God and Nature Spring 2020
Problems with Materialism |
|
By David Siegrist
Materialism and Theism
Materialism is the leading philosophical alternative to belief in a transcendent supreme being. Materialists often claim to believe only in what they can see and touch. Matter itself has a satisfying heft and solidity to it. However, science has shown that those qualities of matter are more apparent than real.
Unbelievers think modern science undermines religion. They believe that if there were a God, S/he wouldn’t have very much to do—natural principles take care of everything.
However, the laws of physics don’t account for how the world would come about. Physicists say the universe began through a singularity; that is, an event in which the normal rules of physics don’t apply. The laws of physics that science studies were themselves born out of the singularity, along with time and space—they did not exist “before.” But if the big bang singularity was caused by a quantum fluctuation, quantum mechanics would have had to preexist it. Science has thus not overcome the need for a first cause beyond the physical universe.
Materialism and Theism
Materialism is the leading philosophical alternative to belief in a transcendent supreme being. Materialists often claim to believe only in what they can see and touch. Matter itself has a satisfying heft and solidity to it. However, science has shown that those qualities of matter are more apparent than real.
Unbelievers think modern science undermines religion. They believe that if there were a God, S/he wouldn’t have very much to do—natural principles take care of everything.
However, the laws of physics don’t account for how the world would come about. Physicists say the universe began through a singularity; that is, an event in which the normal rules of physics don’t apply. The laws of physics that science studies were themselves born out of the singularity, along with time and space—they did not exist “before.” But if the big bang singularity was caused by a quantum fluctuation, quantum mechanics would have had to preexist it. Science has thus not overcome the need for a first cause beyond the physical universe.
"My contention is that the nature of the universe we observe is more consistent with a deliberately created world than with one that has formed accidentally." |
If materialists are correct, then science should buttress philosophical materialism.
It doesn’t.
Scientific discoveries over the last century have severely undermined materialistic philosophy. Despite its appearance, matter is not a solid substance on which to base a philosophy. It also is a great deal more complex than it appears.
Solidity
Atoms are the smallest unit of regular matter. However, atoms are more than 99% empty space. The electron “cloud” around an atom’s nucleus gives the impression of taking up space since its negative charge repels the negative charges of other atoms’ electrons, keeping them from approaching closer—and giving the appearance of solidity to macroscopic objects.
Electrons surround the atom’s nucleus. The nucleus consists of protons and neutrons. These in turn are made up of something even smaller called quarks. Scientists looking for the truly fundamental have posited that quarks and other subatomic particles may be composed of something even smaller still, “strings” of vibrational energy. These would be too small to detect experimentally. It’s possible that science will never be able to tell us exactly what fundamental “particle” matter is made from, which would seem to lend uncertainty to any philosophy that “believes” in matter.
Heft
A second factor beyond apparent solidity that lends credibility to matter is its heft. Matter has mass. Part of that mass comes from interaction with the Higgs Field. But that provides only about 9% of the weight of protons and neutrons, which compose matter. More of their weight comes from the extreme motion of the quarks that compose protons and neutrons. Quarks, locked in protons and neutrons by the Strong Force, are confined to a very small space. To maintain the Uncertainty Principle (which requires high degree of uncertainty of momentum for particles with low uncertainty of location), they must move around with great momentum. That adds mass! More is added by the rapid exchange of gluons as part of the strong force. What we perceive as mass is actually the product of momentum.
Quantum Mechanics
The quark is the most fundamental unit of matter observed and characterized by modern science. The best theoretical description of matter at small scales is Quantum Mechanics (QM). Fundamental bits of matter, “quanta,” do not behave as objects do in classical physics. In addition to acting as particles, they also behave as waves—for example, when confronted by two slits in a panel, they go through both, as a wave would. In other words, the most fundamental “particles” of matter don’t act the way we would expect matter as we know it to act.
Marcelo Gleiser, a noted theoretical physicist and astronomer, wrote about another quantum particle, the electron.
“Strictly speaking, [electrons] are not ‘things,’ like a soccer ball or a car is a thing, but mental idealizations invented to characterize the results of experiments. We don’t see an electron directly, but its existence is undeniable. What happens, then, is that we identify the results of experiments, which we can see and take note of, analyze and quantify, with idealized objects that we can relate to—the electrons, atoms, and molecules of the quantum world… Somehow, piling up a bunch of quantum particles, we get something that we can relate to—an object in the usual sense of the word. There is, apparently, some kind of dividing line between the quantum world and the classical world—our real, tangible, everyday world. And it’s a line that is as mysterious as it gets in physics” (1, emphasis added).
Quantum Field Theory
Quantum Field Theory (QFT) underlies the modern Standard Model of Physics. It explains three of the four forces, as well as the particles. Quantum fields extend through space, and QFT holds that what we perceive as particles of matter are actually excitations of quantum fields. The fields can’t be seen or touched, but excitations of the fields can be perceived by the senses and measured. Essentially, the excitations are ephemeral manifestations of something more fundamental. Scientists believe that QFT is the best current explanation of the world as we know it. For materialists who claim they only believe in what they can see and measure, QFT means they believe in excitations of quantum fields.
