As the 19th century closed and the 20th century opened, a group of European scientists completely revolutionized the way science and humanity in general look at the world. Isaac Newton over two centuries prior crafted an elegant set of explanations for the physical universe that he could observe.
Newton based his laws of nature on observations of how big things interacted with each other. The laws had also the happy benefit of making complete sense even to someone unschooled in science or math. It does not take an advanced mind to understand, for example, “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
At the opening of the 20th century through World War II, theoreticians such as Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg (yes, that Heisenberg, “Breaking Bad” fans), and others noted that as one observed and experimented with extraordinarily small objects and concepts of small objects, those elegant explanations foundered on rocks of growing uncertainty. Observations of the behavior of particles, as well as mathematical equations relating to those, indicated “fuzziness” in how those particles moved about and interacted.
Buried deep inside Newton’s crystal clear clockwork universe, however, was entropy. For much of the latter half of his life, Einstein tried and failed to reconcile the comforting clarity of Newton with the unsettling implications of having a foundation of reality based on sheer randomness.
Einstein and Erwin Schrodinger created a thought experiment to explain the problem that went to the heart of two basic states, particle and wave. They had determined that light has both the properties of a wave and a particle, but at different times.
The experiment was this. A cat was placed in a completely contained box with a mechanism that would cause its death if tripped. The mechanism would either work or not work with the cat being either dead or alive.
Those who love their kitties may want to imagine a vial of supercharged catnip instead of poison. It’s far more pleasant to think of a cat being either high or sober rather than dead or alive.
The cat’s box mechanism is connected to a contained space entirely of inside mirrors. A light wave is introduced. The act of human observation and action on the box forces the wave to revert to the status of a particle. This is called “collapsing the wave.” Introduce a barrier in the middle and the particle will either be on the right or left side of the barrier. Even the mere act of looking into the box will collapse the wave into a particle, but the scientists were trying to imagine a quantum action having an impact on the observable world and its functions.
One side means life, the other means death (or sober versus high, if you prefer) and there is no rule determining whether it happens on one side or the other. Thus, randomness exists at the very foundation of reality.
Quantum physics focuses on the mysterious behavior of these subatomic particles, photons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, and other similar things. Scientists between the world wars worked to try to make sense of these new discoveries through observation, mathematical calculation, and experimentation.
Classical physics has a foundation in tangibility. An object can be either there or not there. It cannot operate in two places at once. Physical objects are confined to the space they inhabit, even as they move about.
Einstein’s theory of special relativity, though not classical physics, also applies. Two objects cannot occupy the same space, or the same perspective. Even if one person hugs another, the distance that light travels from object to eye puts that observation in the past. One can never experience anything in true simultaneous fashion because what we see is always the past from our perspective, no matter how close we are to it.
Only the individual can experience his or her own true “now.” Everything else one sees is the past to them, even though it is microseconds of time. Yet if the act of observation itself collapses a light wave, something else must be at work. Such incongruities frustrated the greatest mind of the modern age.
From some of those scientists came what became known as the Copenhagen interpretation. Long story short, much of it translates to scientists throwing up their hands and saying that humans have no ability to actually observe the quantum realm, so any conclusions must be reached by observing the smallest of microscopic effects on macroscopic materials.
After World War II, more work led to six postulates that tried to define the wave collapse function, attempting to categorize and make sense of what happens and why, as well as trying to predict effects.
Tim Maudlin, an academic working on the convergence of quantum physics and philosophy, called the effort into question. He stated that the six postulates did not represent a theory, because a theory has to meet some standard in explaining something. Maudlin demoted the theory to what he called a “recipe,” explaining that these were concepts thrown together that happened to make sense and work, but do not actually explain the “why” or “how.”
Similarly, science has no idea how gravity works. It can discuss everything about the effects of gravity between objects and how gravity can bend light without slowing it down, but no scientist can tell anyone what gravity actually is or how it operates.
Says Maudlin, “A physical theory should clearly and forthrightly address two fundamental questions: what there is, and what it does. The answer to the first question is provided by the ontology of the theory, and the answer to the second by its dynamics. The ontology should have a sharp mathematical description, and the dynamics should be implemented by precise equations describing how the ontology will, or might, evolve.”
He criticizes the Copenhagen interpretation directly, saying “Nowadays, the term is often used as shorthand for a general instrumentalism that treats the mathematical apparatus of the theory as merely a predictive device, uncommitted to any ontology or dynamics at all.”
Of course one would be correct in stating that Maudlin moved the goalposts on his 1920s-era colleagues with the question being, is that fair or appropriate? Maudlin’s philosophical inquiries, however, stop at that level. He never opened the door to asking about the broader implications of what these scientists had revealed.
The most dangerous philosophical question is this. How does the presence of a sentient human mind create such a dramatic effect? Also, why does the act of observing create such a fundamental change in the observed? Does this mean that at some level, the mind is truly over that of matter? If true, what does that mean in terms of the connection of the human mind to the physical universe itself?
Does the act of observing change the observed in everyday life, just at such a small and incremental level as to not be noticed by the observer? Does the accumulation of these random interactions between minds and matter add up to creating a different direction at the quantum level that has an impact on broader parts of reality?
And what does this mean for free will? The Schrodinger’s Cat experiment never considers what happens if no one ever looks in the box, which is certainly a choice of free will. What also does this mean in terms of what we understand as “cause and effect?”
One mind could have walked through that door. Martin Heidegger, a German philosopher prominent in the 1930s, spent much time exploring the concept of “now.” Existence in the “now,” Heidegger referred to as “beying” as opposed to “being.” All else but the “now,” he said, could never be proven as real and never be accepted as objective truth.
