Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith Journal , Vol 66, Number 1, March 2014

68 Pages·1.148 MB·English

by  American Scientific Affiliation

PERSPECTIVES on Science
P
E
R
S
P
E
C and Christian Faith
T
IV
E
S
O
N
S
C
IE
N
C
E
A
N JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION
D
C
H
R
IS
T
IA
N
F In This Physics Theme Issue …
A
IT
H
Physics at the Theological Frontiers
A Personal God, Chance, and Randomness in
Quantum Physics
V
O
L Two Interlocking Stories: Job and Natural Evil and
U
M
Modern Science and Randomness
E
6
6
,
N Can Natural Laws Create Our Universe?
U
M
B
E Delight in Creation: The Life of a Scientist
R
1
“The fear of the Lord
is the beginning of Wisdom.”
Psalm 111:10
M
A
R
C
H
2
0
1
4
VOLUME 66, NUMBER 1 MARCH 2014
(USISSN0892-2675) (CPM#40927506)
PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith Manuscript Guidelines
©2014bytheAmericanScientificAffiliation
ThepagesofPerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith(PSCF)areopen
Editor
tooriginal,unpublishedcontributionsthatinteractwithscienceandChristian
JAMESC.PETERSON(RoanokeCollegeand faithinamannerconsistentwithscientificandtheologicalintegrity.Published
McMasterUniversity) papersdonotreflectanyofficialpositionoftheAmericanScientificAffiliation.
221CollegeLane 1.Submitallmanuscriptsto:JamesC.Peterson,Editor,RoanokeCollege,
Salem,VA24153 221 College Lane, Salem, VA 24153. E-mail: [email protected].
[email protected]
Submissionsaretypicallyacknowledgedwithin10daysoftheirreceipt.
PhysicsThemeIssueCo-editor
2.Authorsmustsubmitanelectroniccopyofthemanuscriptformattedin
ROBERTMANN(UniversityofWaterloo) Wordasanemailattachment.Typically2–3anonymousreviewerscritique
200UniversityAveW eachmanuscriptconsideredforpublication.
Waterloo,ON N2L3G1
3.Useendnotes forall references.Each notemust haveauniquenumber.
[email protected]
FollowTheChicagoManualofStyle(16thed.,sections14.1to14.317).
BookReviewEditors
4.WhilefiguresanddiagramsmaybeembeddedwithintheWordtextfileofthe
PATRICKFRANKLIN(ProvidenceUniversityCollege manuscript,authorsarerequiredtoalsosendthemasindividualelectronic
andSeminary),CoordinatingEditor files (JPEGorTIFFformat).Figurecaptions should beprovided as alist
10CollegeCrescent attheendofthemanuscripttext.Authorsareencouragedalsotosubmit
Otterburne,MB R0A1G0 asampleofgraphicartthatcanbeusedtoillustratetheirmanuscript.
[email protected]
ARTICLESaremajortreatmentsofaparticularsubjectrelatingsciencetoa
ARIELEEGWATER(CalvinCollege)
1726KnollcrestCircleSE Christianposition.Suchpapersshouldbeatleast2,000wordsbutnotmore
GrandRapids,MI49546 than8,000wordsinlength,excludingendnotes.Anabstractof50–150words
[email protected] isrequired.Publicationforsuchpapersnormallytakes9–12monthsfromthe
timeofacceptance.
ROBINRYLAARSDAM(BenedictineUniversity)
5700CollegeRoad,BK348 COMMUNICATIONSarebrieftreatmentsofawiderangeofsubjectsofinterest
Lisle,IL60532 to PSCF readers. Communications mustnotbelongerthan2700 words,
[email protected] excludingendnotes.Communicationsarenormallypublished6–9monthsfrom
ANGELASABATES(BethelUniversity) thetimeofacceptance.
3900BethelDrive
StPaul,MN55112 BOOK REVIEWS serve both to alert readers to new books that appear
[email protected] significantandtoengagethesebooksincriticalinteraction.Whenasubject
areaeditorselectsabookforreview,thebookisthenofferedtoascholarwith
EditorialBoard
the best match in expertise. ASA/CSCA members who would like to be
ROBERTBISHOP,WheatonCollege consideredaspotentialreviewersarewelcometoexpressinteresttothebook
HESSELBOUMAIII,CalvinCollege reviewcoordinatingeditorforinclusioninthereviewerdatabase.Publishers
WALTERL.BRADLEY,BaylorUniversity mayalsocontactthebookreviewcoordinatingeditoriftheyarenotsurewhich
WARRENS.BROWN,FullerGraduateSchoolof subjectareareviewerwouldbestconsideraparticularbook.
Psychology (cid:2) PatrickFranklin([email protected]):bookreviewcoordinatingeditor;
JEANNEBUNDENS,EasternUniversity subject areas: ethics, philosophy, and theology.
