Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity Who Are We? Sunday, January 27, 2008 10 to 10:50 am, in the Parlor...

Quarks, Chaos, and Quarks, Chaos, and ChristianityChristianity

Who Are We?Who Are We?

Sunday, January 27, 200810 to 10:50 am, in the ParlorPresenter: David Monyak

O God, you made us in your own image and O God, you made us in your own image and redeemed us through Jesus your Son: Look redeemed us through Jesus your Son: Look with compassion on the whole human with compassion on the whole human family; take away the arrogance and hatred family; take away the arrogance and hatred which infect our hearts; break down the which infect our hearts; break down the walls that separate us; unite us in bonds of walls that separate us; unite us in bonds of love; and work through our struggle and love; and work through our struggle and confusion to accomplish your purposes on confusion to accomplish your purposes on earth; that, in your good time, all nations earth; that, in your good time, all nations and races may serve you in harmony and races may serve you in harmony around your heavenly throne; through Jesus around your heavenly throne; through Jesus Christ our Lord.Christ our Lord.

- Book of Common Prayer, p. 815- Book of Common Prayer, p. 815

Primary Primary ReferenceReference

Quarks, Chaos, Quarks, Chaos, & Christianity. & Christianity. Questions to Questions to Science and Science and Religion, Revised Religion, Revised EditionEdition, John , John Polkinghorne, Polkinghorne, Crossroad, 2005Crossroad, 2005

The Rev. Dr. John Polkinghorne KBE, FRS:The Rev. Dr. John Polkinghorne KBE, FRS: 1955:1955: PhD physics from Cambridge University PhD physics from Cambridge University 1968:1968: full Professor of Mathematical Physics at Cambridge full Professor of Mathematical Physics at Cambridge

UniversityUniversity published numerous papers on theoretical elementary particle published numerous papers on theoretical elementary particle

physicsphysics 1974:1974: Fellow of the Royal Society Fellow of the Royal Society 1979:1979: resigned his professorship in order to train for the resigned his professorship in order to train for the

Anglican priesthoodAnglican priesthood 1981 to 1986:1981 to 1986: served as a deacon, curate and vicar served as a deacon, curate and vicar began writing numerous papers and books on interface began writing numerous papers and books on interface

between science and religionbetween science and religion 1986:1986: Dean & Chaplain of Trinity College, Cambridge Dean & Chaplain of Trinity College, Cambridge 1989-1996:1989-1996: President of Queens College, Cambridge President of Queens College, Cambridge 1994-2005:1994-2005: Canon Theologian of Liverpool Cathedral Canon Theologian of Liverpool Cathedral

Rev. Dr John Polkinghorne KBE FRS

IntroductionIntroductionScience and FaithScience and Faith

IntroductionIntroductionThe Book of NatureThe Book of Nature

In our first session, we asked what did religion and In our first session, we asked what did religion and science have to do with each other?science have to do with each other? Psalm 19:2: Psalm 19:2: The heavens speak of the Creator’s The heavens speak of the Creator’s

glory and the sky proclaims God’s handiworkglory and the sky proclaims God’s handiwork St. Paul (St. Paul (Romans 1:20 NRSV): Ever since the

creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made.

The “Book of Nature” as well as the “Book of Scripture” can tell us about God.

IntroductionIntroductionIs Anyone There?Is Anyone There?

In our first session we also discussed two questions In our first session we also discussed two questions about “the whole show” that arise out of science, but about “the whole show” that arise out of science, but which science itself cannot answer.which science itself cannot answer. 1. Why can we do science at all? Why are we capable of

comprehending and appreciating the rationale beauty of the laws that govern the universe, when such knowledge goes far beyond what we need to survive?

2. Why do we live in a universe whose laws are we live in a universe whose laws are incredibly fine-tuned to produce life?incredibly fine-tuned to produce life? (the Anthropic (the Anthropic Principle)Principle)


Question 1:Question 1: Why can we do science at all? Why can we do science at all? The rational beauty and transparency of the The rational beauty and transparency of the

universe (the “reason without”) can be universe (the “reason without”) can be comprehended by us (the “reason within”) because comprehended by us (the “reason within”) because they have a common origin in the reason of the they have a common origin in the reason of the Creator, who is the ground of all that is.Creator, who is the ground of all that is.

