From science historian James Gleick at the New York Times, reviewing astrophysicist Adam Becker’s What Is Real?:
So quantum physics — quite unlike any other realm of science — has acquired its own metaphysics, a shadow discipline tagging along like the tail of a comet. You can think of it as an “ideological superstructure” (Heisenberg’s phrase). This field is called quantum foundations, which is inadvertently ironic, because the point is that precisely where you would expect foundations you instead find quicksand.
…
The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics When scientists search for meaning in quantum physics, they may be straying into a no-man’s-land between philosophy and religion. But they can’t help themselves. They’re only human. “If you were to watch me by day, you would see me sitting at my desk solving Schrödinger’s equation…exactly like my colleagues,” says Sir Anthony Leggett, a Nobel Prize winner and pioneer in superfluidity. “But occasionally at night, when the full moon is bright, I do what in the physics community is the intellectual equivalent of turning into a werewolf: I question whether quantum mechanics is the complete and ultimate truth about the physical universe.”
More.
Well, when we hear people grousing that the public doesn’t “believe in” science, it might be helpful to ask, “What, specifically, should we ‘believe in’ that we can be reasonably sure is science? So many of the controversies revolve around dogmatic metaphysics claiming to be science.
See also: Laszlo Bencze on the current campaign against Karl Popper’s falsification criterion for science (Adam Becker)
and
Does a “fetish for falsification and observation” hold back science? (Adam Becker)
Atheistic Materialists are quick to point to the supposedly unquestionable Copernican Principle in science to say that our lives have no intrinsic meaning and purpose in this universe.
The Copernican principle, is named after Copernican heliocentrism and is the assumption that there is nothing very unusual or special about the earth or humanity:
That is to say, with the removal of the earth from the center of the solar system, some people, particularly atheists, generalized it to mean humans in particular have no real meaning, purpose, and significance in this universe.
In 1996, Michael Rowan-Robinson, former president of the Royal Astronomical Society, and apparently an atheist, emphasized the Copernican principle as the threshold test for modern thought, asserting that:
In 2014 Princeton neuroscientist Michael Graziano stated,, “what is our relationship to the rest of the universe? Copernicus answered that one. We’re not at the center. We’re a speck in a large place.”
In 1980, Carl Sagan, in a Cosmos episode, stated the principle of mediocrity as such: “Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.”
In 2014. Tim Maudlin stated the mediocrity principle more succinctly as such: “No one looking at the vast extent of the universe and the completely random location of homo sapiens within it (in both space and time) could seriously maintain that the whole thing was intentionally created for us. This realization began with Galileo, and has only intensified ever since.”:
And in 1995 Stephen Hawking went much further in denigrating humanity and bluntly stated “The human race is just a chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among a hundred billion galaxies. We are so insignificant that I can’t believe the whole universe exists for our benefit.,,,”
In 2002 John Gray, an English political philosopher, stated that “human life has no more meaning than that of slime mould.”
And in 1995 Richard Dawkins stated much the same thing when he stated “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”
So according to some of these leading experts, no well-informed and rational person disagrees with the fact that we are just chemical scum who’s lives have no more meaning than slime mold. Or disagrees with the fact that we have no free will and that we live in a purposeless universe of blind pitiless indifference.
Mark me down as unimpressed by these supposed experts.
Firstly, contrary to the popularly held belief that the Copernican principle has rendered any belief in the special status for the earth and humanity null and void, the fact of the matter is that both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have themselves now overturned the Copernican principle and/or the principle of mediocrity as being a valid principle in science.
Particularly, In the 4 dimensional spacetime of Einstein’s General Relativity, we find that each 3-Dimensional point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe,,,
,,, and since any 3-Dimensional point can be considered central in the 4-Dimensional space time of General Relativity, then, as the following article makes clear, it is now left completely open to whomever is making a model of the universe to decide for themselves what is to be considered central in the universe,,,
Einstein himself stated, The two sentences: “the sun is at rest and the earth moves” or “the sun moves and the earth is at rest” would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS [coordinate systems].”