Regular Matter as a Fraction of Total Matter
According to current scientific understanding, there are two kinds of matter in the universe: regular matter and dark matter. Dark matter is called dark because it has never been directly observed—it cannot be seen. However, cosmologists have found that galaxies express the gravitational effects of a great amount of matter that is not otherwise observed. Galaxies would spin out of control if there was not this other mass slowing them down through gravity. By the size of its effects, they calculate that dark matter represents a quarter of the entire mass/energy in the universe, or five times more mass than what we consider normal matter. Dark matter also does not interact with other particles/force carriers and form structures. What we think of as normal matter is actually quite unusual. This is not usually discussed by materialists when they speak of matter.
The Nature of Our World
If the world were the result of chance, scientists might expect it to have certain properties. Various key values in cosmic constants would tend to fall “in the middle” of their possible ranges, and the strength of the few major forces in our world would all be related to each other by fairly simple ratios.
That is not our world. Three of the four forces are related to one another and have somewhat comparable strengths. However, the fourth force, gravity, is different by multiple orders of magnitude. This is called the Hierarchy Problem by physicists. As far as key constants go, they must all be precisely what they are in order for there to be any physical universe at all, let alone one that makes life possible. This is the “fine-tuning” described in A Fortunate Universe (2), among other works. Partly in response to these findings, some physicists have posited that there must be a “multiverse” consisting of an infinite number of universes, which would allow us to get this lucky one by chance.
Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Classical Physics
There is another thing that appears to suggest some underlying artifice to the universe. We would “naturally” expect that the apparent and underlying reality of the universe would be of a piece, consistent. However, we see that the basic quantum mechanical nature of the universe seems to operate in a completely different manner from the classical physics that we observe every day. The classical world as we experience it seems to be "added on" to the quantum world. As such it appears at least a little artificial. Theists might speculate that this discontinuity might be consistent with a supernatural being who wanted to create a physical space, perhaps as a home for embodied souls.
My contention is that the nature of the universe we observe is more consistent with a deliberately created world than with one that has formed accidentally. One factor contributing to that is “the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics,” as Eugene Wigner put it (3). Mathematics seems to be the language of nature, describing its most fundamental physical relationships. But mathematics is not made of matter.
Materialists citing modern science have questioned religious beliefs. They have raised questions that deserve serious consideration. However, as we have seen, modern science itself has undermined the logical basis of materialism. Quantum fields may be easier to understand mathematically than they are accessible to sense experience. Sincere scientific materialists must also ultimately believe in things that are beyond their senses.
Do materialists as well as theists now believe in the ‘beautiful invisible”?
References
1. Marcelo Gleiser. “What’s a ‘Thing”? The line between the quantum and classical worlds is a mysterious one”. Orbiter. Mar 14, 2019.
2. Geraint F. Lewis and Luke A. Barnes. A Fortunate Universe: Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos. Cambridge University Press, 2016,
3. Eugene Wigner. “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences: Richard Courant Lecture in Mathematical Sciences Delivered at New York University, May 11, 1959.” Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 13, 1960.
David Siegrist has his PhD in biodefense from George Mason University. His dissertation focused on statistical anomaly detection evaluation for early warning of disease outbreaks. Dr. Siegrist is an employee of the MITRE Corporation. The author's affiliation with The MITRE Corporation is provided for identification purposes only, and is not intended to convey or imply MITRE's concurrence with, or support for, the positions, opinions, or viewpoints expressed by the author.'©2020 The MITRE Corporation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
It doesn’t.
Scientific discoveries over the last century have severely undermined materialistic philosophy. Despite its appearance, matter is not a solid substance on which to base a philosophy. It also is a great deal more complex than it appears.
Solidity
Atoms are the smallest unit of regular matter. However, atoms are more than 99% empty space. The electron “cloud” around an atom’s nucleus gives the impression of taking up space since its negative charge repels the negative charges of other atoms’ electrons, keeping them from approaching closer—and giving the appearance of solidity to macroscopic objects.
Electrons surround the atom’s nucleus. The nucleus consists of protons and neutrons. These in turn are made up of something even smaller called quarks. Scientists looking for the truly fundamental have posited that quarks and other subatomic particles may be composed of something even smaller still, “strings” of vibrational energy. These would be too small to detect experimentally. It’s possible that science will never be able to tell us exactly what fundamental “particle” matter is made from, which would seem to lend uncertainty to any philosophy that “believes” in matter.
Heft
A second factor beyond apparent solidity that lends credibility to matter is its heft. Matter has mass. Part of that mass comes from interaction with the Higgs Field. But that provides only about 9% of the weight of protons and neutrons, which compose matter. More of their weight comes from the extreme motion of the quarks that compose protons and neutrons. Quarks, locked in protons and neutrons by the Strong Force, are confined to a very small space. To maintain the Uncertainty Principle (which requires high degree of uncertainty of momentum for particles with low uncertainty of location), they must move around with great momentum. That adds mass! More is added by the rapid exchange of gluons as part of the strong force. What we perceive as mass is actually the product of momentum.