HARRYCOOK,TheKing’sUniversityCollege (cid:2) Arie Leegwater ([email protected]): cosmology, engineering, history of
JANELM.CURRY,GordonCollege
science, mathematics, non-biotechnologies, and physical sciences.
EDWARDB.DAVIS,MessiahCollege
OWENGINGERICH,Harvard-SmithsonianCenter (cid:2) RobinRylaarsdam([email protected]):biology,environment,genetics,
forAstrophysics and origins.
ALLANHARVEY,Boulder,CO (cid:2) Angela Sabates ([email protected]): anthropology, psychology, and
D.GARETHJONES,UniversityofOtago sociology.
ROBERTKAITA,PrincetonUniversity The viewpoints expressed in the books reviewed, and in the reviews
TREMPERLONGMAN,WestmontCollege themselves,arethoseoftheauthorsandreviewersrespectively,anddonot
HEATHERLOOY,TheKing’sUniversityCollege reflectanofficialpositionoftheASA.
SARAMILES,EasternUniversity
KEITHB.MILLER,KansasStateUniversity LETTERStotheEditorconcerning PSCFcontentmaybepublished unless
GEORGEL.MURPHY,TrinityLutheranSeminary, marked not for publication. Letters submitted for publication must not be
Columbus,OH longer than 700 words and will be subject to editorial review. Letters are
ALANPADGETT,LutherSeminary tobesubmittedaselectroniccopies.Lettersacceptedforpublicationwillbe
JACKC.SWEARENGEN,SantaRosa,CA publishedwithin6months.
JUDITHA.TORONCHUK,TrinityWesternUniversity
DAVISA.YOUNG,CalvinCollege ADVERTISING is accepted in PSCF, subject to editorial approval. Please
address inquiries for rates or further information to the Managing Editor.
LYNBERG,ManagingEditor
The ASA cannot take responsibility for any orders placed with advertisers
ESTHERMARTIN,ManuscriptEditor inPSCF.
PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith
AUTHORIZATION TO PHOTOCOPY MATERIAL for internal, personal, or
(ISSN0892-2675)ispublishedquarterlyfor$50
educationalclassroomuse,ortheinternalorpersonaluseofspecificclients,
per year by the American Scientific Affiliation,
is granted by ASA, ISSN: 0892-2675, provided that the appropriate fee is
55MarketStreet,Ste.202,POBox668,Ipswich,
paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive,
MA01938-0668.Phone:[phone];Fax:978-
Danvers, MA 01923 USA forconventional use, orcheck CCConline at the
356-4375;[email protected];www.asa3.org
followingaddress:www.copyright.com/.NoregistrationwithCCCisneeded:
Periodicals postage paid at Ipswich, MA and at simplyidentifythearticlebeingcopied,thenumberofcopies,andthejournal
additionalmailingoffices.POSTMASTER:Send title (Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith). For those who wish to
address changes to: American Scientific Affilia- request permission for other kinds of copying or reprinting, kindly write to
tion,POBox668,Ipswich,MA01938-0668. theManagingEditor.
Editorial
Have I Got a Job for You
James C. Peterson
H
ave I got a job for you. It demands high something, maybe in raw form, that will probably
expertise in your field, openness to new befreshandinteresting.Theyknowthatbeingasked
ideas, discernment, time, and skilled com- is recognition that they have the expertise to help
munication. There is no pay and I will be the only shape their field, and that such service can be refer-
personotherthanyouwhowillknowthatyouhave enced on their resume. They know that they are
doneit. Ready tosign up? providing a crucial service for the author, helping
herorhimtodevelopthework.Theyknowthatthey
The above is a partial description of doing blind are saving the journal readers’ time and spurring
peer review. The journal and its readers depend on their thought. They know that each discipline pro-
it. It is a crucial task, but when I ask people to do gresses when the best ideas are brought forward
anonymous peer review, I sometimes feel as if I am andthatsuchbothhonorsandextendsthekingdom.
distantly echoing Churchill’s call to the British And that last point, most of all, is enough.
people that “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil,
tears,andsweat.”Andyet,scholarsrisetotheocca- Once a year we do publish an august list of
sion. Each colleague that I ask so to serve almost peer reviewers who have expertly and generously
always says yes, and does it with insight and given of their time in the previous year. A hearty
alacrity. thank-you to each one who so well served in this
way in 2013.
TheyknowthatIsendoutforpeerreview,essays
James C. Peterson,
that have genuine potential. They are going to see Editor (cid:2)
Reviewers in 2013
Wewishtothankthefollowingscholarsfortheircrucialserviceinanonymouspeerreview.
