Quantum Mechanics: Is It Anti-Creationism?

Sir Isaac Newton (1642/3–1727) who is one of most well-known scientists of all time, who wrote more about the Bible than science, he was a creationist who discovered the laws of motion, gravity, and cooling. He invented the reflecting telescope and was the co-inventor of calculus. However, there were some problems that classical physics invented by Newton could not explain.

For example, an experiment which was conducted by Michelson and Morley (1838–1923)  showed conclusively that there was no difference in the measured speed of light regardless of direction. Then along comes Quantum mechanics. Einstein’s theory of special relativity was able to solve this problem. In other example, classical physics prediction of black body that acted like a ‘vibrator’ with certain modes, which had different frequencies with the same amount of energy proportional to temperature.

It worked well for low frequencies, but predicted that the radiation would be more and more intense at higher frequencies, working its way towards infinite energy which is of course impossible! Max Planck (1858–1947) came along and he was able to solved this faulty prediction. He proposed that they could have only discrete amounts of energy proportional to the frequency. A formula known as Planck’s constant (E = hν).

Physicist Louis-Victor-Pierre-Raymond, 7th duc de Broglie discovered another important concept of quantum mechanics. Just as energy of vibrators and electromagnetic radiation was quantized into discrete packets with particle-like properties, de Broglie proposed that all moving particles had an associated wave-like nature. This discovery lead to the invention of electron microscopes where smaller objects could be observed that previously were not able to be seen with optical microscopes.

There have been concerns by Christians about Quantum Mechanics, such as New Agers coming up with mystical, and moral-relativistic views about it and have form special groups to combat QM as a whole. However, Einstein and Schrödinger didn’t like the mysticism of a supposed “observer collapses the wavefunction”.  So is Quantum mechanics anti-creationism? Answer: No! The evidence through the use of operational science has enabled scientists to solved problems within classic physics. It didn’t overturn it where it was rendered totally useless. In fact its concepts are still used today.

Quantum mechanics is operational science which doesn’t deal with explanations about origins unlike the author himself deciding to inject his own interpretation by giving another theory or explanation the credit. Quantum mechanics really works, and has been strongly supported by verification through experiment. There is no logical reason to oppose it. This is not like the ever-growing complexities as a result of numerous falsifications in the explanation of evolution, in fact it’s quite different. Operational science in itself is not anti-creationism, instead it’s a tool to gain knowledge. Quantum mechanics is a great field for Christians who are interested in physics and would like to become scientists in their own right in this area giving God all the glory!

Failing Paradigm Questions Basic Law And More

The big bang ‘theory’ presents a sequence of events which is totally incompatible with the Bible and not only that, but it has progressed to be incompatible with current observations in space than ever before. For example, the big bang makes no predictions about lumps rather it predicts a uniform explosion. Using some invented explanations, they try to get by but now it’s getting harder, scientists are discovering there are even more lumps in distant space. Something that caught astronomers way off guard because the observation was not able to meet the prediction of their ‘theory’ once again. What are lumps and where do they come from?

What has been observed in space are lumpy aggregates of matter like galaxies and clusters of galaxies with near vacuums of empty space between them, this is what they call lumpiness in space. When tiny differences in temperature measured in the cosmic background radiation was detected. fudge factors were added like dark matter, dark energy and inflation.

When these new observations came up recently it did not cast doubt on whether or not the big bang is a completely falsified ‘theory’ for those who firmly believe in it rather it began to question the fudge factors which were inserted to rescue it to keep it going and now only that but call into question one of the most basic laws, gravity itself.

Wired Science reports…

“The universe appears to be clumpier than astronomers expected, according to the largest galaxy survey to date. The extra clumps could call for a redesign of the standard model of cosmology, and maybe a new understanding of how gravity works.

“Maybe on very large scales, Einstein’s general relativity is slightly wrong,” said cosmologist Shaun Thomas of University College London, lead author of a new paper in Physical Review Letters. “This potentially could be one of the first signs that something peculiar is going on. When viewed close up, the matter in the universe bunches up into stars, galaxies and galaxy clusters. But as you zoom out, cosmologists expect the universe to look more and more smooth, sort of the way details in an earthly landscape blend together when viewed from an airplane.”

Take note, the article outlines these areas could be wrong in light of their belief in the big bang ‘theory’…

1) The most basic and fundamental law of them all, gravity.

2) Einstein’s general relativity.

3) The model within the big bang needs to be tweaked to force the observational data into it.

4) Fudge Factor: Dark energy…“The result could mean cosmologists need to reassess their understanding of dark energy, the mysterious force that drives the universe outward at an ever-increasing rate…. The extra lumps could also mean dark energy doesn’t exist at all.

5) Observations-” where they say, “…the clumpiness could also come from systematic errors in the observations….”

Like stated before, it’s not like the Big Bang ‘theory’ is questioned to the point where it’s falsified among secular astronomers who stand by their observations but don’t seem to know what to do with the lack of confirmations with their ‘theory’. The hard evidence for the big bang and dark energy are very flimsy at best!

One asks, if astronomers who are unable to judge the validity or their own observations, and if some of the most solid theories in all of science (gravity and general relativity) require an overhaul due to the ever-growing complexity of their ‘theory’, then how much trust can mere mortals like ourselves be placed in the much less solid pronouncements coming from evolutionary biology?

For example, the story about how living things evolved by adapting to environmental challenges. In June 3, of science, experiments were conducted with bacteria. They demonstrated that adaptations do occur but they also discovered the pace of adaptations decelerates over time. “Proportional reductions of a cost became successively less beneficial as the cost itself was alleviated” says Harvard evolutionary biologist Christopher Marx.