Fred Hoyle and George Ellis add their considerable weight here in these following two quotes:
As Einstein himself noted, there simply is no test that can be performed that can prove the earth is not the center of the universe:
Here are a few more references that drives this point home:
Even Stephen Hawking himself, who once claimed that we are just chemical scum on an insignificant planet, stated that it is not true that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong,,, the real advantage of the Copernican system is simply that the equations of motion are much simpler in the frame of reference in which the sun is at rest.”
Even individual people, as the following article makes clear, can be considered to be central in the universe according to the four-dimensional space-time of General Relativity,,,
,,, In fact, when Einstein first formulated both Special and General relativity, he gave a hypothetical observer a privileged frame of reference in which to make measurements in the universe.
Whereas, on the other hand, in Quantum Mechanics it is the measurement itself that gives each observer a privileged frame of reference in the universe. As the following article states, “It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it,”,,,
Richard Conn Henry, who is Professor of Physics at John Hopkins University, states “It is more than 80 years since the discovery of quantum mechanics gave us the most fundamental insight ever into our nature: the overturning of the Copernican Revolution, and the restoration of us human beings to centrality in the Universe.”
Moreover, Quantum Mechanics further undermines the belief that humanity is just chemical scum by, instead of humans being the accidental result of the laws of nature as is presupposed in Darwinian thought, humans are instead brought into the laws of nature at their most fundamental level.
As Steven Weinberg states in the following article, (in quantum mechanics) humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level.,,, the instrumentalist approach (in quantum mechanics) turns its back on a vision that became possible after Darwin, of a world governed by impersonal physical laws that control human behavior along with everything else.,,, In quantum mechanics these probabilities do not exist until people choose what to measure,,, Unlike the case of classical physics, a choice must be made,,,
And as leading experimental physicist Anton Zeilinger states in the following video, what we perceive as reality now depends on our earlier decision what to measure. Which is a very, very, deep message about the nature of reality and our part in the whole universe. We are not just passive observers.”
Thus, contrary to popular belief, the Copernican principle and/or principle of mediocrity has now been overturned by both of our best theories in science. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics respectively.
I find it extremely interesting, and strange, that quantum mechanics tells us that instantaneous quantum wave collapse to its ‘uncertain’ 3-D state is centered on each individual observer in the universe, whereas, 4-D space-time cosmology (General Relativity) tells us each 3-D point in the universe is central to the expansion of the universe. These findings of modern science are pretty much exactly what we would expect to see if this universe were indeed created, and sustained, from a higher dimension by an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal Being who knows everything that is happening everywhere in the universe at the same time. These findings certainly seem to go to the very heart of the age old question asked of many parents by their children, “How can God hear everybody’s prayers at the same time?”,,, i.e. Why should the expansion of the universe, or the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe, even care that you or I, or anyone else, should exist? Only Theism offers a rational explanation as to why you or I, or anyone else, should have such undeserved significance in such a vast universe:
In other words, our lives, instead of being ‘chemical scum’, are found to have far more significance than was falsely presupposed by atheists (and even Christians), in the Copernican principle.
Moreover, when we rightly let the Agent Causality of God “BACK” into the picture of modern physics, as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned, then an empirically backed reconciliation between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics readily pops out for us in Jesus Christ’s resurrection from the dead.
Verses:
I think we should record our appreciation of BA77’s sterling work in providing substantial evidence to support an affirmative answer to the question.
🙂
More seriously, I’m a fan of James Glieck, but I don’t agree that he has asked a good question when he writes, “Is the search for meaning in quantum physics a form of religion?”
I think attempts to understand what quantum mechanics says about the fundamental nature of reality are a form of metaphysical philosophy, but not in general religion.
Religion involves a whole bunch of things that go beyond philosophy: worship, rituals, morals and other normative beliefs and behavior, stories about mankind’s relationship to something beyond mankind, etc; and religion is something that is culturally shared and affirmed by a group.
Now there are people who believe that their interpretation of quantum mechanics supports and even proves their religion, but that connection is not necessary, and goes beyond just the metaphysics.