RobertBishop RandyIsaac ChristopherPeet
HesselBouma MichaelJanzen AlvinPlantinga
JeanneBundens DavidKoetje PeterRamberg
ClaytonCarlson JohnKok RobinRylaarsdam
JackCollins E.C.Krupp RickSchaeffer
DavidDelaney ArieLeegwater KevinSeybold
ChrisDovolis TremperLongman ArnoldSikkema
HaroldFaw HeatherLooy DavidSnoke
LouiseFreeman RobertMann WilliamStruthers
OwenGingerich AprilMaskiewicz JudyToronchuk
BrianGruel KeriMcFarlane BruceWaltke
DouglasHarink KeithMiller PaulWason
AllanHarvey GeorgeMurphy DavidWilcox
NoreenHerzfeld PhilipM.Novack-Gottshall LeanneWillson
RussHowell DonPage TheresaZolner (cid:2)
Volume66,Number1,March2014 1
Article
Physics at the Theological
Frontiers
Robert B. Mann RobertB. Mann
Therapidpaceofprogressinphysicsinrecentdecadeshasbroughtnotonlysignificant
changesinourtechnologyandeconomy,buthasalsoprovideduswithnewperspectives
on reality, perspectives that have implications for Christian faith. I discuss five major
pointsofcontactintherelationshipbetweenphysicsandChristiantheology:typicality,
plurality, reduction, quantization, and eternity. These ideas influence thinking at
the forefront of physics today, and have interesting implications for Christian faith.
Ishalloutlinethemeaningoftheseideas,relevantrecentexperimentalandtheoretical
developments, and some new questions for theological exploration and reflection.
The goal is to generate further dialogue and research in the science/faith endeavor.
The essays that follow in this theme issue helpfully begin to address some of these
questions and raise yet more related ones.
O
ne of the more exhilarating Such expansive overviews provide
aspectsofbeingascientististhe interesting points of contact with theol-
continual novelty of discovery. ogy. New insights and new challenges
Thismostcommonlytakesplaceinvery for a theological perspective on the
specialized ways, with advances being world are available for those willing to
made incrementally in a multitude of invest the time to reflect deeply on the
subdisciplines. Yet, from time to time, broad meaning of existence. The mind-
all scientists step back to take a broader sciences, life-sciences, and physical sci-
look at progress made in their disci- ences each provide their own particular
pline as a whole, assessing its implica- formsofinputfortheologicalreflection.1
tions and directions for further work. Conversely,theologyofferstheprospect
Thisbig-pictureperspectiveistakenwith of enhancing one’s worldview beyond
increasing frequency, primarily because the empirical and the quantitative in
scientific progress in many fields is pro- novel and refreshing ways.
ceeding at such a rapid pace.
This article is particularly concerned
RobertMannhasaBScinphysicsfromMcMasterUniversityandanMSc with physics, its latest developments,
and PhD from the University of Toronto. Currently a professor of physics and how these might further enrich the
at the University of Waterloo, he has been a visiting researcher at Harvard science/theology dialogue. Rather than
University, Cambridge University, and the Kavli Institute for Theoretical attempt to resolve the possible insights
Physics. He was president of the CSCA from 1996–2007 and chair of the
andquestions,thepurposeofthisessay
Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Waterloo from
is to raise the issues in a context that
2001–2008.HeispresidentoftheCanadianAssociationofPhysicistsandwas
encourages discussion. No attempt is
ontheAdvisoryBoardoftheJohnTempletonFoundation.Hisresearchinterests
include black holes, cosmology, particle physics, quantum foundations, and made either to define the field or to
quantum information. Married with one daughter, he is a member of the claim mastery of it. Rather, the goal
Waterloo-Kitchener United Mennonite Church in Waterloo, Ontario, where is to draw people who specialize in
he regularly teaches Sunday School. For recreation he enjoys video making, physics to think about the implications
cross-country skiing, cats, dogs, cycling, and acting in musicals.
of some of the latest developments for
2 PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith
RobertB.Mann
the Christian faith and to pique interest from scien- principle should be regarded as a demotion of
tistsinotherdisciplinestofindoutwhatisgoingon. humankind7(andbyimplication,underminingChris-
tiantheology8)wasnotasserteduntilacenturyafter
Ishall proceedbydiscussingfivemajorpointsof Copernicus’s death by Cyrano de Bergerac, who
contactinthephysics/theologyinterface—typicality, associated (without citing evidence) the geocentric
plurality, reduction, quantization, and eternity—that Aristotelian/Ptolemaic model with “the insupport-
havebeenaffectedbyrecentexperimentalandtheo- able arrogance of Mankind, which fancies, that
retical developments. Each of the preceding five Nature was only created to serve it.”9 Bernard le
terms will be explained in context, describing the Bovier de Fontenelle advanced this viewpoint fur-
main issues at stake, the recent scientific develop- ther,praisingCopernicusfordemolishing“theVan-
mentspertinenttothetopic,andthevarioustheolog- ity of men who had thrust themselves into the chief
ical questions and discussion points that emerge. place of the Universe.”10 By 1810 Goethe asserted,
“No discovery or opinion ever created a greater
Typicality effect on the human spirit than did the teaching of
Copernicus, [since it required humankind] to relin-
Oneofthemostfruitful advancesinscientific think-
quish the colossal privilege of being the center of
ing was the realization that our planet does not
the universe.”11 More recently, a classic textbook on
occupy a privileged place in the solar system.
