[Hal (OP)]

Does nature have a foreknowledge of observer’s motions and actions?  ­ I will present a scientific proof of God based on quantum phenomena.

I will start with one of the puzzles in quantum mechanics. In  the “Which-­Way” and quantum erasure experiments, how does a distant light source ‘know’ whether   or not the polarizers are there, so that the source can ‘aim’ the photons to only one slit or to both slits, so as to form a Gaussian pattern or an interference pattern, respectively ? Mainstream physics has no explanation, so far it has only a description of what is happening.

According to the current paradigm, the process of emission of quantum particles such as photons and              electrons is completely random and casual. In this post, a new theory and scientific paradigm is proposed as follows.

Just as the point on the ground where a ball will land is predetermined by its initial conditions (initial velocity) at the instant the ball is kicked, the point on the detecting screen of a double ­slit experiment where a photon (or electron) will be detected is predetermined at the instant of photon emission, by the initial conditions of the photon. This is based on a new insight about the internal structure and dynamics of elementary particles such as electrons and photons.

Imagine a mechanical version of a double ­slit experiment. Suppose that there is a wall in which two holes are made and, behind this wall,another wall at some appropriate distance serving as the ‘detector screen’. The holes are designed so that the ball can exit at different angles ( ‘diffraction’ ).

A boy/a girl repeatedly kicks a ball towards the holes. Suppose the boy/girl can precisely aim the ball to    any given point on the ‘detector’ wall. This would be a miracle because it requires extreme fine tuning of the initial condition of the ball ( initial velocity). The boy can then repeatedly kick the ball towards either of the holes and can form an interference pattern. The ball always passes only through one or the other slit; it cannot pass through both slits at the same time.

As another example, imagine a super intelligent football player who can precisely aim the ball to any given point on the net, by deflecting it from either of the poles. The football player can form an interference pattern on the net by repeatedly kicking the ball.

The new insight is that the interference patterns have been formed not because the ball ‘interfered’ with    itself after passing through the two holes, but just because the boy/girl are super intelligent and can precisely aim the ball to any given point on the wall. This means that it is not even necessary for the wall   to have two holes. The boy can form an interference pattern by using only one hole. Not only this.The boy can form a Gaussian pattern, an interference pattern, or any arbitrary pattern, regardless of whether only one or both holes are open,regardless of the distance between the holes, regardless of the distance of the ‘detecting’ wall from the holes.

My argument is this: to say that photons emitted at random from a light source can form an interference pattern is the same as saying that the boy can form an interference pattern on the wall by kicking the ball randomly, i.e. without any fine tuning of the initial conditions.Obviously, forming an interference pattern by the ball requires almost infinite fine tuning of the initial conditions of the ball that it takes a miracle to create an interference pattern. The conclusion is that a photon (electron) in the double slit experiment is   emitted with almost infinite fine tuning of its initial conditions to precisely aim it to a specific point on the detecting screen, and form an interference pattern or a Gaussian pattern.

The grand question is then: WHO is fine­ tuning the photons (electrons) during emission ?  The emitting atoms? Or the emitting atoms conspiring with the detector screen ? These have too infinitely small intelligence to be able to do the task of infinitely fine tuning the initial conditions of each photon. Obviously, the fine tuning requires infinite intelligence.

God is fine tuning the initial conditions of every emitted photon (electron ) in the universe.

Imagine a physicist doing a double­ slit experiment using light from a galaxy one million light years away. Now, we know that an interference pattern is formed when both slits are open, and a Gaussian pattern is    formed when only one slit is open. How is this possible with light from a galaxy one million light years     away ? The answer: one million years ago, God foresaw that a physicist, using his free will, would do a double­ slit experiment at some specific point and time in the universe, and God sent photons for his experiment.  God had/has a foreknowledge of whether only one or both slits will be open and aimed the photons accordingly.

Just as the super intelligent boy can direct the ball to any given point on the ‘detector’ wall, so can God.  God can form a Gaussian pattern, an interference pattern or any arbitrary pattern regardless of whether       only one or both slits are open, regardless of the distance between the slits, regardless of the distance of     the detecting screen from the slits. The question is: why then do we always observe an interference pattern when both slits are open, and a Gaussian pattern when only one slit is open? Why then does the interference pattern consistently depend on the distance between the slits and on the distance of the detecting screen from the slits ? The answer is that God just wanted it to be that way and we call these the laws of nature (optics), in this case the diffraction formula. God does not act in arbitrary ways and He always respects the laws He created Himself. But, occasionally, He may ‘violate’ those laws with purpose and we call these miracles. It would be a miracle if an interference pattern was to be formed with only one slit open.

What about quantum entanglement ? Suppose that two entangled photons A and B, one with X­-polarization and the other with Y-­polarization are sent in opposite directions in space. The detectors are placed light years away. Suppose that photon A was detected as X­-polarized. Then, instantly, photon B’s polarization will be fixed to be Y. The puzzle is: how did the photons communicate instantly?

