One could quite provocatively say that the classical image of the universe,
constructed by the "founders" called scientists, breaks down.
It seems to be a "work of error."
One could quite provocatively say that the classical image of the universe, constructed by the "founders" called scientists, breaks down. It seems to be a "work of error." What is now happening to a lot of scientists can be expressed perfectly through another verse from the Bible:
"They shall be turned back and utterly put to shame — those who trust in carved images, who say to cast images, 'You are our gods'" — Isa. 42:17 (NRSV).
The "god" of solid, deterministic reality, describable by physics and understandable by reasoning and "common sense," may very well have to be sacrificed. As in the above verse, our knowledge turns out to be foolish. This development may also be foreseen in the book of Isaiah:
"Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and He who formed you from the womb: "I am the LORD, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens all alone, who spreads abroad the earth by Myself; Who frustrates the signs of the babblers, and drives diviners mad; Who turns wise men backward, and makes their knowledge foolishness" — Isa. 44:24, 25 (NKJV).
Last, but not least, "the making of their knowledge foolishness" is prophesied for the End Times and astonishingly matches these verses in the Bible:
"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!
"For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was" — 2 Tim. 3:1-9 (NKJV, emphasis mine).
Another Anthropic Principle?
For a moment, let us put aside the problem of the reality of the past without an observer and turn instead to classical physical views.
It has only been a few years since physicists found out that the values of our nature constants are crucial for our existence. 8
If, during the Big Bang, some values would only differ by 0.000000000001%, the resulting universe could never yield any biological life. Even conservative mathematical estimations show that the probability for the existence of a life-bearing universe is at least 1:10229. 9
If one holds to the position that the universe came into existence without a Creator, who deliberately "fine-tuned" these nature constants in such a way that biological life could appear, then this is a position where one is betting against the most unlikely and the most highly and extreme odds. Furthermore, if one estimates the possibility for some kind of life form to appear within the universe, then — corresponding to the evolution theories — the probability that an intelligent life form will appear (we assume humans are intelligent) is much worse (over 400 zeros after the "1" of the denominator). Thus, it is quite clear that scientists ask the question, "Why do we observe these special values of the nature constants?"
Now, the usual anthropic principle says (simplified) that the universe evolves (deliberately) in such a way that sooner or later an intelligent life form will arise who will "appreciate" it, that is, who could observe it and try to understand it. This is a kind of pantheistic world view (pantheism says that God is identified with the universe and its phenomena, and is bound by the laws of nature). There are different variations of this principle, like WAP (weak anthropic principle), SAP (strong anthropic principle), PAP (participatory anthropic principle), and FAP (final anthropic principle).
These views, however, do not help us understand the results of Scully's experiments. So I will try to formulate an anthropic principle of another kind. But I surely do not want to add another CRAP (completely ridiculous anthropic principle). Therefore, to distinguish my position from all the pantheistic versions of the usual anthropic principle, I would like to call it the "Divine Anthropic Principle" (DAP).
Physical reality is no longer a thing "out there,"
it is something that needs two things:
an observer and an observable object.
We surely can say that we exist ("I think, therefore I am"). What the "we" is, is not evidently clear (consider the infinite regress mentioned earlier). But as we now know, this "we" is responsible for the outcome of our reality (the "we" decides how our experiments are chosen and, therefore, what reality "looks like"). Thus, our reality is, in a sense, "created" by our observation. The past could only be defined through our remembrance. Therefore, past is what we remember. The question, whether our remembrance is "true" or "real," is meaningless. Let us call this remembrance (or past) our "path" or "way" as the Bible calls it. This path appears rather subjective. None of our paths are identical. Even two "different" pasts can occur (see the description of the cosmological analogy of the Scully experiment). There is no "unique" past, the past depends on the observer. Therefore, scientifically speaking, no special past has more reality than any other, so the "real" past simply does not exist (in this physical sense). Furthermore, and this is the intrinsic message, there is no "real" past at all, if there are no observers (see also the PAP).
To make one thing clear: "There is no real past …" does not absolutely exclude any past at all, but it should be understood in relation to a (human) observer. Physical reality is no longer a thing "out there," it is something that needs two things: an observer and an observable object. Thus, once again, physical reality is what mathematicians call a "relation." Without an observer, we simply cannot say anything (in a physical, that is, "real" way) about any past. This is what we call "no real past." And this leads us to the "divine" part of this Divine Anthropic Principle.