general relativity by Hawking and Ellis asserts,
This idea, first proposed by Nicolaus Copernicus,
asserted that the sun, instead of the earth, was at SincethetimeofCopernicuswehavebeensteadily
the center of the solar system.2 Reasoning from this demoted to a medium sized planet going round
hypothesisprovidedamorecoherentandtechnically amediumsized staronthe outeredge ofafairly
satisfying explanation for the observed retrograde averagegalaxy,whichisitselfsimplyoneofalocal
motionoftheplanetsthandidthePtolemaicsystem. group of galaxies. Indeed we are now so demo-
craticthatwewouldnotclaimthatourpositionin
The implications of this idea for both science space is specially distinguished in any way.12
and faith have redounded through the centuries, Not only has this general perception persisted to
systematically revising our worldview.3 So named thepresentday,butthePtolemaicmodelisalsostill
by Hermann Bondi in the mid-twentieth century, promoted in terms of representing humankind as
theCopernicanprinciplehashaditsgreatestinfluence “the pinnacle of God’s creation,” rhetorically link-
in cosmology, where it has been indispensable in ingmonotheisticperspectivestobackwardscientific
providing a paradigm for interpreting observations thinking.13
concerning our universe.4 For example, from the
observation that our universe is isotropic (that The Copernican principle is an irreducible philo-
it appears to have approximately the same large- sophical assumption, one whose implications go
scalestructureinanydirection),itisstraightforward well beyond cosmology. Indeed, many take it to
to reason, using the Copernican principle, that our mean that a core principle of science must be that
universe is homogeneous at any given time, and so of typicality, namely, that the outcome of any ex-
must be isotropic about any point in space (and not periment must be interpreted using the assumption
just our own earth-bound position). These condi- that we are typical observers.14 This perspective
tions of homogeneity and isotropy are the primary motivates much modern work where details of its
testable consequences of the cosmological principle, deploymentinstringtheory,inflationarycosmology,
which states that the properties of the universe, and quantum physics are debated in the scientific
viewed on a sufficiently large scale, are the same literature.
for all observers.5
YettheCopernicanprincipleevidentlyhaslimita-
It is more or less folkloric that the Copernican tions. Applying it temporally, Bondi and Gold used
principleisinconflictwithChristiantheology.While ittoarguethattheuniverseishomogeneousintime
thehighpointofthisconflictisgenerallyregardedas as well as space, the so-called “perfect” cosmologi-
beingepitomizedinthedisputebetweenGalileoand cal principle.15 The steady-state cosmological model
theCatholicchurch,6thenotionthattheCopernican that is founded on this idea is in strong disagree-
Volume66,Number1,March2014 3
Article
PhysicsattheTheologicalFrontiers
ment with observation, which indicates that our Plurality
universeisundergoingcosmologicalevolutionfrom
TheCopernicaninsightthatourplanetisoneamong
markedly different conditions at a particular time
several orbiting the sun inspired Giordano Bruno to
(knownastheBigBang)toafuturestatewhosecon-
propose that our universe is infinite, containing
ditions again differ radically from what we observe
many suns and planets. The relative importance of
today.Isittimeforareassessmentoftheapplicabil-
thisview(comparedtootherheresiesBrunoheld)as
ity of the Copernican principle and its theological
the rationale for the Roman Inquisition sentencing
implications?
him to be burned at the stake, has been a point of
historical debate.21 Yet it is clear from the documen-
There is a dynamic tension in Christian theology
tation of Bruno’s trial that his cosmological ideas
between typicality and uniqueness. The Savior who
regardingthescopeoftheuniverseandtheplurality
reminds us that it rains on the just and the unjust16
ofworldswereanaggingconcernofhisinquisitors.22
also brings us the good news that the hairs on our
heads are numbered by a loving God.17 How do we
Anumberofcosmologistsandparticlephysicists
effectively articulate a theology of God’s love for
are reconsidering Bruno’s idea in an extreme form,
each person in the light of the perceived secular
replacing the plurality of worlds with a plurality of
“demotion” of humanity? To what extent should
universes.Knownasmultiversecosmology,theidea
Christian theology humbly incorporate new scien-
that our observable universe is a small part of a
tificfindingsinterpretedthroughthelensoftypical-
much,muchlargerstructure23raisesnewchallenges
ity,andtowhatextentshouldapropheticvoicestep
for science, theology, and the relationship between
forth to challenge the secular anthropological zeit-
themthatgofarbeyondwhatBrunoandhisinquisi-
geistconnectedwithmoderncosmologicalthought?
tors might have imagined.