That is: humanity is made “in the image of God,” and That is: humanity is made “in the image of God,” and this is why we can comprehend and appreciate the this is why we can comprehend and appreciate the rationale beauty of God’s creation; this is why we can rationale beauty of God’s creation; this is why we can “do science.”“do science.”


Question 2:Question 2: Why do we live in a universe fine- Why do we live in a universe fine-tuned for life?tuned for life? There are two rational answers, There are two rational answers, bothboth of which are of which are

“metaphysical” (“metaphysical” (beyondbeyond physics): physics): 1. There is a vast number of other universes, each with its 1. There is a vast number of other universes, each with its

own natural laws and circumstances. They are nearly all own natural laws and circumstances. They are nearly all sterile and lifeless, but we happen to be in one that by sheer sterile and lifeless, but we happen to be in one that by sheer chance had the laws and circumstances to produce life.chance had the laws and circumstances to produce life.

2. There is only one universe. It is fine tuned for life 2. There is only one universe. It is fine tuned for life because it is the creation of a Creator who desires it to be because it is the creation of a Creator who desires it to be fruitful of life.fruitful of life.

IntroductionIntroduction What’s Been Going On?What’s Been Going On?

In our second session, we asked the question, In our second session, we asked the question, “What’s been going on?”“What’s been going on?”


a universe of saints and scientists

13.7 billion years ago God began to create the universe of space-time. God’s on-going sustaining of the universe is best viewed as an on-going creation of the universe



It is a developing, evolving universe, given by faithful and loving God the twin gifts of reliability and independence so it could be other than God, so it could make itself, be fruitful.



In 13.7 billions years, it has evolved from an unimaginably hot plasma of quarks and gluons to a world of galaxies, stars, planets, saints and scientists.



It has evolved through processes involving the fruitful interplay of chance (happenstance) and necessity (laws, regularity), within a range of potentialities defined by its Creator, and with providential interactions of its Creator through history.



Its freedom to make itself necessarily includes the rough edges of moral and physical evil, the prices that must be paid for the greater good of free will and free process

IntroductionIntroductionWho Are We?Who Are We?

Today we ask: Today we ask: “Who are we?”“Who are we?” Does science tell us we are merely computers Does science tell us we are merely computers

made of meat? Or does science still leave open made of meat? Or does science still leave open the possibility we are much more than that? the possibility we are much more than that?

Reductionism vs.Reductionism vs. Antireductionism Antireductionism

(Anti-) Reductionism(Anti-) Reductionism “Nothing Butters”“Nothing Butters”

Are we merely a complicated arrangement of Are we merely a complicated arrangement of fundamental particles?fundamental particles?

Does a whole fundamentally reduce to the Does a whole fundamentally reduce to the collection of its parts?collection of its parts?

ReductionistReductionist or or “Nothing Butters:”“Nothing Butters:” we are we are nothing butnothing but a collection of elementary a collection of elementary particles.particles.

AntireductionistAntireductionist would disagree: “more is would disagree: “more is different,” the whole is more than simply the different,” the whole is more than simply the sum of its parts.sum of its parts.

(Anti-) Reductionism (Anti-) Reductionism Physics or Stamp CollectingPhysics or Stamp Collecting

““All science is either All science is either physics or stamp physics or stamp

collecting”collecting”

- Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937)- Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937) For a For a reductionistreductionist, physics is , physics is

the fundamental science, and the the fundamental science, and the rest — including biology and life rest — including biology and life — are only (very complicated) — are only (very complicated) consequences of itconsequences of it