The quantum entanglement puzzle is a problem created by quantum theory itself and, according to the new theory,  there is no  such puzzle. The polarizations of the photons are determined at the instant of emission and there is no need of ‘communication’ between photons light years apart. God decides which photon is to be X-polarized and which is to be Y-polarized at the instant of emission. Therefore , the ‘communication’ happens at the instant of emission of the entangled photons. With the new theory, the quantum entanglement puzzle just disappears.

According to QM, a photon cannot be said with certainty to be at a given point P until it is detected at that point. The wave function of the photon collapses to that point at the instant of detection. The new theory says that the photon was sent to be at point P at some specific time instant τ because God had a foreknowledge that an observer ( for example, an absorbing atom that is in motion) would be at point P at time instant τ. From a foreknowledge of the future positions of the atom, God made the source emit the photon in the right direction, and at the right instant, so that the photon and the atom will meet at point P.

As another illustration, suppose that right now, say at noon, you plan to look in the sky at a specific star one light year away at the next midnight, that is 12 hours from now. You plan to see the star from a point just outside your house. The new theory says that if you will really see the star, that is if you will really implement your plan, then the photons that are destined to meet your eyes have already traveled almost one light year and are already on the way, 12 light hours away right now. But are the photons really there, are they really coming ? This depends on whether you will execute your plan or not, which is impossible to tell with certainty however determined you are to implement your plan. For example, right now you may be far away from your house and you might not get to your house by mid night due to traffic jam,  or something may happen to distract your mind in the meantime and so on. Only God knows whether you will actually implement your plan, and thus whether the photons are really coming. The only way for you to be sure whether the photons are really coming or not is to pray to God so that He will tell you. Suppose that God answers your prayer immediately and tells you that the photons are on the way. Then you can be sure not only that the photons are coming, but also that at least you will not die within the next 12 hours. In this case, therefore, God foresaw one year ago that you would actually implement your plan (see the star). Then He must have sent the photons from one light year away by extreme fine-tuning so that the photons would meet your eyes at that point outside your house, at exactly the next midnight. Just imagine the fine tuning required to aim a photon at a specific atom in your retina from a distance of one light year!

Stated in another way, by choosing at will to look or not to look at a star that is one million light years away, at a specific time of a specific midnight, from a specific point of space, the observer retroactively decides on whether or not a photon was to be emitted one million years ago from that star, and decide on the fine tuning of each photon. The observer is 100% responsible for a photon coming all the way from a galaxy one billion light years away.

The grand question is: why do quantum phenomena point to God in such overwhelming way ? I think this is because God had/has a GRAND  PLAN. He wants humanity to discover Him not only through religion and   faith, but also through nature and science.

My paper is found on Vixra.  Henok Tadesse.

[hamdani yusuf]

In classical physics, what you called God is known as Laplace's Demon.

[Bored chemist]

"Do Quantum Phenomena prove God?"
No.

[alancalverd]

The faint odor of bovine feces gets stronger with every paragraph until it becomes overpoweringly nauseating.

[Hal (OP)]

In classical physics, what you called God is known as Laplace's Demon.

I can't figure out how Laplace's Demon can explain quantum phenomena, such as the Which-Way experiment.
Again imagine a physicist doing a Which-Way experiment using light from a star that is one million light years away. We know that an interference pattern is obtained if a polarizer is placed in front of the second detector. Those photons were emitted one million years ago. It is as if the atoms in the star had a foreknowledge that a Which-Way experiment would be performed one million years later at some point in the universe, that a polarizer would be placed in front of the detector and aimed each photon to form an interference pattern. Laplace's Demon predicts classical behavior and there would be no quantum phenomena as we know them, such as the Which-Way. 

[Bored chemist]

The faint odor of bovine feces gets stronger with every paragraph until it becomes overpoweringly nauseating.

I admire your stamina and determination- if not your wisdom- in actually reading it.

[hamdani yusuf]

In classical physics, what you called God is known as Laplace's Demon.

I can't figure out how Laplace's Demon can explain quantum phenomena, such as the Which-Way experiment.
Again imagine a physicist doing a Which-Way experiment using light from a star that is one million light years away. We know that an interference pattern is obtained if a polarizer is placed in front of the second detector. Those photons were emitted one million years ago. It is as if the atoms in the star had a foreknowledge that a Which-Way experiment would be performed one million years later at some point in the universe, that a polarizer would be placed in front of the detector and aimed each photon to form an interference pattern. Laplace's Demon predicts classical behavior and there would be no quantum phenomena as we know them, such as the Which-Way. 

Laplace demon knows everything from infinitely distance past to infinitely distance future. Our failures to make simple predictions are more likely means that we have made at least one false assumption.