Can human significance be given a scientific basis?
If not, then how can its refutation be founded on
Scientifically,themotivationforthisideaemerges
scientific findings? Is atypicality a testable concept?
from the meta-observation that our cosmos is not
If so, what would be the implications for Christian
a generic specimen from a warehouse of possible
faith?Conversely,istypicalityfalsifiable,ormustwe
universes,24 but instead has rather atypical features
simplyacceptitasintrinsictoallofmodernscience?
conducive to the existence of life and the cosmos
Andifwedo,whitherisourunderstandingofGod’s
as a whole.25 Specifically, the physical laws, initial
relationship to humanity?
conditions,andparticularstructuresofouruniverse
Dennis Danielson, who has pointed out that the are in a delicate state of balance: a small relative
Copernican principle does not carry the misan- changeinoneparameter(e.g.,themassoftheproton
thropic interpretation that many modern scientists or the expansion rate of the universe26) results in
ascribe to it, has started some reassessment of this a cosmos inhospitable to life,27 looking nothing like
work.18 Scientifically, there have been a few recent theonewesee.28AdesiretoensureCopernicantypi-
ideassuggestinghowtheCopernicanprinciplecould cality has in recent years motivated an increasing
be subjected to new scientific tests, insofar as we number of scientists to consider the multiverse as
might be able to discern more directly the extent to the underlying scientific description of reality.29 Its
which the universe is indeed spatially homoge- proponents generally rely further on string theory30
neous;19 alternatively, if we are located atthe center andcosmicinflation,31regardedrespectivelybymany
of a cosmic void, we would indeed be in a “privi- as the best paradigms for uniting quantum theory
leged” location.20 The outcome of such experiments with gravity and for describing our cosmos. String-
and observations, should they be carried out, will theory calculations recently suggested that at least
surely have implications as profound as that of 10500 kinds of low-energy types of universes were
Copernicus’s original insight. The ongoing implicit possible (each with its own particular properties).
theological challenge of the Copernican principle is Cosmic inflation, having indirect support from ob-
thatof understandingoursignificanceina universe servations of the cosmic microwave background, is
that can appear so harshly indifferent to human regardedbymanyasbeingmostnaturallydescribed
beings. in a multiverse context.
4 PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith
RobertB.Mann
This “super-Copernican” revolution merits a systemsarecommoninourgalaxy(andpresumably
healthy dose of skepticism from both scientific and soinothergalaxies).37Attheendof2011,discoveries
theological perspectives, as I have advocated else- oftheearth-sizedplanetsKepler20-eandKepler20-f
where.32Scientifically,thenecessarybreadthoftheo- were announced, along with the discovery of Kep-
retical perspective, combined with the obvious ler22-b,aplanetlocatedinthehabitablezoneabout
empirical limitations of observing other universes, its star. While these candidates fail other tests for
is implicitly redefining what is meant by science.33 habitability (20-e and 20-f being too close to their
Theologically, it introduces a new question: why is star, and 22-b being too large), it would seem only
there something instead of everything?34 a matter of time—perhaps less than a few years—
before a planet is found possessing all of Earth’s
These are interesting questions to pursue, to be habitable characteristics. As of this writing, there
sure. But one need not, and should not, accept at are twelve “superterran” exoplanets: considerably
face value the ostensible merits of the multiverse larger than Earth, though within what is thought
withoutproperlyassessingitsepistemiccosts.From to be the habitable zone about their star. There are
ascientificperspective,therelationshipbetweenob- no Earth-sized potentially habitable candidates at
servationandtheorytakesonawholenewcharacter present.38
(since the idea relies on a wealth of empirically
unverifiable precepts), and the distinction between This would be the first empirical evidence that
potentiality and actuality becomes blurred, if not we may very well not be the sole inhabitants of our
lost (since the ensemble of universes needs to be galaxy. Should evidence for life be found on such
physically instantiated for our universe to have a a world (or even perhaps elsewhere in our solar
chanceofbeingatypicalmember).Fromatheologi- system), it would more strongly affirm the ubiquity
cal perspective, the theodicy problem becomes far of life throughout the universe. Such discoveries
more acute (since there can be unbounded replica- will have a profound impact on humanity’s self-
tionoftragicevents),andthepossibilityofascribing assessment of its place in the universe.39
any form of transcendent meaning or purpose in
the context of a loving God becomes very remote While secularists will undoubtedly point to this
(since existence itself actualizes otherwise exclusive as increasing evidence of a godless universe gov-
possibilities). erned by blind evolutionary processes, such asser-
tionsmissthepointthatourquestforextra-solarlife
There is a tension here between acknowledging is of a deeply religious nature. There is an opportu-
God’s sovereign ability to create in abundance with nity here for Christians to raise interesting ethical
God’spurposefulintentionsforcreation(asinIsaiah and theological questions, questions that go well
46:9–10). A theory of everything is not the same as beyond recognition of the generous creative power
a theory of anything,35 nor is a God that can create of God. How far can we extend the concept of the
anything the same as a God that does creates every- Imago Dei, that we are made in God’s image? What
thing.36 A proper assessment of the merits of the proper social and ethical controls should be exerted
multiversewillrequireatrueblendofclearthinking over communication with alien species, should this
in the overlap between science and theology. be possible? What kinds of reinterpretations need
to be made with regard to the creation/evolution
If the multiverse is too speculative and extreme dialogue?Howdoweinterprettheplanofsalvation
a realization of plurality, recent advances in astron- in the context of life on other worlds?