Ernest RutherfordWinner of the Nobel Prize in

Chemistry, 1908

(Anti-) Reductionism(Anti-) Reductionism VitalismVitalism

There are two distinct positions an There are two distinct positions an antireductionistantireductionist can take on why life is can take on why life is fundamentally more than its component fundamentally more than its component particles:particles: 1. 1. VitalismVitalism: the position that life involves the : the position that life involves the

infusion of some magical infusion of some magical externalexternal substance or substance or principle that animates it, that makes it “alive”principle that animates it, that makes it “alive”

2. 2. ““Emergence”:Emergence”: the position that new properties the position that new properties emerge emerge internallyinternally as systems become more and as systems become more and more complicated – properties that would have no more complicated – properties that would have no meaning in terms of the simple parts by themselvesmeaning in terms of the simple parts by themselves

(Anti-) Reductionism(Anti-) Reductionism VitalismVitalism

There is no support for the view of There is no support for the view of vitalism vitalism in in science: science: Biochemistry (the chemistry of life) meets physical Biochemistry (the chemistry of life) meets physical

chemistry at every point of contact.chemistry at every point of contact. The evolution of life is a continuous story from the The evolution of life is a continuous story from the

chemically rich shallow pools of early Earth, to the chemically rich shallow pools of early Earth, to the first elementary replicating and living systems, first elementary replicating and living systems, then on through biological evolution to you and then on through biological evolution to you and me. me.

(Anti-) Reductionism(Anti-) Reductionism EmergenceEmergence

There is certainly evidence in science of new There is certainly evidence in science of new properties emerging as a structure grows in properties emerging as a structure grows in complexity, properties that have no meaning in complexity, properties that have no meaning in terms of the parts of the structure.terms of the parts of the structure.

Example:Example: the “wetness” of water. the “wetness” of water. A few molecules of HA few molecules of H220 are not “wet.”0 are not “wet.” However, from the interaction of billons of However, from the interaction of billons of

molecules of Hmolecules of H220 emerges a property we 0 emerges a property we experience as “wetness” (which is related to the experience as “wetness” (which is related to the surface tension of the collection of Hsurface tension of the collection of H220 molecules).0 molecules).

(Anti-) Reductionism(Anti-) Reductionism EmergenceEmergence

A much more profound property has emerged A much more profound property has emerged in the most complex known structure in the in the most complex known structure in the universe, the human brain – universe, the human brain – consciousnessconsciousness..

ConsciousnessConsciousness

ConsciousnessConsciousness A Universe Aware of ItselfA Universe Aware of Itself

Through science we have learned about the Through science we have learned about the remarkable story of the universe’s evolution:remarkable story of the universe’s evolution: A hot plasma of quarks and gluons and other A hot plasma of quarks and gluons and other

elementary particles evolved into a vast world of elementary particles evolved into a vast world of planets, stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and planets, stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and superclusters.superclusters.

Then life formed out of the chemical soup of a Then life formed out of the chemical soup of a primitive planet Earth, evolved, became more primitive planet Earth, evolved, became more diverse and more complex.diverse and more complex.

Then, with the evolution of human beings, the Then, with the evolution of human beings, the universe became universe became awareaware of itself. of itself.

ConsciousnessConsciousness A Universe Aware of ItselfA Universe Aware of Itself

Is consciousness to be thought of as a mere Is consciousness to be thought of as a mere superficial “fluff”, a “froth” produced as a side superficial “fluff”, a “froth” produced as a side effect of the fundamental reality of the effect of the fundamental reality of the protons, neutrons and electrons arranged in a protons, neutrons and electrons arranged in a peculiar array know as the human brain?peculiar array know as the human brain?

Or is consciousness itself something Or is consciousness itself something fundamentally and profoundly new, the fundamentally and profoundly new, the greatest achievement of the evolving universe?greatest achievement of the evolving universe?

ConsciousnessConsciousness The Mystery of the Mind-Brain ProblemThe Mystery of the Mind-Brain Problem

Polkinghorne asserts that Polkinghorne asserts that consciousnessconsciousness remains a remains a profound mystery, and we are no where near solving profound mystery, and we are no where near solving the the mind-brain problemmind-brain problem..

