Abstract Some thinkers in the Christian and Islamic traditions assert that God doesn’t only create the universe ex nihilo, but that he also continuously recreates the universe in order to preserve its existence. This chapter will discuss randomness vis-à-vis the doctrine of continuous creation as understood in both religious traditions. We argue that the doctrine of continuous creation in its version that is held by both Christians and Muslims would preclude ontic quantum randomness. The reason is that in the doctrine of continuous creation, God is ultimately and meticulously responsible for the existence of objects and properties at every single moment.
Abstract Some thinkers in the Christian and Islamic traditions assert that God doesn’t only create the universe ex nihilo, but that he also continuously recreates the universe in order to preserve its existence. This chapter will discuss randomness vis-à-vis the doctrine of continuous creation as understood in both religious traditions. We argue that the doctrine of continuous creation in its version that is held by both Christians and Muslims would preclude ontic quantum randomness. The reason is that in the doctrine of continuous creation, God is ultimately and meticulously responsible for the existence of objects and properties at every single moment.
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.
Now that we have defined, described, and tested random numbers, the question arises: do random numbers exist? Can true randomness occur in nature? Albert Einstein’s famous dictum “God does not play dice” – uttered about the then new-fangled theory of quantum mechanics and its inherent random nature – expressed his belief that everything is deterministic, that there is no true randomness in nature. Did the great physicist turn full circle to the early religious doctrines which claims that it is God’s finger that determines everything?
It is widely accepted that quantum theory predicts an indeterminism for the micro-processes of the physical realm, i.e. a future uncertainty that transcends mechanical necessity. What this indeterminism means ontologically has been debated for nearly a century. According to one of the theses put forward during this time, the uncertainties that are assumed to be present in every phenomenon and the microscopic coincidences that statistically coincide with them are not the ultimate reality, but rather quantum uncertainty has a metaphysical behind-the-scenes, namely the existence of a God who actively ordains and creates the concrete outcome of every micro phenomenon. It is from this indeterminacy that the “quantum divine action” models, especially those put forward by Christian scientists and philosophers with the intention of reconciling modern science with the concept of a creator God, start. This article analyses the natural philosophy of the Muslim theoretical physicist and scholar of Islamic Kalām theology Basil Altaie, which can be interpreted as a quantum divine action model based on Islamic theology. Altaie’s approach is here discussed from different philosophical and theological perspectives and compared with Christian approaches.
The experimental results of quantum physics were manipulated by empiricists to forward some philosophical notions, which are in conflict with common sense and religious convictions. Most seriously, the notion of observer-created reality questions the independent reality of subatomic particles and endows divine qualities on observers who presumably determine their status. Moreover, the seemingly spontaneous electronic transitions were used to shed light as to whether the universe has a stationary configuration. In this article, both notions are analysed in terms of the logical consistency of their arguments and the scientific approach they adopt. The same arguments are also examined in light of the Islamic conceptual framework pertinent to how the universe is like. The article starts by delineating the logical framework of classical physics through discussing three energy-related concepts. A more objective approach that emerges from the positions of rationalists, such as Faraday and Einstein, is proposed. It is argued that despite the peculiarities of quantum physics, drawing parallels between classical and quantum physics is possible, and following the same analytical approach in both is imperative.
Applying the concepts of Kolmogorov-Chaitin complexity and Turing’s uncomputability from the computability and algorithmic information theories to the irreducible and incomputable randomness of quantum mechanics, a novel argument for the existence of God is presented. Concepts of ‘transintelligence’ and ‘transcausality’ are introduced, and from them, it is posited that our universe must be epistemologically and ontologically an open universe. The proposed idea also proffers a new perspective on the nonlocal nature and the infamous wave-function-collapse problem of quantum mechanics.
The biblical story begins with the story of the creation of the world out of nothing. In the context of theological tradition, creation means non-self-being; this is the reason for the constant variability of the universe. Biblical Revelation presupposes the assumption of a special kind of ontology of creation: nothing is self-existent, all being is relative and everything is relative to God. The entire history of natural science, starting with Galileo, shows that its development proceeded along the path of concretizing and expanding the field of applicability of the principle of the relativity of being: from Galilean relativity - to Einstein’s special theory of relativity - and, finally, to quantum mechanics - to the fact that one of the greatest physicists of the XX century academician Vladimir Fock called the principle of relativity to the means of observation. Considering quantum mechanics as the last natural link in this chain of realization of the principle of relativity in physics, we can, from the many alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics existing today, single out those that are organically consistent with the fundamental biblical principle of the relativity of being and consistently explain what is perceived as quantum paradoxes. This will allow you to take the next step towards comprehending the fundamental nature of reality.