omy are bringing Bruno’s expectations much closer
tohome.Overonethousandextrasolarplanetshave WhiletheexplorationofalienlifefromaChristian
been confirmed by observation, with more than theological perspective is notnew,40 the subjecthas,
2,600otherobjectsaslikelycandidates.Onehundred by and large, been leftto secular writers and Holly-
sixty-two different planetary systems analogous to wood filmmakers to shape our societal perspectives
our own solar system have been discovered so far. on this issue. The input of new information from
NASA’s Kepler mission is making extraordinary theKeplerprobeoffersanopportunitytorevisitthe
advances, affirming the expectation that planetary question of plurality afresh, seeing what genuine
Volume66,Number1,March2014 5
Article
PhysicsattheTheologicalFrontiers
new insights and reliable truth the gospel might although the Standard Model self-consistently
have to offer. describes all that is known about particle physics,
it depends on twenty-seven distinct parameters
Reductionism (twelve of which are the different masses of the
twelveelementarysubatomicparticles,forexample),
A key motivator underlying all scientific thought is
each of which must be determined by experiment.
unification:thenotionthatapparentlydisparatephe-
No deeper principle explaining their values is
nomena can be understood as different aspects of
known. Furthermore, cosmological observations of
thesamephenomenonatsomedeeperlevel.Histori-
the orbital motions of galaxies in clusters and of
cally, it has been scientifically quite fruitful to seek
the accelerating expansion of our universe have led
unification, particularly in physics, even though
to the view that only a little less than 5% of the
thereisnoproofthatthisstrategywillwork.Newton
mass-energy of the universe is composed of known
unitedterrestrialphenomenawithcelestialphenom-
(Standard Model) matter, most of which is gas and
enaviahisuniversallawofgravitationthatgoverned
dust. The remaining portion is about 26.8% dark
the motion of both apples falling to earth and stars
matter (matter that does not interact with light or
moving in the sky.41 Maxwell united electricity and
electromagnetism and so cannot be directly
magnetism, once thought to be distinct phenomena,
observed by traditional astronomic means) and
in a single theory describing them as a unified force
68.3%darkenergy(thenamegiventowhateverdif-
thatwenowcall“electromagnetism.”42Fourdecades
fuse energy source is causing the universe to
ago, weak interactions governing the phenomenon
accelerate).
of radioactivity were united with electromagnetism
in a single theory, “electroweak theory,” that made Forthesereasons,mostparticlephysicistsbelieve
a number of new predictions that have since been that a deeper level of unification beyond the Stan-
confirmed experimentally.43 dard Model is required. The search for a “Theory
of Everything,” a single theory describing all
WenowhaveaStandardModelofparticlephys- known (and currently undiscovered) particles and
ics,44 a set of mathematical equations that describe forces in a coherent unified whole, has occupied
all known subatomic particles (quarks and leptons) the attention of theoretical physicists for over three
and their interactions due to the strong (or nuclear) decades. The simplest model of a grand unification
forceandelectroweakforces.45High-energyacceler- uniting the electroweak and strong forces predicted
ator and low-energy precision experiments have thattheprotonwasnotstable,decayingwithavery
repeatedlyconfirmedthismodel.Thelastoutstand- long but feasibly observable lifetime.47 No evidence
ingbitofinformationremainingwastheHiggspar- forthisdecaywasfoundinsubsequentexperimental
ticle, a particle whose interactions with all other searches.Instead,lowerboundsweresetonthepro-
known particles give rise to what we measure as ton lifetime.48 Many more Grand Unified Theories
their masses. In 2012, the Large Hadron Collider (or GUTs as they are called) have since been con-
(LHC) announced the discovery of a particle with structed, each with its own predictions for low-
a mass 125 times heavier than the proton, a particle energy (and sometimes early-universe) physics.