With that starting point, unfortunately Heidegger endeavored to use these concepts to prove what he considered as the superior dynamics of National Socialism and that there was no objective truth or morality to restrain pursuit of power and change, overthrowing the classical liberal world (most of whose concepts are called “conservative” now.) His work, instead of exploring reality’s depths, became the foundation of postmodernism and all the Fascist, Socialist, and Communist ills that have come from that ignoble set of ideals.
There is another possibility explaining the wave collapse function, its unpredictable behavior, and its broader impact. Perhaps in this gray area lies the hand of God in the physical realm.
Francesco Forgione was born on May 25, 1887 in Pietreclina, Italy to a family of peasant farmers living in poverty. By the age of five, he decided to dedicate his life to God, taking the path that led him to the name “Brother Pio” when he joined the Franciscans, then “Padre Pio” and finally, eventually, Saint Pio.
His entire life and ministry was defined by dedication to the model and example of Saint Francis of Assisi.
He lived well into the 20th century, rarely physically leaving the monastery, but at times bearing the painful mark of the Stigmata. Doctors had no explanation of the coming and going of these wounds that caused him much suffering. His wounds lasted for 50 years and, as EWTN describes, “emitted a heavenly fragrance” similar to roses.
He did not seek either the suffering or the attention from it and wrote “will Jesus, who is so good, grant me this grace? Will he at least free me from the embarrassment caused by these outward signs . . . which cause me such embarrassment and physical pain?”
Saint Pio became famous for the confession experience of believers. It was said that he could read their hearts and see deceit if it was there, or if they forgot the commission of a serious sin.
That said, Saint Pio has a relevance to his inclusion in this piece on science. Elevation to sainthood means that the individual has satisfied Vatican investigators that at least two confirmed miracles took place related to the figure.
One took place with the most unlikely of witnesses. In 1943, United States Army Air Forces bombers targeted the town of San Giovanni Rotondo. Earlier in the conflict, Padre Pio promised the residents of the town that they would be spared the violence of war.
As EWTN explains “when they (the bombers) appeared over the city and prepared to unload their munitions, a brown-robed friar appeared before their aircraft. All attempts to unload the bombs failed.” Several pilots reported that they witnessed a brilliant white cloud containing three figures, a bearded monk raising his hand, a woman holding a child, and a young man carrying a sword stained with blood. During the apparition, no bombs would leave the plane.
The pilots, extraordinarily affected by the experience, were taken to the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie. There they found to their surprise, “the little friar he had seen in the air that day over San Giovanni.” Others whispered “that’s him. That’s the monk we saw in the cloud.” The image of the woman and child was replicated in art in the monastery. The pilots found the sword-bearing man in the shrine of Saint Michael the Archangel at Monte Sant’Angelo.
It was the statue of the Archangel they saw in the sky.
One must understand that the Roman Catholic Church, especially in the 20th century, was wary about miracles in the face of a more scientific and skeptical time. Investigators assumed that reports of miracles in sainthood investigations were false, either by fraud or misplaced belief.
None of the reports of his “bilocation,” the official name for one of his miracles, came from the Padre himself, but from other observers. In Friar Gordon McRae’s essay “‘I am a Mystery to Myself’ The Last Days of Padre Pio”, he quotes Saint Pio revealing “I don’t know how it is or the nature of this phenomenon – and I certainly don’t give it much thought – but it did happen to me to be in that presence of this or that person, to be in this or that place; but I do not know whether I was there with my body or without it . . . Usually this has happened while I was praying . . . This is the first time I talk about this,”
The saint had no desire for what others called special spiritual gifts, preferring to be a humble servant of God and God’s children rather than a figure of attention. Saint John Paul II the Great, whose own miracles involved unexplained healing, officiated over his canonization.
Bilocation is a possibility in quantum physics through a concept called quantum entanglement in which subatomic particles can wink in and out of existence in two locations at once through some kind of connection. Quantum entanglement has become a tangible reality in the world of technology. American (mostly IBM), Japanese, and Chinese scientists are developing computer systems based on quantum entanglement whose processes could even exceed the speed of light, which Einstein believed was an impenetrable barrier to human ambitions.
Taking us back to the cat experiment, some quantum entanglement between the observer mind and the wave/particle must take place for one to affect the other, given the constraints of the Theory of Special Relativity. Again, how does this happen, what does this mean, and what are the broader ramifications in theology, philosophy, and science?
Interestingly, some initial studies on an observed effect seem to show that some people’s brain waves synchronize together somewhat over time, creating possibly deeper connections between the individual minds that would appear to violate both classical physics and Special Relativity. Couples who, as some do, finish each other’s sentences could be objective examples of this.
Speculation can lead to entire other theories. Some have proposed that the either/or bilateralism of the Schrodinger’s Cat box is wrong, that a new dimension or universe hives off when the wave collapses and an infinite number of very similar universes exist somehow simultaneously, diverging in different directions. One could imagine the existence of angels, ghosts, demons, or other religious or supernatural entities with the ability to hop from one realm to another or exist in more than one at once.
Science can become science fiction fairly quickly, but one must remember that the imaginations of science fiction writers have often prefaced real world discoveries of the same things. For example, Gene Roddenberry’s fictional creation of a warp drive propelling a spaceship past the speed of light is increasingly today seen as a possibility (though needing unimaginable amounts of power) in the most advanced frontiers of science.
All that said, don’t get too crazy in seeing quantum physics as the explanation for all of life’s mysteries. Lazy archaeologists when studying early mankind attributed every unexplainable behavior to religion, which may or may not be true, but is certainly not provable in any form and is highly unlikely anyway.
The universe, fortunately or unfortunately, is still largely a mysterious place to us and both the frustration and the joy inherent in exploring theology, science, and philosophy lies in helping reality to reveal itself.