So my answer to the question is “no”.
FWIW, I just bought Becker’s book. It got good reviews on Amazon, and I’ve read other stuff about the meaning of quantum mechanics lately, both physics and metaphysics. We’ll see what I think of it.
And I liked this quote from the linked article in the OP:
So apparently, according to the response of Seversky and jdk to my posts in 1 and 2, it is OK for atheists to say, via the Copernican principle, that our lives have no more meaning and purpose than that of chemical scum and slime mold, but to show that quantum mechanics overturns the Copernican principle, and therefore our lives, using the atheist’s own method of reasoning from the Copernican principle, have meaning and purpose, is not OK???
REALLY??? Interesting double standard you guys have.
Your guys ability for sheer hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me.
Question: How do you guys develop any real meaning and purpose for your life from your nihilistic Atheistic worldview?
And since you, by definition, can’t have real meaning and purpose for your lives within atheism, does it bother you that you have to steal from Christian presuppositions in order to be able live your lives as if they had some kind of real meaning and purpose? If not, why not?
I didn’t even respond to your posts 1 and 2, ba – didn’t even bother to read them, as it just the same stuff over and over. I first responded to seversky, and then to the question posed by the OP.
And in fact none of my responses had anything to do with an atheistic perspective: I think a theist could have written exactly what I did.
So you agreed with Seversky without bothering to know exactly what he was responding to?
My argument stands on its merits especially when you don’t even bother to know exactly what the merits of the argument are and ‘happily’ agree with Seversky just because you want to disagree with me regardless.
How typical. A disingenuous and dishonest response.
as to:
“none of my responses had anything to do with an atheistic perspective: I think a theist could have written exactly what I did.”
HA, a laughable claim! Your metaphysics permeates your responses.
Seversky merely said that you are someone who thinks that QM can lead to and support your religious beliefs, and my point was that I did not think in general that was a necessary connection. I didn’t need to read your particular posts to know what he was referring to.
Funny how you can, without citing any empirical evidence, and by force of your own personal opinion, reach a conclusion that exactly matches your atheistic/pantheistic premises. i.e. There is no meaning or purpose for our lives to be derived from quantum mechanics.
Whereas, on the other hand, I cited specific scientific evidence to support my position that the Copernican principle itself is now overturned not only by quantum mechanics but also by general relativity, and that, therefore, using the atheist’s own line of reasoning from the Copernican principle to discount any meaning and purpose for our lives, that our lives do indeed have meaning and purpose.
Go figure. One of us is being forthright in the debate, the other simply ignores the scientific evidence and thinks his a-priori metphysical opinion is above empirical reproach.
The unbiased readers can decide for themselves which one among us has been forthright.
P.S.
1) Just looking at my posts, and not adding in things you think you know about me, what part of what I wrote was”atheistic” and might not have been written by a theist?
2. I am not a pantheist or a deist, and the things I wrote above have nothing to do with those those topics, so I don’t know how the Dawkins quote you offered is relevant to me.
3. I just looked at your first post and I have no idea how the Copernicus Principle has anything to do with the issue raised in the OP. Did perhaps Copenhagen and Copernicus get mixed up in your copy-and-paste machine?
I’ll let my posts stand for the unbiased reader.
As to your base metaphysics, I’ve seen you waiver, whenever the mood strikes you and put in a spot, between full blown reductive materialism and eastern mysticism.
Fine. However, I’ll note that your posts don’t actually address any of the points I’ve made, either in general or about your specific posts about me.
But we’ll let things stand as they are, I suppose.
bornagain77 @ 7
Actually, all I was pointing out was that you are a good example of those who search for meaning or religious significance in quantum phenomena. Nobody was saying that you couldn’t hold or express your own beliefs in this matter.
As for purpose or the lack thereof, why do you think that your life can only be validated by a purpose conceived by some alien being?
as to
“As for purpose or the lack thereof, why do you think that your life can only be validated by a purpose conceived by some alien being?”
And exactly why did atheists think that the now falsified Copernican principle rendered any significance, purpose, and meaning for our lives null and void?