that has all of the expected properties of the Higgs Superstring theory was originally regarded as the
particle.46 mostpromisingGUT,49asitheldoutthepromiseof
also uniting gravitation with the other forces in a
Whilefurthertestingwillneedtobedonetocon- manner consistent with quantum mechanics.
firm that the interactions of this particle with other
forms of matter agree with the predictions of the To the frustration of the scientific community,
Standard Model, this finding is indeed a triumph no evidence whatsoever has thus far been found in
forreductionisticscience.Likeatwenty-first-century their favor; instead, only various empirical bounds
version of the chemical periodic table, it leads, for and limits on GUTs have been set. While many still
thefirsttime,toafullycomprehensivedescriptionof pin their hopes on the final round of LHC experi-
all known matter and forces. Nevertheless, particle ments as revealing some new phenomenon, there
physicists will remain much less than satisfied with is no guarantee that anything beyond the Standard
this final confirmation of the Standard Model. For Model will be found.
6 PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith
RobertB.Mann
Reductionismelicitsextremeresponseswithinthe trialsandthenkeeptrackoftheresults.IfAlicegets
scientific community. Nontheists generally regard heads, Bob has a 50/50 chance of getting heads or
thisapproach(affirmedatleastbythesuccessofthe tails,nomatterwhatAlicegets.Andviceversa.Such
StandardModel)asclosingoffanylastgapsinwhich is the normal behavior of random processes in the
hopeful believers might want to place evidence for everyday world.
a deity. Theists have generally regarded the deep
mathematical intelligibility that has emerged from Now consider what would happen if it were
reductionistic physics as evidence in favor of a Cre- possible to quantum mechanically entangle the
ator, partially reflecting the mind of God for those coins. The results would be strikingly different.
willing to see.50 In one possible form of entanglement (there are
many), Alice still has a 50/50 chance of getting
Must science and theology stand on opposite heads—but whenever she gets heads, Bob also gets
sidesofsuchawideintellectualchasm?Orisitpos- heads. And whenever she gets tails, Bob also gets
sible to build a bridge of new understanding here? tails. It is as though each coin “knows” what the
What, if any, are the limits of reductionism? How otherisdoing,eventhoughthecoinssendnosignals
doesscienceproceedinthefaceofsuchlimitations? to each other. Each coin maintains its individual
What metaphysical interpretations might be drawn integrity—for each coin, heads comes up as often
inthiscase?Alternatively,isitpossibletogobeyond as tails, with a 50/50 chance. Yet there is no chance
intelligibilityinunderstandingaCreatorwhovalues of a head/tail or tail/head combination. The pair
mathematical elegance to One who loves creation of entangled coins does not behave as two distinct
sacrificially?HowistheGodoftheStandardModel coins,butratherasasystemthatexhibits“together-
the God of Calvary? ness in separation.” The whole truly is greater than
the sum of the parts.
Quantization
Thisholisticfeatureofquantumentanglementcan
Oneofthecentrallessonsoftwentieth-centuryphys- be shown to imply a certain degree of ambiguity
ics resulting from a reductionist paradigm was that or indefiniteness to existence itself, overturning not
the natural world is not fully atomized. Localized only commonsense, but all conventional ways of
atoms, nuclei, and subatomic particles can behave thinking about science as well.52 It troubled many
as extended waves, and delocalized wavelike phe- physicists, most notably Albert Einstein, who re-
nomena, such as light, can behave as particles. This fused to believe that nature could be like that.53 Yet
schizophrenic wave/particle behavior is described this spooky form of interconnectedness has been
by quantum mechanics.51 The Standard Model is repeatedlyverifiedinlaboratoriesaroundtheworld,
a quantum theory, more properly, a quantum field mostcommonlywithpolarizedphotonsasthequan-
theory that regards point-like particles as quantum tum coins, “heads” being a left-circularly polarized
excitationsoffields;thephoton,forexample,maybe photonand“tails”beingaright-circularlypolarized
treated as a quantized excitation of electromagnetic one.54 By shining light of a particular frequency
field, or moresimply, a tiny bundle of light. through a nonlinear crystal, a pair of light rays
of reduced frequency can emerge (a process known
Indeed, the foundational laws governing nature as spontaneous parametric down-conversion), and
blur the distinction between individual things and a percentage of the photons in these rays can have
their surroundings. This blurring of distinction their polarizations entangled, affording a verifica-
betweenthesubsystemsofasystemiscalled“entan- tion of the strange coin-flip scenario above.55
glement,” and the theory describing this is called
“quantummechanics.”Ithassurprisingimplications The implications of quantum entanglement are
for how we understand the natural world. It is so profound. At a practical level, it can be exploited
powerful that it alters the laws of probability from to encode and transmit information in completely
theeverydayworldasweknowit.Considertwofair novelways.Thisrealizationhasgivenrisetoawhole
coins, one given to Alice and the other to Bob. Let newresearchfieldknownas“quantumcomputing,”
each flip their respective coins repeatedly for many whose goal is to exploit the properties of quantum
Volume66,Number1,March2014 7
Article
PhysicsattheTheologicalFrontiers
theorytotransmit,encode,andprocessinformation. Atamoreprosaiclevel,theeconomicandsocietal
So far the field is still rather young, though rapid impacts of quantum entanglement are novel and
progress is being made. The stakes are high, with potentially far reaching. Quantum computation
unbreakable security codes, teleportation, and solv- will radically change how we store, transmit, and
ingotherwiseunsolvablemathproblemsasprospec- process information. How we make use of this new
tive outcomes of the endeavor.56 technology is a question that necessarily goes be-
yond science. Insofar as we will be faced with new
Quantum entanglement also has profound philo- choices presented to us, we have new opportunities
sophicalconsequences,implyingthatinterconnected- tobethesaltoftheearthandthelightoftheworld.
