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

Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies

Randomness, Compatibilism and Divine Providence

James Lefeu

Published Jan 1, 2015• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

This essay explores quantum physics and theology to propose that ontological randomness does not exist, but divine Providence does. Some interpretations of quantum physics that involve mathematical formalism and observational phenomenology are deterministic (de Broglie-Bohm, many-worlds, cosmological, time-symmetric, many-minds), while others are non-deterministic (Copenhagen, stochastic, objective collapse, transactional). Yet, quantum events are merely epistemically indeterminable by us, but actually do have a fundamental cause. Compatibilism best describes the teaching of the Bible. Humans possess free agency, and are determined by their desires and values. Hence, they can be said to have “free will,” because they do what they want. The fundamental cause, as understood by Compatibilism, is God’s Providence, defined as God’s continual involvement with creation through keeping it existing, cooperating with creation in every action, and directing it to fulfill His purposes. The interaction between quantum physics and Providence suggests methodological parallels between science and theology in a quest for synthesis.

DOI
10.5840/jis2015271/25

Related papers

Quantum Physics and God’s Agency

Hamidreza Shakerin

The common understanding of Copenhagen interpretation of the uncertainty principle and indeterminism in quantum physics is that it is a negation of causal relationships. Having the relationship between the existence of God and causality in mind, some advocates of ontological naturalism assert that by negating causality in modern physics, there remains no room for belief in God as the necessary cause of the world and His actions in it. To examine this claim, I will explain briefly the quantum theory, Copenhagen interpretation of uncertainty principle, and its epistemological position. Next, I will investigate its relationship with causality and divine actions. The article concludes that not only is there no conflict between Copenhagen interpretation and causality, but the former is based on the latter and has complete coherence with the belief in God and His actions in the world. Compared to classical physics, its consistency with direct and special divine actions in the world is more.

•Feb 1, 2022•0 citations

Does God Gamble With Creation?

Dennis F. Polis

Despite Albert Einstein’s claim that “God does not throw dice,” it is widely believed that quantum physics presents an intrinsically random universe. This conflicts with the theological view that nature operates in one and the same way, unless it be prevented as a result of divine providence. A proposed projection paradigm is based on respect for the integrity of each science. Apparent conflicts between science and theology may be resolved by the consistent application of the principles of science, each within its valid domain. Using this approach, paradoxes are found to involve a covert Platonism among quantum theory’s interpreters. Rather than endorsing an interpretive hypothesis, this essay seeks to apply accepted physics to quandaries posed by quantum theory.

Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies•Jan 1, 2015•0 citations

Quantum Ontology and the Probabilistic God: A New Philosophical Framework for Understanding Existence

Yıldırım, Begüm

This paper introduces a new philosophical and scientific framework called Quantum Ontology, which integrates quantum mechanics and metaphysics to explore the possibility of a probabilistic God. Moving beyond deterministic paradigms, it investigates how quantum indeterminacy, probability amplitudes, and the collapse of wave functions challenge classical understandings of causality, order, and divine omniscience. The central thesis posits that if the foundation of physical reality is probabilistic, then any concept of divinity that aligns with it must also reflect this probabilistic nature. The work synthesizes insights from physics, philosophy, theology, and cosmology to construct an original view of a God who is not the controller of certainties but the ground of all lawful possibilities.The author acknowledges the use of OpenAI’s language model for assistance in drafting certain sections of this work.

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Quantum theology, or: “Theologie als strenge Wissenschaft”

Vasil Dinev Penchev

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.

•Sep 19, 2024•0 citations

Dice and Divine Action

Karl Giberson

Abstract The world picture disclosed by classical physics, beginning with Kepler, Galileo, and Newton and continuing until the early part of the twentieth century, was increasingly deterministic. The prevailing metaphor was that of a clock: as a clock is wound up and runs in an entirely predictable way which can be known from its initial conditions, so the universe unfolds according to a deterministic plan. Such a universe, unfolding under the influence of forces so absolute they were called ‘laws’, appeared to have limited opportunity for divine action. The theological response to this world picture was deism: God created the world but it runs on its own. This world picture collapsed in the early twentieth century as quantum mechanics was discovered and developed into a central, if not the central, part of scientific understanding of physical reality. The quantum-mechanical world picture cannot be modelled after the gears, pulleys, and levers of the classical world: its irreducible constituent parts are more like tiny clouds than tiny gears. Furthermore, the behaviour of these smallest parts was discovered to be indeterministic, and eternally so until observed by a mind. The mysterious behaviour of quantum particles, which compose all reality, and the puzzling role of minds invited speculation that God may be acting through the natural order to influence events. Such divine action could exist entirely within the envelope of possibilities possessed by quantum particles and thus not require any disruption of the natural order.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Jun 9, 2021•0 citations

QUANTUM THEOLOGY BEYOND COPENHAGEN: TAKING FUNDAMENTALISM LITERALLY

Mark Harris

Theological engagement with quantum physics has, to this day, been dominated by the Copenhagen interpretation. However, philosophers and physicists working in the “quantum foundations” field have largely abandoned the Copenhagen view on account of what is widely seen as its troublesome antirealism. Other metaphysical approaches have come to the fore instead, which often take a strongly realist flavor, such as de Broglie‐Bohm, or Everett's “Many‐Worlds” interpretation. In the spirit of recent quantum foundations work, this article introduces a collection of studies aimed at taking quantum theology “beyond Copenhagen.” The present article advocates a commitment to “quantum fundamentalism,” which could resolve some of the enduring ontological problems faced by existing theological work with quantum mechanics, especially in discussions of quantum special divine action. Taking quantum fundamentalism literally would mean a departure from the Copenhagen interpretation, and the article suggests the need for a new research program to lay the groundwork in the natural theology of quantum foundations.