Again, "past reality" is subsequently created by an (intelligent?) observer; this means created by that which we named our "we" in the above statements. So, who can tell us what the universe really looked like before the creation of the first conscious human beings according to the Genesis report (see day 6)?
As we find in Genesis 1, it took six days to create the universe, including the earth and human beings. Thus, the first five days are beyond human observation. So according to the former considerations, these five days are a kind of past that we would not regard as "real" in our physical definition. But, as I mentioned, this certainly does not mean that this past did not take place. As we have seen, the word "real" (in physics) only makes sense in relation to a human observer. The "reality" of God is surely something totally different and completely incomprehensible, and it is even unimaginable for us. But there is no reason whatsoever to doubt the description given in the Bible concerning the creation account of the universe. Since God cannot lie (Tit. 1:2), we must assume that the Genesis report is true. So now we can distinguish between the kind of past that has a "reality" (since the sixth day) and the "other" past that occurred during days 1 through 5. This "other" past is just as true as the past after the sixth day, but it is a "divine" past, "unreachable" through our physical reality. Furthermore, quantum physics not only supports this view, it also supports the possibility for God to act within our reality.
The word "real" (in physics) only makes sense in relation to a human observer.
The Bible says:
"Now therefore, stand still, that I may reason with you before the LORD concerning all the righteous acts of the LORD which He did to you and your fathers" — 1 Sam. 12:7 (NKJV).
According to quantum physics, God is also able to interact effectively with our (observable) reality. As John Polkinghorne stated in his book, Belief in God in an Age of Science:10
the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle offers almost infinite possibilities for God to interact on a subatomic level with tremendous results on our physical reality in the macroscopic world.
Furthermore, here is another point which agrees with Genesis: God provided Adam with a free will. But according to classical physics, especially according to Newton's mechanics, there is no room for a free will, since the universe was "only" seen as a kind of clockwork, and God's position in it was restricted to the winding up of the clock, and then the clock was "left to itself."
We can distinguish between the kind of past that has a "reality"
(since the sixth day [of creation]) and the "other" past that occurred during days 1 through 5.
This "other" past is just as true as the past after the sixth day,
but it is a "divine" past, "unreachable" through our physical reality.
Now, with quantum physics, God can interact with reality through the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and he can also enable human beings to make "true" decisions. These decisions are not determined in advance by the current state of the universe. So the old dilemma of living in a calculable universe and having a free will is also solved (although God is, of course, omniscient concerning all events that occur in the universe).
We have seen that, even from a scientific viewpoint alone, Genesis 1 is just as good as any other possible "path" for our past beyond humankind. And, according to classical physics, there still remains the highly improbable and unlikely absurd ratio that seems to lead rational and logical thinkers to a "deliberately" fine-tuned universe. But when Genesis 1 is seen in the new light of the Divine Anthropic Principle along with the improbable appearance of conscious human beings, this makes Genesis the most likely "past" for the search for truth that is supported by actual physical observations and laws.
For God said:
"Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths" — Prov. 3:5, 6 (KJV).
"The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens" — Prov. 3:19 (KJV).
"Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind'" — Matt. 22:37 (KJV).
Notes
1 A. Aspect, et al., in Physical Review Letters 49 (1982): 91.
2 M. O. Scully, et al., in Nature 351 (1991): 111.
3 H. Ross, "Astronomical Evidences for a Personal, Transcendent God," in J. P. Moreland, ed.,The Creation Hypothesis (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 158.
4 J. Horgan, in Spektrum der Wissenschaft 9 (1992): 82; and Scientific American 4 (1999): 18.
5 P. C. W. Davies, and J. R. Brown, Der Geist im Atom (Insel Verlag, 1993), 41-4.
6 W. von Lucadou, Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Beeinflußbarkeit von stochastischen quamten-physikalischen Systemen durch den Beobachter (Haag + Herchen Verlag, 1986).
7 John A. Wheeler, "Law without Law," in Quantum Theory and Measurement, (Princeton, 1983).
8 P. Glynn, God — The Evidence (Prima Publishing, 1997), 21 ff.
9 Rüdiger Vaas, in Bild der Wissenschaft 2 (1998): 80.
10 J. Polkinghorne, Belief in God in the Age of Science (Hartford: Yale University Press, 1998), 48 ff.