The Laws of Physics and the Concept of God

  1. Lemma
  2. ფიზიკის კანონები და ღმერთის იდეა
  3. English
  4. Pataridze, Tamara
  5. Scientific theories and disciplines > Modern physics :QM - Concepts of knowledge and modes of reasoning - Scientific theories and disciplines
  6. 12-06-2017
  7. Humans between the Science and Religion
  8. epistemology - Evolution - Big Bang
  9. Click Here - Click Here
    1. The Associate Professor at Free University of Tbilisi, the Coordinator of the School of Physics, Dr. Z. Osmanov ( was interviewed by Archpriest Andrea Jagmaidze on a “Georgian Chanel”, emission - “Humans between the Science and Religion”.

      The principal questions raised in the dialogue dealt with the border between the Physics and Religion:

      Which attitude should be adopted by Christians in front of the new scientific discoveries? Are the laws of nature some flexible tools in the hands of the Creator managing and supervising the universe? Do the contemporary science needs the concept of Creator? On which basis the physical laws are considered as universals (“the fundamental”) laws?

      Dr. Osmanov argued that Galileo Galilei was a first thinker laying the basis of the scientific methodology, insisting, therefore, on the need for interpretation of natural laws through mathematical theories. It is widely agreed that the scientific theories must satisfy some concrete criteria, for instance, they must be refutable as a matter of principle. Expressed at first as hypotheses, they become the theories only after being successfully tested on the empirical level. Francis Bacon had discussed this methodological approach: he argued that, first, the hypothesis must be proposed to resolve an unexplained problem; secondly, the hypothesis allows making scientific predictions (presumptions); the last step consists in testing theoretical suggestions on the basis of empirical experiences in order to formulate the scientific theory.

      Contrary to what is often argued, the science is not full of contradictions. Indeed, the Mechanics of Newton have been differently reinterpreted by Einstein and by Quantum Mechanics. Despite, none of them are providing refutations of Newton’s theories which are remaining valid till now. They just offer the new interpretations applied to different context.  

      In respect of the question related to the “fundamental” laws, it should be noted that a scientific approach is always based on demonstration. For example, the recently discovered fossil radiation from the initial big bang allows to observe the universe in its initial state (c.a. 100 000 after its apparition). It makes clear that the fundamental natural laws are same from that time and till today. 

      In respect of the border between the religion and science Dr. Osmanov argued that these two are the distinct domains newer overlapping each other. The science occupies its own domain without getting in touch with theology. In result, the borders of each of them are fully preserved.

      We should also point out the existence of some atheist physicists, such as Brian Cox, who considers the refutation of the idea of God as a simple trend, the contemporary prevailing tendency. He does not see any reason in such trend judging this tendency quite unnecessary.

      Another important physicist Karl Heisenberg was likewise focussed on the issue of relation between the science and religion considering these two realities as distinct categories in need of each other. Indeed, the categories of moral are outside of the limits of science, even though we, as a society, clearly need the scientists to be moral.