Quantum Mechanics
The quark is the most fundamental unit of matter observed and characterized by modern science. The best theoretical description of matter at small scales is Quantum Mechanics (QM). Fundamental bits of matter, “quanta,” do not behave as objects do in classical physics. In addition to acting as particles, they also behave as waves—for example, when confronted by two slits in a panel, they go through both, as a wave would. In other words, the most fundamental “particles” of matter don’t act the way we would expect matter as we know it to act.
Marcelo Gleiser, a noted theoretical physicist and astronomer, wrote about another quantum particle, the electron.
“Strictly speaking, [electrons] are not ‘things,’ like a soccer ball or a car is a thing, but mental idealizations invented to characterize the results of experiments. We don’t see an electron directly, but its existence is undeniable. What happens, then, is that we identify the results of experiments, which we can see and take note of, analyze and quantify, with idealized objects that we can relate to—the electrons, atoms, and molecules of the quantum world… Somehow, piling up a bunch of quantum particles, we get something that we can relate to—an object in the usual sense of the word. There is, apparently, some kind of dividing line between the quantum world and the classical world—our real, tangible, everyday world. And it’s a line that is as mysterious as it gets in physics” (1, emphasis added).
Quantum Field Theory
Quantum Field Theory (QFT) underlies the modern Standard Model of Physics. It explains three of the four forces, as well as the particles. Quantum fields extend through space, and QFT holds that what we perceive as particles of matter are actually excitations of quantum fields. The fields can’t be seen or touched, but excitations of the fields can be perceived by the senses and measured. Essentially, the excitations are ephemeral manifestations of something more fundamental. Scientists believe that QFT is the best current explanation of the world as we know it. For materialists who claim they only believe in what they can see and measure, QFT means they believe in excitations of quantum fields.
Regular Matter as a Fraction of Total Matter
According to current scientific understanding, there are two kinds of matter in the universe: regular matter and dark matter. Dark matter is called dark because it has never been directly observed—it cannot be seen. However, cosmologists have found that galaxies express the gravitational effects of a great amount of matter that is not otherwise observed. Galaxies would spin out of control if there was not this other mass slowing them down through gravity. By the size of its effects, they calculate that dark matter represents a quarter of the entire mass/energy in the universe, or five times more mass than what we consider normal matter. Dark matter also does not interact with other particles/force carriers and form structures. What we think of as normal matter is actually quite unusual. This is not usually discussed by materialists when they speak of matter.
The Nature of Our World
If the world were the result of chance, scientists might expect it to have certain properties. Various key values in cosmic constants would tend to fall “in the middle” of their possible ranges, and the strength of the few major forces in our world would all be related to each other by fairly simple ratios.
That is not our world. Three of the four forces are related to one another and have somewhat comparable strengths. However, the fourth force, gravity, is different by multiple orders of magnitude. This is called the Hierarchy Problem by physicists. As far as key constants go, they must all be precisely what they are in order for there to be any physical universe at all, let alone one that makes life possible. This is the “fine-tuning” described in A Fortunate Universe (2), among other works. Partly in response to these findings, some physicists have posited that there must be a “multiverse” consisting of an infinite number of universes, which would allow us to get this lucky one by chance.
Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Classical Physics
There is another thing that appears to suggest some underlying artifice to the universe. We would “naturally” expect that the apparent and underlying reality of the universe would be of a piece, consistent. However, we see that the basic quantum mechanical nature of the universe seems to operate in a completely different manner from the classical physics that we observe every day. The classical world as we experience it seems to be "added on" to the quantum world. As such it appears at least a little artificial. Theists might speculate that this discontinuity might be consistent with a supernatural being who wanted to create a physical space, perhaps as a home for embodied souls.
My contention is that the nature of the universe we observe is more consistent with a deliberately created world than with one that has formed accidentally. One factor contributing to that is “the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics,” as Eugene Wigner put it (3). Mathematics seems to be the language of nature, describing its most fundamental physical relationships. But mathematics is not made of matter.
Materialists citing modern science have questioned religious beliefs. They have raised questions that deserve serious consideration. However, as we have seen, modern science itself has undermined the logical basis of materialism. Quantum fields may be easier to understand mathematically than they are accessible to sense experience. Sincere scientific materialists must also ultimately believe in things that are beyond their senses.
Do materialists as well as theists now believe in the ‘beautiful invisible”?
References
1. Marcelo Gleiser. “What’s a ‘Thing”? The line between the quantum and classical worlds is a mysterious one”. Orbiter. Mar 14, 2019.
2. Geraint F. Lewis and Luke A. Barnes. A Fortunate Universe: Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos. Cambridge University Press, 2016,
3. Eugene Wigner. “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences: Richard Courant Lecture in Mathematical Sciences Delivered at New York University, May 11, 1959.” Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 13, 1960.
David Siegrist has his PhD in biodefense from George Mason University. His dissertation focused on statistical anomaly detection evaluation for early warning of disease outbreaks. Dr. Siegrist is an employee of the MITRE Corporation. The author's affiliation with The MITRE Corporation is provided for identification purposes only, and is not intended to convey or imply MITRE's concurrence with, or support for, the positions, opinions, or viewpoints expressed by the author.'©2020 The MITRE Corporation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.