Brief reflections on quantum theology: The Many Worlds Interpretation and Abrahamic religions
Previous discussions of quantum theology have mostly focused on mystical woo and new-agey rubbish. A handful of writers have wondered about God’s status as a universal observer. I have a different set of puzzles in mind.
Wikipedia summarizes the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) as follows:
The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that asserts that the universal wavefunction is objectively real, and that there is no wave function collapse. This implies that all possible outcomes of quantum measurements are physically realized in some "world" or universe.
The MWI is quite popular among physicists who study quantum mechanics, and many people have argued that the only thing that holds us back from acceptance of the MWI is philosophical prejudice. Some people try to slide out of the seemingly radical ontological implications of the MWI while accepting it, but in this article we’ll be assuming a fairly robust conception of MWI, in which there really are branching worlds.
Perhaps the first question is what would the MWI do to predictive prophecy and God’s foreknowledge: answer, not very much. Presumably God knows what will happen down each worldline, and prophecy comes true on each of them. I suppose one could argue that the truth of prophecy only requires that the prophecy is instantiated on one worldline, since that does, after all, mean it has happened.
The deeper problem is the afterlife.
In most forms of Islam and Christianity, it is agreed that some people, at some point post-mortem, spend an eternity in hell, and others spend an eternity in heaven, as a result of their beliefs and/or actions in this life. Judaism is much harder to pin down on this question, but it doesn’t seem like a wholly unreasonable interpretation- the Talmud does refer to some individuals being in hell, apparently forever.
I see many possibilities:
A person is saved if even one of their worldlines is saved. This could effectively result in universalism, a welcome result for many, and might even give resources for explaining away verses that appear to state at least some will be eternally damned- through their actions, viz- they would be, but they are redeemed through their better worldlines. All shall be well, and all shall be well and all manner of thing shall be well - Julian of Norwich. Alternatively, perhaps some people are doomed on all their worldlines.
Perhaps an individual who is saved on one world line will never act or fail to believe in such a way as to make them ‘unsaved’ on their other worldlines. This would be compatible with at least some versions of Calvinist predestination.
Alternatively, judgement could be an aggregate between worldlines. This seems to me to be against the tenor of these religions, but who am I as an agnostic to say? It is written Allahu a'alam - Allah knows best. An aggregate judged on its best exemplar would collapse into option one. Given the mercy of God, judging on the basis of the best exemplar seems reasonable- it is written that he said of Sodom "For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it."- how many worldlines would it take for him save a person?
Perhaps there is a canonical worldline, and the individual is judged on the basis of that. Other worldlines are either admitted to the afterlife on that basis, or perhaps even just consigned to oblivion. An odd doctrine to my mind.
Perhaps the most obvious interpretation is that every worldline is judged as a separate person and goes to heaven or hell as is fitting. This lead to very full heavens and hell (so many, I had not thought death had undone so many) but otherwise seems reasonable.
As always when it comes to Soteriology, it’s worth considering that if God is real, God’s ways are stranger and more marvelous than we can know.
I am not quite sure what to think about this little reflection. First of all, belief in heaven is a utopian autocratic where God dictates totally . The difference in this autocracy , supposedly, is that anyone who does not wish to spend eternity under such autocratic conditions has already been religiously cleaned from existence and banished to eternal punishment.
But you are right in that there is an essential contradiction in our commonly understood (as proposed by quantumists). I think Einstein's belief that quantum physics cannot actually be contrary to macro, observable physics. After all, what we observe consists of quantum particles and therefore exist as they do because of the quantum particles. So actually they cannot "predict" varying types of universes. unless one first makes the assumption that somehow the observed universe is not dependent upon its own particles. That is like saying the body is not dependent on its organs to be a body. Some might like that, to say we are all brain and/or soul. However, no matter the observation that the observable body is different than the parts within is does not at all mean there are infinitely different possible compositions for the human body. Yes the observable are infinitely different in multiple ways, but without nearly all of the internal parts being located where they are and working together, the observable would show not an infinite observable variety (as in sizes, shapes, lifespans, etc of stars). A thing might not be of itself, but neither is a thing separate from itself.
Of course that does not rule out infinitely possible other types of universes, but it completely rules out that our universe could be different than it is, and it does not take too much contemplation to realize what we are able to observe is the result of quantum interactions that create what is observable.