Ultimate Reality: Randomness or Order?

More ransacking ... this time my target is quantum mechanics and chaos theory.

Why these topics?

They raise questions about randomness.  Things like Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, Bohr's Copenhagen Interpretation, and Chaos Theory (think Butterfly Effect) seem to suggest that the world is a random place.

A world of randomness creates a tension point for those holding to a traditional view of God's providence, order, design and governance of creation.

I was interested in what Dr. Collins had to say.

First, let's start with a very basic and high level view of quantum mechanics.  Picture electrons orbiting around the nucleus of an atom.  These things are whizzing around like planets circling a sun.  There are two weird things that occur when we try to study these electrons.  The first weirdness is that we are able to determine where a given electron is or how fast it is going.  However, we are not able to determine both.  The more we zero in on its location, the harder it is to determine speed.  The more we know about its speed, the harder it is to determine its location.  In other words, the better you know one, the worse you know the other.  There is a second bit of weirdness.  Planets have well developed and predictable orbits.  Electrons, however, do not.  Physicists use probability functions to determine where an electron is orbiting.  Where a given electron is at any time is a matter of probability not law.

The wacky world of atoms, electrons and subatomic particles makes one wonder whether the world at its most basic level is ultimately random.  Numerous interpretations have arisen to explain this weirdness.  One of the weirdest, in my opinion, is the Copenhagen Interpretation.  This narrative posits that the electron has neither speed nor location until you measure it.  So reality is created when we attempt to measure it.  There are other theories out there which go beyond the scope of this post.

Dr. Collins weighs in,

"My own hunch - and it is not much stronger than that - is that quantum mechanics is a model, and that it shows what the world acts like at its lowest level; but that we may well have reached the limits of our ability to know things with more precision than quantum mechanics allows.

But in any case quantum mechanics in itself  - as opposed to the interpretations that some might try to put on it [e.g. Copenhagen] - does not undermine the traditional Christian picture of the world with knowable natural properties behaving in a predictable and understandable way, under the rule of a wise and holy Creator.  This is true for at least two reasons.

First, however spooky quantum theory may sound, it is highly mathematical: and this shows that the world is still intelligible, since that is just what mathematics is for.

Second, we experience the world at a much larger scale than the one quantum mechanics describes.  And at this level, "ordinary physics" - Newton's laws and all that - describes everything quite well.  So we experience the world at a level that combines the tiny quantum effects, and all the goofiness gets washed out."

Science & Faith, p.223

Quantum theory is a highly mathematical enterprise.  Mathematics presupposes order and intelligibility -- not randomness.  So quantum mechanics as a discipline does not get off the ground without a universe of order solidly in place.  What we are running into, more than likely, is a limit in our ability to study the world at its smallest level.  If we had more advanced technology, my hunch is that some of the fog would lift over electron behavior.  Quantum theory with its probability functions does a good job of predicting electron properties at present.  That is not where the problems are.  The problems arise when some physicists let their imaginations run wild and suggest strange metaphysical explanations.

What about Chaos Theory?

The word "chaos" gets us in trouble here.  Chaos is a misnomer.  A chaotic system is one that has two properties.  First, the output is a nonlinear function of the input.  A linear function would be something like pushing three times as hard produces three times the output.  A nonlinear function would be something like pushing three times as hard and getting nine times the output.  The second property of chaotic systems is that small changes in initial conditions can cause huge changes in output.  In other words, the output is very sensitive to changes in the initial conditions.

For software geeks like me, this stuff makes perfect sense.  I write functions every day.  I understand inputs and outputs.  I understand initial conditions.  For a layman, a better example is the weather.  It is terribly difficult to predict weather.  There are simply too many factors.  The initial condition is far to difficult to measure.  The output is nonlinear.  Weather is therefore a chaotic system.  Hence we use predictions based on probability instead of knowing exactly what will happen based on natural laws.

Does this undermine a biblical worldview?

Hardly.  This is nothing more than a math problem that is too difficult for us to solve at present.  Nothing more, nothing less.  If we could precisely measure the initial conditions and every single factor, we could precisely say what tomorrow's weather would be.

In conclusion, neither quantum theory or chaos theory presents a serious challenge to a biblical worldview.

Comments

[Matt]

So in other words, Chaos theory isn't truly chaotic at all. It only seems chaotic because we are unable to understand the vast amount of variables to have an effect on the eventual outcome.

For example a dice roll isn't really random. If you roll a die, it's outcome depends on things like it's initial orientation in your hand, how hard you throw it, the amount and location of dust particles in the air, the texture of the surface on which it lands, etc. If absolutely every factor of the dice roll can be perfectly replicated (not currently possible) then the die should land on the same number every time.

[Mr. Dawntreader]

"So in other words, Chaos theory isn't truly chaotic at all. It only seems chaotic because we are unable to understand the vast amount of variables to have an effect on the eventual outcome."

Yes ... nonlinear outputs and immense difficulty in capturing initial conditions ... I think chaos is a misnomer.

[Aaron Snell]

What we are running into, more than likely, is a limit in our ability to study the world at its smallest level.

This is nothing more than a math problem that is too difficult for us to solve at present. Nothing more, nothing less. If we could precisely measure the initial conditions and every single factor, we could precisely say what tomorrow's weather would be.

Two great examples of the usefulness of keeping the categories of epistelmology and ontology well-defined. If only Copenhagen, et al, would take this basic philosophical distinction into account before making the kind of mistake that would earn them a failing grade in most undergrad philosophy courses. Thanks for the post, Mr. D.