Our minds – our awareness, thoughts, wills, Our minds – our awareness, thoughts, wills, experiences of (for example) beauty – are linked in experiences of (for example) beauty – are linked in some way to our brains (a hammer blow the head will some way to our brains (a hammer blow the head will affirm this).affirm this).

but our minds cannot be simply reduced, as but our minds cannot be simply reduced, as reductionists might insist, to the correlated activity of reductionists might insist, to the correlated activity of many brain cells.many brain cells.

Something more mysterious is going on.Something more mysterious is going on.

ConsciousnessConsciousness The Mystery of the Mind-Brain ProblemThe Mystery of the Mind-Brain Problem

We would all sit up if someone said he could We would all sit up if someone said he could use the power of his thoughts to levitate an use the power of his thoughts to levitate an inanimate object, say a book.inanimate object, say a book.

We would be less than impressed if he then We would be less than impressed if he then picked up the book and raised it with his handpicked up the book and raised it with his hand

– – yet was that not a levitation by the power of yet was that not a levitation by the power of thought? thought?

ConsciousnessConsciousness The Parable of the Chinese RoomThe Parable of the Chinese Room

Thinking exceeds computationThinking exceeds computation. We are more than . We are more than computers made of meat.computers made of meat.

Philosopher John Searle made this point in his Philosopher John Searle made this point in his Parable of the Chinese RoomParable of the Chinese Room You are in an office with two grilles.You are in an office with two grilles. Through one grille you receive pieces of paper with some Through one grille you receive pieces of paper with some

Chinese writing on it (but to you, knowing no Chinese, Chinese writing on it (but to you, knowing no Chinese, they are just squiggles).they are just squiggles).

You match the squiggles on the paper with squiggles in a You match the squiggles on the paper with squiggles in a book you have been given, and then copy on the paper book you have been given, and then copy on the paper some squiggles in the book that are beside the matchsome squiggles in the book that are beside the match

You then hand out the paper through the second grille.You then hand out the paper through the second grille.

ConsciousnessConsciousness The Parable of the Chinese RoomThe Parable of the Chinese Room

The squiggles you were given were questions The squiggles you were given were questions in Chinese, and the squiggles you copied out in Chinese, and the squiggles you copied out from a book were the answers, but you didn’t from a book were the answers, but you didn’t have the slightest idea what was going on.have the slightest idea what was going on. You: were the computerYou: were the computer Book: was the programBook: was the program The only The only understandingunderstanding however was in the person however was in the person

who compiled the book – the programmerwho compiled the book – the programmer Computers lack the human capacity for Computers lack the human capacity for

meaningmeaning..

ConsciousnessConsciousness Glimmers from ScienceGlimmers from Science

Whatever the answer to the mystery of consciousness Whatever the answer to the mystery of consciousness and the mind-brain problem, there are several and the mind-brain problem, there are several glimmers from science that the explanation will not glimmers from science that the explanation will not be a reductionist one:be a reductionist one: the fundamental interconnectedness of physical reality, as the fundamental interconnectedness of physical reality, as

found in:found in: Quantum nonlocality = quantum entanglementQuantum nonlocality = quantum entanglement Chaos theoryChaos theory

the nascent science of “Complexity Theory” that raises the the nascent science of “Complexity Theory” that raises the possibility that complex structures may:possibility that complex structures may:

have their own fundamental lawshave their own fundamental laws influence their constituent parts (that is, display a “top-down” influence their constituent parts (that is, display a “top-down”

causality)causality)

Quantum NonlocalityQuantum Nonlocality

Quantum NonlocalityQuantum Nonlocality Physical RealityPhysical Reality

Quantum physics tells us that fundamental Quantum physics tells us that fundamental physical reality is best imagined physical reality is best imagined notnot as a vast as a vast number of subatomic particles swirling about, number of subatomic particles swirling about, but as a seething bed of unembodied but as a seething bed of unembodied potentially, possibility. potentially, possibility.

The boundaries, the range or scope of that The boundaries, the range or scope of that potentiality, possibility is encapsulated in the potentiality, possibility is encapsulated in the quantum wavefunction or statefunction.quantum wavefunction or statefunction.


