User blogs

Part IV. Founders of Modern Science Who Believe in GOD (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following twenty-one (21) Scientists (17th - 21st Century): Sir Issac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Rene DesCartes, Blaise Pascal, Sir Michael Faraday, James C Maxwell, Lord Kelvin (Sir William Thomson), Sir Robert Boyle, Sir William Harvey, John Ray, Gottfried W. Leibniz, Charles Darwin, Ernst Haeckel, Thomas H. Huxley, Sir Joseph J. Thomson, Louis Pasteur, Werner von Braun, and Francis Collins. Founders of Modern Science include the following Nobel Scientists covered in Part I in this issue: Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schroedinger, Charles Townes, Arthur Schawlow, Richard Smalley, John Eccles, Alexis Carrel, and Joseph Murry. This article also contains a table showing scientific disciplines established by Bible-believing scientists. It furher includes a table showing notable inventions, discoveries and developments by Bible-believng scientists.

Part V. Great Philosophers Who Believe in GOD (by Tihomir Dimitrov)

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following ten (10) Great Philosophers (17th - 21st Century): Immanuel Kant, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Voltaire, David Hume, Benedict de Spinoza, Giordano Bruno, George Berkeley, John S. Mill, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and Richard Swinburne. Nobel Philosophers who believe in GOD include the following Nobel Laureates covered in Part II and Part III: Jean-Paul Sartre, Rudolf Eucken, Albert Schweitzer, and Thomas S. Eliot.

Part VI. Other Religious Nobelists (by Tihomir Dimitrov)

This article lists other religious Nobel Scientists, Nobel Writers and Nobel Peace Laureates.

Part VII. Nobelists, Philosophers and Scientists on Jesus (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from seventeen (17) Nobelists, philosophers and scientists on Jesus.

Part VIII. Recommended Books and Links (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article constains recommended books and links.

Bibliography To Part I through Part VIII (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article constains bibliography to Part I through Part VIII.

This is an introduction to Part I through Part VIII to follow which covers 50 Nobel laureates and other great scientists and philosophers who believe in GOD plus useful books and links.

Part I. 50 Nobel Laureates Who Believe in GOD: Nobel Scientists (1) (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following fourteen (14) Nobel scienticists: Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Erwin Schroedinger, Werner Heisenberg, Robert A. Millikan, Charles H. Townes, Arthur Schawlow, William D. Phillips, William H. Bragg, Guglielmo Marconi, Arthur H. Compton, Arno Penzias, Sir Nevill Mott, and Isidor I. Rabi.

Part I. 50 Nobel Laureates Who Believe in GOD: Nobel Scientists (2) (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following thirteen (13) Nobel scienticists: Abdus Salam, Antony Hewish, Joseph H. Taylor, Jr., Alexis Carrel, John Eccles, Joseph Murray, Ernst Chain, George Wald, Ronald Ross, Derek Barton, Christian Anfinsen, Walter Kohn, and Richard Smalley.

Part II. 50 Nobel Laureates Who Believe in GOD: Nobel Writers (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following eleven (11) Nobel writers: Thomas S. Eliot, Joseph R. Kipling, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Francois Mauriac, Hermann Hesse, Sir Winston Churchill, Jean-Paul Sartre, Sigrid Undset, Sir Rabindranath Tagore, Rudolf Eucken, and Isaac B. Singer.

Part III. 50 Nobel Laureates Who Believe in GOD: Nobel Peace Laureates (by Tihomir Dimitrov):

This article covers well-documented quotations from the following twelve (12) Nobel Peace Laureates: Albert Schweitzer, James E. Carter, Jr., Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., Thomas W. Wilson, Frederik de Klerk, Nelson Mandela, Kim Dae-jung, Dag Hammarskjoeld, Martin L. King, Jr.,Adolfo P. Esquivel, Desmond Tutu, and John Raleigh Mott.

The following is some consciousness-related "Information for World Transformation" (not exhaustive nor in particular order):

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin & the Noosphere
Franklin Merrell-Wolff and Transcendental Philosophy
John C. Lilly and Simulations of God
Brian David Josephson and Mind–Matter Unification Project
Rupert Sheldrake and Morphogenesis
Edgar Mitchell and Noetic Sciences
Dean Radin and Conscious Universe
Michael Persinger and GOD Experiments
Robert G. Jahn, Brenda Dunne and PEAR
Roger D. Nelson and Global Consciousness Project
William A. Tiller and Psychoenergetics
William Bengston and Energy Healing
Max Planck and Consciousness
Walter B. Russell and the Universal One
David J. Bohm and the Implicate Order
John S. Bell and the Bell's Theorem
Allain Aspect and the EPR Experiment

On the 11th year of 9/11 Attack & the approaching Dec. 21, 2012, let all of us unite & work together under GOD to start building a New World so that the victims of 9/11 would not have died in vain! Let us awaken to the Reality that there is 1 Creator Over 1 Creation Who is prompting us to build a New World of 1 God 1 World, 1 World 1 People & 1 World 1 Dream because we are 1 & ready to transcend!