The changes in the DNA of bacteria were not a free bonus but came with a cost. It’s another example of the law of diminishing returns which has been coming up more and more and is what creationism predicted in nature when it comes to adaption with mutations!

Just like the big bang as science progresses with amazing technology, the more observations are not matching up with the fundamental principles of evolution. Again one asks, how much faith and trust can mere mortals like ourselves be placed in the failing paradigm of the big bang much less solid pronouncements coming from evolutionary biology?

P.Z. Myers Asserts The Mediocrity Principle

The “anthropic argument” which is used for creationism which includes the existence of God is based on the tight values taken on by certain constants in the world of physics thus making our own existence unique and implies intent produced by intelligence. Albert Einstein was the first to propose the cosmological constant.

Cosmic microwave background (CMB) measurement not only demonstrate the existence of the cosmological constant, but also the value of the constant which makes up the lack of matter in the universe. It’s alternative explanation to the invisible dark matter, many secular scientists have embraced. Now there are also various other constants, here are few examples…

1) An electromagnetic force constant, if this is greater, it would cause chemical bonding to be disrupted; elements more massive than boron would be unstable to fission. Now if it was lesser: the chemical bonding would be insufficient for life chemistry.

2) Ratio of electron to proton mass, regardless of greater or lesser, the results would be the same, chemical bonding would be not sufficient enough for life chemistry.

3) The sun, earth’s closest star. It’s made up mostly of hydrogen and helium. Surface temperature is an incredible 6,000 degrees Kelvin. The Bible talks about the sun being, “the greater light” which governs the day. All life on earth depends on the sun. If the sun would burn out one day, it would cause the earth to freeze, the atmosphere would condense, liquefy and freeze, rendering the earth’s temperature to deep space.  The sun is unique, the light and heat from most stars is very variable but the Sun is relatively constant.

PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris. Some regard him as a militant atheist who presents very anti-christian viewpoints in his blog. Recently, he wrote about how he teaches students at his University about the “Mediocrity Principle” which he regards it as a must for science. What is it?  He describes it this way…

1) “The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren’t special.”

2) “What the mediocrity principle tells us is that our state is not the product of intent, that the universe lacks both malice and benevolence, but that everything does follow rules — and that grasping those rules should be the goal of science.”

3) “Everything that you as a human being consider cosmically important is an accident.”

4) “Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws”

P.Z. Myers claims that “Opposition to the mediocrity principle is one of the major linchpins of religion and creationism and jingoism and failed social policies.” He fails directly to answer, why is that “essential” to science?  Why would accidents be compelled to follow any rules? ““Everything that you as a human being consider cosmically important is an accident.” How could your kids be considered nothing special but just an accident? Many people plan with their intelligence (not instincts) on having kids and many also accomplish those goals.

PZ is clearly advocating atheism while attacking Christianity and other religions by calling them a “cognitive ill” which can be done a way with if only people would have faith in the Mediocrity Principle which has no foundation on what is observed in the real world and attempts to tell us that this is required in science. We are special, we live in a special place, with tight constants that have been designed in such a way that allows us to live our lives in, kids are a blessing to us, not an accident!     

Anti-Realism ‘Theory’ Considered Breakhrough

Earlier this year to explain the origin of the universe, Hawking invokes “M-theory” which is really not a theory at all but rather a collection of different unproven ideas. In science daily, they claim they have the magic to create something out of nothing, naturally…

“The scientists and engineers have developed new equations that show how a high-energy electron beam combined with an intense laser pulse could rip apart a vacuum into its fundamental matter and antimatter components, and set off a cascade of events that generates additional pairs of particles and antiparticles.”

“But in a strong electromagnetic field, this annihilation, which is typically a sink mechanism, can be the source of new particles,” Nees said, “In the course of the annihilation, gamma photons appear, which can produce additional electrons and positrons.” A gamma photon is a high-energy particle of light. A positron is an anti-electron, a mirror-image particle with the same properties as an electron, but an opposite, positive charge.”

This isn’t exactly creating something out of nothing, is it? No, because that is going against natural law. So in turn, they do what Darwinian evolution does, you invent something and go from there without explaining how it got there in the first place. What created a high-energy electron beam to zap into existence, events that supposedly created particles and antiparticles?

Do you really call that science? Should these scientists be removed from their post? In Kentucky back in 2007, astronomer Martin Gaskell found himself as the leading candidate for directing the new observatory at the University of Kentucky. He claimed that evolution and the Bible were reconcilable (which they are not) and also suggested to his students to read intelligent design papers. This like creating something out of nothing became hype. Hiring a ‘creationist’ could be an embarrassment to the University, the establishment and special interest groups suggested. So the process of his removal was on!

Gaskell’s is taking the University to court with an allegation that the university violated the 1964 Civil Rights Act for discrimination against him because of his religion. The university did admit in a legal brief, that concerns over Gaskell’s views on evolution (it wasn’t dogmatic enough) played a role in the decision to chose another candidate.

Gaskell has a doctorate in his field, plus he had published extensively on various subjects such as black holes in space, and developed an observatory at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln atop a campus parking garage — an innovative approach UK (who rejected his hire based on his religious views) eventually would also use.

So there you have it, as long as scientists view evolution or naturalism as a dogma, you can invent anything, even zapping things out of nothing and calling it a major breaththrough, but when you have conducted real observations and nobody had a problem with your work before, but when an important job comes along, you are questioned because of doubts about your view on evolution and then rejected as a result.  This is the movie “Expelled” all over again!