthesis and reconciliation of science and religion.
Since Dirac’s paper from 1930 on the theory of electrons and protons, the question about nothingness has pervaded the right conception of reality at large. Quantum Mechanics (QM) both allows and demands, at the same time, a highly counterintuitive take on the universe and the world. However, science at large remains cautious about the issue of nothingness. Apparently a referential and objectivistic view of the universe and things is preferred. This paper argues in favor of nothingness based on non-classical logics (NCLs) in general, and free logic, in particular. The crux of the issue is about thinking without presuppositions, or also, thinking about phenomena, systems and behaviors free of existence.