Read the Full Expression Here.

Nobel Laureate Antony Hewish: GOD Is a Rational Creator (compiled by Tihomir Dimitrov)

1. To the question, “What do you think about the existence of God?” Prof. Hewish replied:

“I believe in God. It makes no sense to me to assume that the Universe and our existence is just a cosmic accident, that life emerged due to random physical processes in an environment which simply happened to have the right properties.

As a Christian I begin to comprehend what life is all about through belief in a Creator, some of whose nature was revealed by a man born about 2000 years ago.” (Hewish 2002a).

2. To the inquiry, “What do you think should be the relationship between science and religion? Why do you think so?” Prof. Hewish gave the following answer:

“I think both science and religion are necessary to understand our relation to the Universe. In principle, Science tells us how everything works, although there are many unsolved problems and I guess there always will be. But science raises questions that it can never answer. Why did the big bang eventually lead to conscious beings who question the purpose of life and the existence of the Universe? This is where religion is necessary.” (Hewish 2002a).

3. To the question, “What is your opinion on the nature of God? Do you think that God is a rational Creator (Designer)?” Prof. Hewish gave the following answer:

“God certainly seems to be a rational Creator. That the entire terrestrial world is made from electrons, protons and neutrons and that a vacuum is filled with virtual particles demands incredible rationality.” (Hewish 2002b).

4. And to the inquiry, “What should be the place of religion in our modern materialistic world?” Antony Hewish replied:

“Religion has a most important role in pointing out that there is more to life than selfish materialism.” (Hewish 2002b).

5. “God is a concept, which I need to cohere my total experience. Christianity comes nearest to the formal expression of this for me. You’ve got to have something other than just scientific laws. More science is not going to answer all the questions that we ask.” (Hewish, as cited in Candid Science IV: Conversations with Famous Physicists by Istvan Hargittai, London, Imperial College Press, 2004, 637).

* Jocelyn Bell Burnell was an important part of the team of astronomers who discovered pulsars in 1967, for which Antony Hewish and Martin Ryle were awarded the 1974 Nobel Prize in Physics. Jocelyn Bell Burnell is a deeply religious Quaker and Professor of Physics.

Scientific Genesis in the Making: Higgs Discovery & the Shadow of God Particle (by Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu)

Scientific God Journal 3(6) celebrates the discovery of Higgs Boson (or Higgs-like particle). Congratulations to CERN, Fermilab, people at LHC, people at Tevatron and all the theoretical and experimental physicists who made this discovery possible over the last 50 years! In the meantime, let us all contemplate what this discovery means and what it has to do with scientific studies of God and be cautious about the new discovery since there are still unsettling issues. After introductions of articles in this issue, we shall focus our attentions on some of the phobic, allergic or even hostile but important issues related to the new discovery. The topics covered includes: Antidote to 20th Century phobia; “higgson” as the name of the new particle; quantum gravity & table top experiments; higgson as the shadow of universal consciousness; and the 2012 phenomena & Dawn of a Brave New World. This Editorial ends with a “mathematical” poem entitled “The Real ‘God Particle’ Please Stand Up.".

Read the Full Article Here.

Live Higgs Report on July 4, 2012 & Congratulations - It's a Boson (by Philip E. Gibbs)

This is a live Higgs report from the webcast of CERN Announcement on July 4, 2012 plus viXra unofficial Higgs combinations and my analysis after the announcement. As expected, CERN has happily announced the arrival of a new Boson. The facts are that the boson discovered with a mass of about 125 GeV or 126 GeV interacts with a wide range of particles in exactly the way the Higgs boson should. Its decay modes to Z, W, b and tau have just the right ratios and its production has also been tested in different ways confirming indirectly that its coupling to the top quark is also about right. Its spin could be 0 or 2 but 0 is much more likely. All these features point to the standard model Higgs boson. The only fly in the ointment is its decay rate to two photons. This is nearly twice as large as expected. The significance of the discrepancy with the standard model is about 2.5 sigma.