When a scientists (or any observer) attempts to detect When a scientists (or any observer) attempts to detect or measure some property of a particle (say its position or measure some property of a particle (say its position or speed):or speed): the act of measurementthe act of measurement causescauses the wavefunction of the the wavefunction of the

particle to particle to collapsecollapse, and , and the particle comes into existence, becomes embodied with the particle comes into existence, becomes embodied with

oneone of the possible values of the property allowed by its of the possible values of the property allowed by its wavefunction.wavefunction.

The wavefunction can tell the observer the probability The wavefunction can tell the observer the probability of the particle taking on a particular value of the of the particle taking on a particular value of the property, but the actual value taken appears to be property, but the actual value taken appears to be “chosen” at random by the ground of physical reality.“chosen” at random by the ground of physical reality.


For example:For example: if we try to measure the position if we try to measure the position of an electron:of an electron: the wavefunction of the electron will tell us the the wavefunction of the electron will tell us the

probabilityprobability of finding the electron in a given of finding the electron in a given position when we do a measurement, butposition when we do a measurement, but

the actual position taken on by the electron when the actual position taken on by the electron when we collapse the wavefunction by a measurement we collapse the wavefunction by a measurement could be could be anywhereanywhere in the range of potentiality / in the range of potentiality / possibility described by its wavefunction.possibility described by its wavefunction.

it could be here, it could be there …it could be here, it could be there …


Note:Note: Our inability to exactly predict the position of the Our inability to exactly predict the position of the

electron is electron is notnot due to some experimental error or due to some experimental error or some imprecision of our measuring tools. It is built some imprecision of our measuring tools. It is built into the fabric of reality.into the fabric of reality.

The electron does not exist as an embodied particle The electron does not exist as an embodied particle until we try to measure it, and then it comes into until we try to measure it, and then it comes into existence in a particular position. existence in a particular position.

Before the measurement, we can only predict the Before the measurement, we can only predict the probability of it showing up in that position.probability of it showing up in that position.


Once we cease to observe a particle, it soon Once we cease to observe a particle, it soon “disappears” back into the bed of potentiality, “disappears” back into the bed of potentiality, possibility described by its wavelength – until possibility described by its wavelength – until someone attempts another measurement on it.someone attempts another measurement on it. In the quantum world of elementary particles, we In the quantum world of elementary particles, we

might say the tree in forest ceases to exist when no might say the tree in forest ceases to exist when no one is in the forest to look at it.one is in the forest to look at it.


In the macroscopic world, we don’t notice this bizarre In the macroscopic world, we don’t notice this bizarre quantum behavior because everything we look at quantum behavior because everything we look at consists of billions and billions of quantum particles, consists of billions and billions of quantum particles, and their uncertainties cancel out, producing a highly and their uncertainties cancel out, producing a highly reliable overall pattern of behavior.reliable overall pattern of behavior. It is rather like life insurance. By knowing the probabilities It is rather like life insurance. By knowing the probabilities

of death in someone of a given age, and by insuring a very of death in someone of a given age, and by insuring a very large number of people, the statistical fluctuations cancel large number of people, the statistical fluctuations cancel out, and insurers can rely on the calculations of their out, and insurers can rely on the calculations of their actuaries to make money.actuaries to make money.

Quantum NonlocalityQuantum Nonlocality The EPR ExperimentThe EPR Experiment

When two particles interact, their interaction When two particles interact, their interaction causes them to influence each other even if causes them to influence each other even if they subsequent separatethey subsequent separate In other words: they behave in the future as if the In other words: they behave in the future as if the

two of them were part of a single wavefunctiontwo of them were part of a single wavefunction Einstein (along with physicists named Einstein (along with physicists named

Podolsky and Rosen; EPR) proposed a thought Podolsky and Rosen; EPR) proposed a thought experience that had such crazy results he experience that had such crazy results he though it would surely prove quantum though it would surely prove quantum mechanics wrong.mechanics wrong.