ness is a central feature of existence. It is so central Ascience/faithdialogueontheproperusesof such
thattherelationshipsbetweenthebitsandpiecesof newinformationtechnologyis(aswithanyapplica-
nature can produce effects that each bit or piece on tionof science) of perhaps evengreater importthan
its own cannot produce. Nature is intrinsically rela- advancing our theological understanding.
tional. Here the discussion can take a theological
turn,insofarasthisfeatureiswhatwemightexpect
Eternity
fromacreationreflectingthecharacterofitsCreator,
who, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is most pro- All attemptsthusfar tounderstandgravityinquan-
foundly a personal and relational God. tum mechanical terms have failed. While a majority
of theoretical physicists still regard string theory as
Theologians for centuries have struggled with the most promising approach for addressing this
a problem similar to that faced by scientists con- problem, there are a number of competing ideas.
frontedwithquantumentanglement,namely,thatof Indeed, an understanding of quantum information
understanding the nature of the Trinity. Known as in the context of gravitation has become a subdisci-
perichoresis, it is a dazzingly paradoxical concept, pline in its own right. Although at this point far
and refers to the mutual indwelling and inter- removedfromexperiment,suchideasraisequestions
penetrationofthePersonsoftheTrinity.Theeighth- about the foundations of reality, a subject never far
century Syrian Christian monk, John of Damascus, fromatheological worldview.Theysuggestthatthe
described it as a cleaving together in a fellowship relationship between creation and the Creator is
of mutual love.57 The Persons of the Trinity are not exceedingly subtle and complex.
simplydifferentaspectsofonePerson,aperspective
thatwould notdojustice inunderstanding, say, the Perhapsthemostdifficultconundrumhereisthat
baptism of Jesus. Nor are they so distinct as to be of time.60 Every civilization throughout history has
a sort of stripped-down polytheism, a committee of hadtocometogripswithhowitmarksthepassingof
threegods.Perichoresisratherassertsboththeindi- theseasonsandtheadvancementofyears.However,
vidual integrity of Father, Son, and Spirit and the itisatthebirthofmodernsciencethatadebatetakes
indivisibility of the one true God. placeconcerningthenatureoftimeanditsrelevance
to scientific understanding. One view, expressed by
Here is new territory for science and Christian Newton, is that time is an external “thing” that
faith to explore.58 Indeed, a fruitful and stimulating clocksmeasure,flowinglikeaninexhaustibleriver.61
dialogueistakingplacebetweenscientistsandtheo- The other view, articulated by Leibniz, is that time
logians as to the consonant relationship between has no ontic reality of its own, but rather serves as
perichoresis and entanglement. Scientists such as anorderingparameter,withitssequencingofevents
Anton Zeilinger and Jeffrey Bub, and theologians bearing no more significance than the alphabetical
such as Sarah Coakley and John Zizioulas, have orderingofnamesinatelephonebook.62TheNewto-
gatheredundertheleadershipoftheAnglicanphysi- nian notion of time best corresponds to everyday
cist-turned-priestSirJohnPolkinghornetocarryout intuition, and, for the most part, held sway in the
researchinthesematters.Agenuinetheologicaland practice of science. However, the twentieth-century
scientific dialogue is going on, one that is far revolutions of quantum physics and relativity have
removed from the more traditional conflict/apolo- modifiedourunderstandingoftime,bothpragmati-
getic stances.59 cally and philosophically.
8 PerspectivesonScienceandChristianFaith