Read the Full Article Here.

Vita Principalis: Road to Single Mathematical Particle (by Dainis Zeps)

Three weeks after announcement of discovery of Higgs particle at LHC we discuss this discovery from the point of view presented previously in (1) in the form of predictions, and from what we had argued before in (2-5). We argue that behind Standard Model there might be another level of discernible reality which we call reference of life (4). We show how we can connect it with the vision in the general sense and vita principalis and how it could be connected with what we discover as mathematics (3). We argue that mathematics is a form of creatio ex nihilo but only in its weak form where the proper agent is the vision or vita principalis.

Read the Full Article Here.

How Consciousness Creates Reality (by Claus Janew)

In essence, Steven E. Kaufman’s work shows how self-relational Consciousness produces and interacts with reality. But to appreciate the important work done by Kaufman, one needs to read the whole 325 pages of this Focus Issue of JCER covering his work. Our goals with this Focus Issue are: (1) bring broader awareness of Kaufman’s work by scholars and all genuine truth seekers; and (2) promote scholarly discussions of the same through commentaries and responses to commentaries in the future issues of JCER. In so doing, we hope that all of us may benefit in our endeavor to reach higher Consciousness within ourselves and build a genuine Science of Consciousness.

Read the Full Article Here.

Relating the Relational-Matrix Model of Reality to Space-Time and Physical Reality (by Steven E. Kaufman)

This article is a continuation of Kaufman’s work previously published in SGJ Vol. 2, No. 3 (2011), in which work the relational-matrix model was developed and described as a dynamic structure composed of existence involved in a defined set of relations with itself. The purpose of this article is to relate the relational-matrix model, as a dynamic structure, to what we apprehend as space-time by demonstrating that certain fundamental behaviors and aspects of physical reality can be explained in the context of the defined set of relations of existence to itself that were previously described as composing the fundamental structure of reality conceptualized as the relational-matrix. Specifically, within the context of the relational-matrix model, we will account for the following aspects of physical reality: (1) the relationship between space and time, including the basis of temporal relativity, as well as the precise nature of time as a function of the dynamic aspect of the spatial structure; (2) the basis of the speed-of-light constant, including why the frequency and wavelength of electromagnetic radiation are inversely related as a function of that constant; (3) the basis of Planck’s constant, including why the energy associated with electromagnetic radiation exists in discrete amounts, or quanta; (4) the nature of gravitation, including why matter and gravitation are always associated and why gravitation is universally attractive; (5) the equivalence of the gravitational and inertial forces; (6) the relationship between electromagnetic radiation and gravitation; and (7) the nature of energy. Using the relational-matrix model to explain these aspects of the behavior of physical reality will establish a conceptual basis for understanding how physical reality extends from the structure of space. By the end of this article, we will also have established a conceptual basis for understanding why nothing can truly be separated from anything else—i.e., why nothing can be said to exist independent of all other things..

Read the Full Article Here.

The Quantum Illusion-like Nature of ‘Reality’ & the Buddhist Doctrine of ‘Two Levels of Reality’ Part I: Deconstructing Reality (by Graham P. Smetham)

The Buddhist metaphysical conceptual analysis of the nature of reality has always been founded upon the basis of a rigorous employment of scrupulously coherent conceptual analysis, which is in turn based upon an empirical observation of experience in a manner appropriate to the time, although one major difference between the empirical attitude of Western science and philosophy during the age of science and that of Buddhism was the Buddhist development of rigorous techniques of meditation in order to explore the structure and nature of consciousness. In this paper I will use the Buddhist philosopher Dharmakirti‘s imaginative deconstruction of reality, in the context of quantum theory, to try to answer the question which seems to be posed by quantum theory: Is 'Reality' really real? In our search for the ultimate nature of reality we have to leave behind the 'seeming' appearances of the everyday world, however persuasive the appearance may be, and break through to a more 'ultimate truth' concerning the nature of reality. We shall discover that Dharmakirti's philosophical analysis, alongside other Buddhist insights, which lead to the 'ultimate' realm of 'empty' Mindnature, prefigures modern quantum discoveries.

Read the Full Article Here.