Zygon®•Feb 17, 2023•6 citations
This essay explores quantum physics and theology to propose that ontological randomness does not exist, but divine Providence does. Some interpretations of quantum physics that involve mathematical formalism and observational phenomenology are deterministic (de Broglie-Bohm, many-worlds, cosmological, time-symmetric, many-minds), while others are non-deterministic (Copenhagen, stochastic, objective collapse, transactional). Yet, quantum events are merely epistemically indeterminable by us, but actually do have a fundamental cause. Compatibilism best describes the teaching of the Bible. Humans possess free agency, and are determined by their desires and values. Hence, they can be said to have “free will,” because they do what they want. The fundamental cause, as understood by Compatibilism, is God’s Providence, defined as God’s continual involvement with creation through keeping it existing, cooperating with creation in every action, and directing it to fulfill His purposes. The interaction between quantum physics and Providence suggests methodological parallels between science and theology in a quest for synthesis.
The common understanding of Copenhagen interpretation of the uncertainty principle and indeterminism in quantum physics is that it is a negation of causal relationships. Having the relationship between the existence of God and causality in mind, some advocates of ontological naturalism assert that by negating causality in modern physics, there remains no room for belief in God as the necessary cause of the world and His actions in it. To examine this claim, I will explain briefly the quantum theory, Copenhagen interpretation of uncertainty principle, and its epistemological position. Next, I will investigate its relationship with causality and divine actions. The article concludes that not only is there no conflict between Copenhagen interpretation and causality, but the former is based on the latter and has complete coherence with the belief in God and His actions in the world. Compared to classical physics, its consistency with direct and special divine actions in the world is more.
Despite Albert Einstein’s claim that “God does not throw dice,” it is widely believed that quantum physics presents an intrinsically random universe. This conflicts with the theological view that nature operates in one and the same way, unless it be prevented as a result of divine providence. A proposed projection paradigm is based on respect for the integrity of each science. Apparent conflicts between science and theology may be resolved by the consistent application of the principles of science, each within its valid domain. Using this approach, paradoxes are found to involve a covert Platonism among quantum theory’s interpreters. Rather than endorsing an interpretive hypothesis, this essay seeks to apply accepted physics to quandaries posed by quantum theory.
This paper introduces a new philosophical and scientific framework called Quantum Ontology, which integrates quantum mechanics and metaphysics to explore the possibility of a probabilistic God. Moving beyond deterministic paradigms, it investigates how quantum indeterminacy, probability amplitudes, and the collapse of wave functions challenge classical understandings of causality, order, and divine omniscience. The central thesis posits that if the foundation of physical reality is probabilistic, then any concept of divinity that aligns with it must also reflect this probabilistic nature. The work synthesizes insights from physics, philosophy, theology, and cosmology to construct an original view of a God who is not the controller of certainties but the ground of all lawful possibilities.The author acknowledges the use of OpenAI’s language model for assistance in drafting certain sections of this work.
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 The world picture disclosed by classical physics, beginning with Kepler, Galileo, and Newton and continuing until the early part of the twentieth century, was increasingly deterministic. The prevailing metaphor was that of a clock: as a clock is wound up and runs in an entirely predictable way which can be known from its initial conditions, so the universe unfolds according to a deterministic plan. Such a universe, unfolding under the influence of forces so absolute they were called ‘laws’, appeared to have limited opportunity for divine action. The theological response to this world picture was deism: God created the world but it runs on its own. This world picture collapsed in the early twentieth century as quantum mechanics was discovered and developed into a central, if not the central, part of scientific understanding of physical reality. The quantum-mechanical world picture cannot be modelled after the gears, pulleys, and levers of the classical world: its irreducible constituent parts are more like tiny clouds than tiny gears. Furthermore, the behaviour of these smallest parts was discovered to be indeterministic, and eternally so until observed by a mind. The mysterious behaviour of quantum particles, which compose all reality, and the puzzling role of minds invited speculation that God may be acting through the natural order to influence events. Such divine action could exist entirely within the envelope of possibilities possessed by quantum particles and thus not require any disruption of the natural order.
Theological engagement with quantum physics has, to this day, been dominated by the Copenhagen interpretation. However, philosophers and physicists working in the “quantum foundations” field have largely abandoned the Copenhagen view on account of what is widely seen as its troublesome antirealism. Other metaphysical approaches have come to the fore instead, which often take a strongly realist flavor, such as de Broglie‐Bohm, or Everett's “Many‐Worlds” interpretation. In the spirit of recent quantum foundations work, this article introduces a collection of studies aimed at taking quantum theology “beyond Copenhagen.” The present article advocates a commitment to “quantum fundamentalism,” which could resolve some of the enduring ontological problems faced by existing theological work with quantum mechanics, especially in discussions of quantum special divine action. Taking quantum fundamentalism literally would mean a departure from the Copenhagen interpretation, and the article suggests the need for a new research program to lay the groundwork in the natural theology of quantum foundations.