[syhprum]

Any post that spells god as God I automatically skip

[hamdani yusuf]

The only way for you to be sure whether the photons are really coming or not is to pray to God so that He will tell you.

How can you be sure that god will answer, and that god won't mislead you?

[Bored chemist]

Any post that spells god as God I automatically skip

What about Neptune, Pluto, Odin etc?
It's a grammatical rule, not a theological one. Whichever one you mean, He or She gets a capital letter.

[charles1948]

Any post that spells god as God I automatically skip

What about Neptune, Pluto, Odin etc?
It's a grammatical rule, not a theological one. Whichever one you mean, He or She gets a capital letter.

 

 To be pedantic:
The capitalisation of particular nouns is not a grammatical rule, but an orthographic one.

Orthography has varied over the ages. For example, in Newton's time it was normal to capitalise all English nouns. This practice has died out in modern English.  But in the German language, all nouns still get capital letters. Which slows the speed of German typists, as they have to make more frequent use of the Caps Shift key .Whereas as in the closely related Dutch language, common nouns aren't capitalised, so the Dutch type faster.

The French of course are a law unto themselves, and often don't capitalise nouns which everyone else considers essential. It would be superfluous to cite examples, as all francophones on here will be familiar with them.

I would get out more, but can't seem to shift.

[Hal (OP)]

The only way for you to be sure whether the photons are really coming or not is to pray to God so that He will tell you.

How can you be sure that god will answer, and that god won't mislead you?

If God answers and tells me that the photons are coming ( or not coming), and if I actually see (or not see) the photons as He told me, I prove that God does not and will not mislead me. If a physicist is righteous enough, his prayer will be answered and I think he can prove this theory.

Instead consider the the opposite: what if you tried to 'mislead' God. Suppose that a physicist asked God about the photons and was told that they are coming. Now imagine that the physicist is not honest and wanted to prove God 'wrong' by deciding not to look at the star. Then, since God, by definition, CANNOT lie the physicist is destined to look at the star despite his decision, in a completely unexpected way. But God may not answer in the first place because He can read the physicist's wicked thoughts.

[Hal (OP)]

Any post that spells god as God I automatically skip

My theory is that quantum phenomena, particularly the Which-Way experiment, point to an intelligent being. For me that is God. You can interpret it the way you like, such as an alien. I think we can still discuss the scientific aspect of the new theory without the theological implications. Actually it is a new scientific paradigm.

[Hal (OP)]

In classical physics, what you called God is known as Laplace's Demon.

I can't figure out how Laplace's Demon can explain quantum phenomena, such as the Which-Way experiment.
Again imagine a physicist doing a Which-Way experiment using light from a star that is one million light years away. We know that an interference pattern is obtained if a polarizer is placed in front of the second detector. Those photons were emitted one million years ago. It is as if the atoms in the star had a foreknowledge that a Which-Way experiment would be performed one million years later at some point in the universe, that a polarizer would be placed in front of the detector and aimed each photon to form an interference pattern. Laplace's Demon predicts classical behavior and there would be no quantum phenomena as we know them, such as the Which-Way. 

Laplace demon knows everything from infinitely distance past to infinitely distance future. Our failures to make simple predictions are more likely means that we have made at least one false assumption.

How do you explain the fact that every time ( thousand times) you do a Which-Way experiment with a polarizer placed in front of the detector, you always get an interference pattern? If you think this is also because it was predetermined, then your theory will be unfalsifiable. It also implies an effect without a cause. I must admit that my theory also may be thought as unfalsifiable, but it is more explanatory and striking. The idea that an intelligent being is watching an (quantum) experimental setup and aims each photon accordingly is striking. 

 

[Bored chemist]

If a physicist is righteous enough,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

[Hal (OP)]

" For God speaks in one way and in another, yet no one notices. "

[Bored chemist]

" For God speaks in one way and in another, yet no one notices. "

Pretty useless God then.
Needs a better comms package.

This is a science page; either bring evidence or don't bring anything.

[Hal (OP)]

" For God speaks in one way and in another, yet no one notices. "

Pretty useless God then.
Needs a better comms package.

This is a science page; either bring evidence or don't bring anything.

Ok, I will not post quotes from the Bible.
 
The Which-Way experiment is an overwhelming direct evidence. Also quantum entanglement.

Even classical physics points to God, although in a less obvious way. For example, what exactly are (electric, gravitational ) fields ? Who or what instantaneously calculates the force to be applied between the charges ? The charges themselves? the space between them ?  Physics is only a description of the physical universe, not an explanation.

 

[Bored chemist]

  Physics is only a description of the physical universe, not an explanation.
 

Unless you explain God then, in the same way,
Physics God is only a description of the physical universe, not an explanation.

[Bored chemist]

Who or what instantaneously calculates the force to be applied between the charges ?

Why do you suppose the calculation is done?