Nobel Laureate Joseph E. Murray: There Is No Conflict between Science & Religion (compiled by Tihomir Dimitrov)

1. In an interview for the National Catholic Register (December 1-7, 1996), Prof. Joseph Murray asserts that there is no conflict between religion and science:

“Is the Church inimical to science? Growing up as a Catholic and a scientist – I don’t see it. One truth is revealed truth, the other is scientific truth. If you really believe that creation is good, there can be no harm in studying science. The more we learn about creation – the way it emerged – it just adds to the glory of God. Personally, I’ve never seen a conflict.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

2. “We’re just working with the tools God gave us. There’s no reason that science and religion have to operate in an adversarial relationship. Both come from the same source, the only source of truth – the Creator.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

3. In his article “Murray: Surgeon with soul” (Harvard University Gazette, 4 October 2001), John Lenger wrote:

“To Murray, a doctor’s responsibility is to treat each patient as not just a set of symptoms, but as someone with a spirit that can be helped through medical procedures. The title of his autobiography, Surgery of the Soul (Boston Medical Library, 2001), stems from Murray’s spiritually based approach to medicine. Though he has in the past hesitated to talk publicly about his faith, for fear of being lumped in with the televangelist crowd, Murray is deeply religious. ‘Work is a prayer,’ he said, ‘and I start off every morning dedicating it to our Creator. Every day is a prayer – I feel that, and I feel that very strongly.’ ” (Murray, as cited in Lenger 2001).

4. “I think the important thing to realize is how little we know about anything – how flowers unfold, how butterflies migrate. We have to avoid the arrogance of persons on either side of the science-religion divide who feel that they have all the answers. We have to try to use our intellect with humility.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

5. “There are a lot of moral problems that my Jesuit training has helped me with. In my own conscience, I’ve never had a conflict between my religious upbringing and my science.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

Nobel Laureate Arno Penzias on GOD, Creation & Big Bang (compiled by Tihomir Dimitrov)

1. “If there are a bunch of fruit trees, one can say that whoever created these fruit trees wanted some apples. In other words, by looking at the order in the world, we can infer purpose and from purpose we begin to get some knowledge of the Creator, the Planner of all this. This is, then, how I look at God. I look at God through the works of God’s hands and from those works imply intentions. From these intentions, I receive an impression of the Almighty.” (Penzias, as cited in ‘The God I Believe in’, Joshua O. Haberman - editor, New York, Maxwell Macmillan International, 1994, 184).

2. In an interview published in the anthology 'The God I Believe in' (1994), Penzias talks about his religious views and the Mount Sinai, where God gave the Ten Commandments to the entire Jewish nation – 3 million people:

“Q: You referred before to Sinai. This brings up one of the most complex problems – revelation. Do you think that God revealed Himself at Sinai?

PENZIAS: Or, maybe God always reveals Himself? Again I think as Psalm 19, ‘the heavens proclaim the glory of God,’ that is, God reveals Himself in all there is. All reality, to a greater or lesser extent, reveals the purpose of God. There is some connection to the purpose and order of the world in all aspects of human experience.

Q: When you read or hear the Torah, is it to you the word of Moses or the word of God?

PENZIAS: Well, to me it is the word of Moses and the word of God through Moses.

Q: Then why did Sinai happen?

PENZIAS: I don’t have a good answer, except that Sinai was important for Judaism and important for the future of the world. It was a place where God chose the Jews, but the Jews also chose God. It was a historical moment in which a spiritual connection was made.

Q: Jewish speculations about the hereafter involve the Messiah. Do you believe in such a redeemer or final redemption from all evil here on earth?

PENZIAS: Yes. I believe the world has a purpose, hopefully a good purpose. So I think that a Messiah is necessary to help achieve a purposeful world.” (Penzias, as cited in ‘The God I Believe in’, Joshua O. Haberman - editor, New York, Maxwell Macmillan International, 1994, 188-190).

3. In connection with the Big Bang theory and the issue of the origin of our highly ordered universe, on March 12, 1978, Dr. Penzias stated to the New York Times:

“The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted, had I had nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.” (Penzias, as cited in Bergman 1994, 183; see also Brian 1995, 163).

Arno Penzias’ research into astrophysics has caused him to see “evidence of a plan of divine creation” (Penzias, as cited in Bergman 1994, 183).

4. In an interview published in the scientific anthology The Voice of Genius (1995), Dr. Penzias says:

“Penzias: The Bible talks of purposeful creation. What we have, however, is an amazing amount of order; and when we see order, in our experience it normally reflects purpose.

Brian: And this order is reflected in the Bible?

Penzias: Well, if we read the Bible as a whole we would expect order in the world. Purpose would imply order, and what we actually find is order.

Brian: So we can assume there might be purpose?

Penzias: Exactly. …This world is most consistent with purposeful creation.” (Penzias, as cited in Brian 1995, 163-165).

