Timeline for "God doesn't play with dice": does QM's randomness really contradict religion?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2023 at 18:44 | comment | added | Corbin | @YechiamWeiss: What is lacking among the current answers? I'm happy to write an answer which explains the KS theorem and why QM contradicts all-seeing/all-knowing beings, but I'd like to understand why no answer's yet accepted. | |
| Feb 15, 2018 at 19:48 | history | edited | Geoffrey Thomas♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 6 characters in body; edited title. GT : improved grammar of question
|
| Feb 14, 2018 at 5:53 | answer | added | Guill | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 19:52 | answer | added | user30865 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 20:56 | answer | added | Mozibur Ullah | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 14:26 | answer | added | Michal Paszkiewicz | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 10:29 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | @QuentinRuyant I hope the edits I've made cleared up the mess I created by combining both issues. | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 10:28 | history | edited | Yechiam Weiss | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 371 characters in body
|
| Feb 12, 2018 at 10:18 | comment | added | Quentin Ruyant | @YechiamWeiss no that's fine, the question can be asked even if it's not what Einstein meant. | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 6:27 | answer | added | 42- | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 12, 2018 at 2:55 | comment | added | Conifold | Of all the things why randomness, and why quantum mechanics? Classical mechanics allows randomness too, see Indeterminism in classical mechanics, and the problem of free will vs predestination predates even it. Both are purely theological doctrines that conflict regardless of mechanics. For proposed resolutions see SEP's Foreknowledge and Free Will. Also, there is no "common God perception", Hindu and Buddhist gods are very different, and some versions of Buddhism are atheistic. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 23:13 | answer | added | Adnan Y | timeline score: -1 | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 22:49 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | @QuentinRuyant yes, I agree that that's probably what concerned Einstein, my mistake. And maybe this should be 2 different questions, about creation and about "after", but the core of them both is the main concern so I think opening a different question isn't the smart choice. Tell me if you think otherwise though. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 22:30 | comment | added | Quentin Ruyant | @YechiamWeiss thanks for the clarification. Now I agree with FrankHubeny that God in this sentence is probably metaphorical and I don't think Einstein was concerned about the origin of the universe, but rather with the fact that events after the origin of the universe are random. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 18:01 | comment | added | Frank Hubeny | In addition to those @PeterJ mentioned in his answer you might want to see Shimon Malin's "Nature Loves to Hide". Malin is a physicist and the book is about the collapse of the wave function which is when the potentialities become actual. His philosophical approach rests mainly on Whitehead and Plotinus. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 17:53 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhilosophy/status/962746427842670592 | ||
| Feb 11, 2018 at 17:52 | comment | added | H Walters | Just to be clear, physicists often use "God" not to mean "God" per se, but as a metaphor. In the particular case of "God does not play dice", God can be seen as a metaphor for physical laws. Playing dice specifically refers to the application of the Born Rule. Einstein isn't making a theological claim (even a Spinozan one) here; he's making an entirely physical claim... that all physical laws must be driven by mechanics, if you will. The Born Rule per se is fine (here); it just can't be "the real mechanics" because behaviors "don't just pop out of thin air". | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 17:41 | answer | added | Nat | timeline score: 8 | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 14:54 | answer | added | user103766 | timeline score: 16 | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 14:39 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | @QuentinRuyant please see my edit. And no, Einstein's biggest (if not only) issue with accepting QM, even though it's mathematics was correct, is that sentence. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 14:38 | history | edited | Yechiam Weiss | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 176 characters in body
|
| Feb 11, 2018 at 14:37 | comment | added | Quentin Ruyant | And also Einstein's sentence is probably a way of talking rather than a commitment to the existence of God. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 14:33 | comment | added | Quentin Ruyant | I don't know this topic very well so I won't post an answer but I think that the are different religious views within christianity regarding the question of determinism, some being fatalists and others not. The question of free will and compatibilism is rather important for that matter since it plays a role in theology. I would say that determinism or indeterminism are both compatible with religion. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 13:08 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | @LuísHenrique yes, as I noted, it's Spinoza's God. But I count it in the same sphere of theism that's being attacked. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 12:45 | comment | added | Luís Henrique | To notice, Einstein's god was a clocksmith god, not the providential god of Christianism. | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 12:43 | answer | added | user19423 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 11:22 | answer | added | user20253 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 11, 2018 at 10:37 | history | asked | Yechiam Weiss | CC BY-SA 3.0 |