The EPR thought experiment:The EPR thought experiment: Assume electrons have a conserved property “color” that can take on Assume electrons have a conserved property “color” that can take on

one of two values when a measurement is done to collapse their one of two values when a measurement is done to collapse their wavefunction: red or blue.wavefunction: red or blue.

Conserved: the total amount of red or blue must be constantConserved: the total amount of red or blue must be constant Two electrons interact, one red, one blue.Two electrons interact, one red, one blue. The two electrons then separate. No one is measuring them so they The two electrons then separate. No one is measuring them so they

fade back into the realm of possibility, potentiality.fade back into the realm of possibility, potentiality. A million year later someone tries to measure the color of one of the A million year later someone tries to measure the color of one of the

electrons. The act of measurement causes its wavefunction to collapse. electrons. The act of measurement causes its wavefunction to collapse. It becomes embodied and takes on one of two possible values of color: It becomes embodied and takes on one of two possible values of color: red, or blue. Say it become blue.red, or blue. Say it become blue.

Because color is conserved, Because color is conserved, immediatelyimmediately the color of the other electron the color of the other electron – even if it has traveled to the other side of the universe – becomes red.– even if it has traveled to the other side of the universe – becomes red.


Einstein: this instantaneous action at a distance Einstein: this instantaneous action at a distance is preposterous. How can the two electrons is preposterous. How can the two electrons communicate with each other?communicate with each other?

Quantum orthodoxy: by interacting, the two Quantum orthodoxy: by interacting, the two electrons became in some sense a single entity electrons became in some sense a single entity described by a single wavefunction. Their described by a single wavefunction. Their spatial separation does not matter, as their spatial separation does not matter, as their wavefunction exists in the ground of physical wavefunction exists in the ground of physical reality in a way that is not tied to a particular reality in a way that is not tied to a particular position or time: it is “nonlocal.”position or time: it is “nonlocal.”


In 1983, scientists at the University of Paris In 1983, scientists at the University of Paris experimentally confirmed the experimentally confirmed the EPR effectEPR effect, or , or quantum nonlocalityquantum nonlocality..

Because particles are often interacting, and the Because particles are often interacting, and the “memory” of that interaction is encoded in their “memory” of that interaction is encoded in their wavefunctions, another name for wavefunctions, another name for quantum quantum nonlocalitynonlocality = the = the EPR effectEPR effect is is quantum quantum entanglemententanglement..

Quantum nonlocalityQuantum nonlocality shows there is an intrinsic shows there is an intrinsic interconnectedness in the subatomic world that interconnectedness in the subatomic world that cannot be broken. Quantum entities are “entangled” cannot be broken. Quantum entities are “entangled” with each other, even at vast distances.with each other, even at vast distances.

Chaos TheoryChaos Theory

Chaos TheoryChaos Theory Clocks Versus CloudsClocks Versus Clouds

A profound interconnectedness in physical reality can A profound interconnectedness in physical reality can also be found in the normal “macroscopic” world in also be found in the normal “macroscopic” world in Chaos TheoryChaos Theory..

Many physical systems are “well-behaved” in that we Many physical systems are “well-behaved” in that we can easily predict their future behavior. For example: can easily predict their future behavior. For example: clocks.clocks.

More commonly however physical systems display More commonly however physical systems display “chaotic” behavior. For example: clouds.“chaotic” behavior. For example: clouds.

““Chaotic” = they are Chaotic” = they are exquisitelyexquisitely sensitive to initial sensitive to initial conditions. conditions. We theoretically have the classical equations to predict We theoretically have the classical equations to predict

their future behavior, but extremely tiny differences in the their future behavior, but extremely tiny differences in the input values (initial conditions) leads to wildly different input values (initial conditions) leads to wildly different behaviors in the future.behaviors in the future.


Example:Example: the weather in North America can be the weather in North America can be effected by whether or not an African butterfly effected by whether or not an African butterfly flapped its wings a week earlier.flapped its wings a week earlier.

Another name for Chaos Theory: Another name for Chaos Theory: “The Butterfly “The Butterfly Effect”Effect”

Example:Example: analytical calculation of the exact position analytical calculation of the exact position of each gas particle in a cubic foot of room air after a of each gas particle in a cubic foot of room air after a fraction of a second of motion would require fraction of a second of motion would require knowledge of initial conditions so infinitesimally knowledge of initial conditions so infinitesimally precise that we would have to take into account the precise that we would have to take into account the gravitational effect of an electron at the other end of gravitational effect of an electron at the other end of the universe.the universe.


Chaos TheoryChaos Theory is a “classical” theory. is a “classical” theory. However, the extreme sensitivity to initial However, the extreme sensitivity to initial conditions means chaos theory cannot ignore conditions means chaos theory cannot ignore the quantum realm, as the knowledge of initial the quantum realm, as the knowledge of initial conditions needed often gets to the level of the conditions needed often gets to the level of the size of quantum mechanical uncertainty.size of quantum mechanical uncertainty. There is still no satisfactory theory that merges There is still no satisfactory theory that merges

Chaos Theory with quantum mechanics.Chaos Theory with quantum mechanics.


Chaos TheoryChaos Theory = The = The Butterfly EffectButterfly Effect does does allow us to say that in a world that has more allow us to say that in a world that has more clouds than clocks, there is a profound clouds than clocks, there is a profound macroscopic “interconnectedness” that defies a macroscopic “interconnectedness” that defies a simple reductionist viewsimple reductionist view

““Complexity” TheoryComplexity” TheoryTop – Down CausalityTop – Down Causality

Complexity TheoryComplexity Theory More Is DifferentMore Is Different

Complexity theoryComplexity theory is a nascent science is a nascent science looking at the emergence of behavior and looking at the emergence of behavior and properties in complex systems that could not properties in complex systems that could not have been recognized from the properties of have been recognized from the properties of their constituent parts.their constituent parts.

““More is different.”More is different.”


Example:Example: consider a large array of electric lights: consider a large array of electric lights: What each bulb does next is determined by the What each bulb does next is determined by the

present states of two other bulb in the array.present states of two other bulb in the array. The system is started at some random state of The system is started at some random state of

illumination and allowed to evolve.illumination and allowed to evolve. The array will soon “self-organize” into a very orderly The array will soon “self-organize” into a very orderly

set of behaviors, cycling through a very limited set of set of behaviors, cycling through a very limited set of patternspatterns

For 10,000 bulbs, there would be 10For 10,000 bulbs, there would be 1030003000 different states it different states it could theoretically be found it, but it cycles through only could theoretically be found it, but it cycles through only 100 (In general, for N bulbs, the number of patterns is N100 (In general, for N bulbs, the number of patterns is N1/21/2) )


Similar spontaneous generation of order can be Similar spontaneous generation of order can be seen in seen in cellular automatacellular automata..

In chaotic systems in which friction is present, In chaotic systems in which friction is present, the chaotic system will converge after a period the chaotic system will converge after a period to time onto an intricate but limited portfolio to time onto an intricate but limited portfolio of possible forms called a of possible forms called a “strange attractor”“strange attractor” (“attractor” = the motions converged upon(“attractor” = the motions converged upon ““strange” = refers to the fractal character of its strange” = refers to the fractal character of its

structure in “phase space”)structure in “phase space”)


At present, there is no general theory that covers the At present, there is no general theory that covers the behavior of complex systems.behavior of complex systems.

Polkinghorne believes there is a deep theory Polkinghorne believes there is a deep theory underlying these phenomenon whose discovery will underlying these phenomenon whose discovery will revolutionize scientific thinking.revolutionize scientific thinking.

We will have to adopt a new style of thought in We will have to adopt a new style of thought in science, and treat systems holistically using science, and treat systems holistically using “information” as a fundamental concept“information” as a fundamental concept ““information” = the specification of patterns of dynamical information” = the specification of patterns of dynamical

ordered behaviorordered behavior

Complexity TheoryComplexity Theory Top Down CausalityTop Down Causality

We may find that in addition to explaining the We may find that in addition to explaining the world with: world with: ““bottom-up” causalitybottom-up” causality, the way fundamental , the way fundamental

constituents effect the whole, we need to take into constituents effect the whole, we need to take into account a:account a:

““top-down” causalitytop-down” causality, the way global properties , the way global properties of a complex system effect its constituent partsof a complex system effect its constituent parts

Who Are We?Who Are We? ConclusionsConclusions

Who Are We?Who Are We? Inadequacy of a Reductionist ViewInadequacy of a Reductionist View

What do we make of all this?What do we make of all this? Science is only beginning to try to understand Science is only beginning to try to understand

complex systems, and cannot tell us who we complex systems, and cannot tell us who we are – despite the arrogant (implying are – despite the arrogant (implying knowledge science does not have) claims of knowledge science does not have) claims of some scientists that we are only “computers some scientists that we are only “computers made of meat”, or “genetic survival machines”made of meat”, or “genetic survival machines”


The interconnectedness of physical reality The interconnectedness of physical reality found in:found in: Quantum NonlocalityQuantum Nonlocality and and Chaos TheoryChaos Theory,,

the unexplained self-organization of complex the unexplained self-organization of complex systems just beginning to be studied in systems just beginning to be studied in Complexity TheoryComplexity Theory

suggest a reductionist view of who we are will suggest a reductionist view of who we are will not be adequate.not be adequate.


In searching for the answer of who we are, we In searching for the answer of who we are, we must resist an impoverished account of human must resist an impoverished account of human experience.experience.

We must not ignore the “data” of:We must not ignore the “data” of: The human experience of artists that the world is a The human experience of artists that the world is a

carrier of beauty,carrier of beauty, The human experience of writers that the world is The human experience of writers that the world is

an arena of moral choice and responsibility,an arena of moral choice and responsibility, The human experience of saints and mystics who The human experience of saints and mystics who

testify to encounters with an ultimate Reality both testify to encounters with an ultimate Reality both beyond us and yet also nearer to us than breathing.beyond us and yet also nearer to us than breathing.

Who Are We?Who Are We? Religion as an Explanation for the Religion as an Explanation for the

Richness of RealityRichness of Reality In seeing the will and nature of the Creator In seeing the will and nature of the Creator

underlying and unifying the varieties of human underlying and unifying the varieties of human experience, it makes the richness of human experience, it makes the richness of human experience more intelligible:experience more intelligible: Our scientific explorations are insights into the rational Our scientific explorations are insights into the rational

order with which God has endowed the universe,order with which God has endowed the universe, Our experiences of beauty are a sharing in God's joy in Our experiences of beauty are a sharing in God's joy in

creation,creation, Our moral perceptions are intuitions of God's good and Our moral perceptions are intuitions of God's good and

perfect will,perfect will, Our religious experiences are encounters with the hidden Our religious experiences are encounters with the hidden

divine presence.divine presence.

Who Are We?Who Are We? Religion as an Explanation for the Religion as an Explanation for the

Richness of RealityRichness of Reality Such a view is whole and satisfying.Such a view is whole and satisfying. Who are we? We are God's creatures.Who are we? We are God's creatures.

TopicsTopicsQuarks, Chaos, and ChristianityQuarks, Chaos, and Christianity

Jan 6:Jan 6: Is Anyone There? Is Anyone There? Jan 13:Jan 13: What’s Been Going On? What’s Been Going On? Jan 20:Jan 20: Annual Parish MeetingAnnual Parish Meeting Jan 27:Jan 27: Who are We? Who are We? Feb 3:Feb 3: Prayer and Miracles Prayer and Miracles Feb 10:Feb 10: How Will It End? How Will It End?

Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity Who Are We? Sunday, January 27, 2008 10 to 10:50 am, in the Parlor...

Documents

Transcript of Quarks, Chaos, and Christianity Who Are We? Sunday, January 27, 2008 10 to 10:50 am, in the Parlor...