5. In Gordy Slack’s article “When Science and Religion Collide or Why Einstein Wasn’t an Atheist: Scientists Talk about Why They Believe in God” (1997), Dr. Penzias stated: “If God created the universe, he would have done it elegantly. The absence of any imprint of intervention upon creation is what we would expect from a truly all-powerful Creator. You don’t need somebody diddling around like Frank Morgan in The Wizard of Oz to keep the universe going. Instead, what you have is half a page of mathematics that describes everything. In some sense, the power of the creation lies in its underlying simplicity.” (Penzias, as cited in Slack 1997).

6. Concerning the Big Bang theory and the observational evidence that the universe was created, Penzias pointed out:

“How could the everyday person take sides in this dispute between giants? One held that the universe was created out of nothing, while the other proclaimed the evident eternity of matter. The ‘dogma’ of creation was thwarted by the ‘fact’ of the eternal nature of matter.

Well, today’s dogma holds that matter is eternal. The dogma comes from the intuitive belief of people (including the majority of physicists) who don’t want to accept the observational evidence that the universe was created – despite the fact that the creation of the universe is supported by all the observable data astronomy has produced so far. As a result, the people who reject the data can arguably be described as having a ‘religious’ belief that matter must be eternal. These people regard themselves as objective scientists.” (Penzias, 1983, 3; see also Bergman 1994, 183).

As we mentioned earlier, Scientific GOD is about the scientific aspects of GOD both theoretically and experimentally. Today we discuss the experimental aspects of Scientific GOD. Some mystical experiences and laboratory/drug-induced altered states of consciousness such as Persinger's "God Helmet" experiments should also fall within the experimental aspects of Scientific GOD.

It is often said that GOD has three Attributes: Omnipotence, Omniscience and Omnipresence. The latter two Attributes require GOD to be everywhere at the same time within Its Creation. The question we ask then is: Is there any experimental evidence/proof of a process or force which allow GOD to be everywhere at the same time? The answer is "yes" but independent experimental verification is needed.

Such process or force is no other than the universal force of gravitation.

The idea of instantaneous gravity is nothing new. Newton’s law of universal gravitation implies instantaneous “action at a distance” which he felt deeply uncomfortable with, but Newton was not able to find a cause of gravity [1]. Later Mach suggested that "[t]he investigator must feel the need of...knowledge of the immediate connections, say, of the masses of the universe…[t]here will hover before him as an ideal insight into the principles of the whole matter, from which accelerated and inertial motions will result in the same way" [2]. Ontologically, Mach’s above suggestion is a form of holism and implies that gravity is relational and instantaneous. It was Einstein who fulfilled Mach’s “relational” suggestion of gravity by inventing general relativity [3]. However, such fulfillment may be at the sacrifice of Mach’s “immediate connections” by assuming that the speed of gravity is the speed of light. However, gravity wave of linearized Einstein's field equation has not been detected.

On the other hand, it has been theorized in [4] that gravity originates from the primordial spin processes in non-spatial and non-temporal prespacetime, is the manifestation of quantum entanglement, and implies genuine instantaneous interconnectedness of all matters in the universe. Thus, the principle of non-local action is advocated. To certain degree, this view is a reductionist expression of Newton’s instantaneous universal gravity and Mach’s Principle with important consequences.

Importantly, it has been found experimentally that the weight of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir can change against the gravity of its local environment when the latter was remotely manipulated. If independently verified, these experiments demonstrated Newton's instantaneous gravity and Mach's instantaneous connection conjecture and the relationship between gravity and quantum entanglement.

In turn, instantanoeus gravity as quantum entanglement provides scientific evidence in support of GOD's Attributes of Omnipresence and Omniscience.

We end this piece with a poem by Francis Thompson: "All things by immortal power, Near and Far, Hiddenly, To each other linked are, That thou canst not stir a flower Without troubling of a star."

References

1. Newton I. The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated by I.Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman. Preceded by A Guide to Newton's Principia, by I.Bernard Cohen. University of California Press ISBN 0-520-08816-6, 1999.

2. Mach E. The Science of Mechanics; a Critical and Historical Account of its Development. LaSalle, IL: Open Court Pub. Co. LCCN 60010179, 1960.

3. Einstein A. Die Feldgleichungun der Gravitation. Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin Nov. 1915; 844-847.

4. http://neuroquantology.com/index.php/journal/article/view/126

5. http://neuroquantology.com/index.php/journal/article/view/108 and http://ptep-online.com/index_files/2007/PP-09-03.PDF

Written by Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu