I have a new book coming out and was hoping that one or more of you would be willing to review the book, or portions thereof. It’s fairly technical: the Hebrew is straightforward but the cosmology and quantum mechanics may require some heavy lifting (tho’ there is no math).
PDF and EPUB links are shown below. I can also provide links in other formats (e.g., MOBI). Just let me know.
How are you approaching the technicalities of cosmology and quantum mechanics? While it’s possible to give a decent pop-sci overview of these subjects without it (A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking comes to mind here), I’d have thought that if you want to do any heavy lifting, you would need to start engaging with the maths at some level. After all, it’s in the maths where all the technicalities and the counterintuitive aspects of these subjects start to show up.
Math is not required. The science is descriptive. For example, quantum entanglement and the two-state vector formalism (TSVF - see below) are described using a dice analogy… Wave collapse and decoherence are described using the pebble-in-the-pond analogy. The Anthropic principle and its corresponding constants are simply defined (e.g., gravitational constant, speed of light, etc.), quantum tunneling is described using a rubber ball rolling “through” a hill. The Block Universe model and its derivatives are described and pictured.
The book extends the Block Universe model to include quantized space, emergent time, and lots of verbiage dealing with the inflationary epochs (e.g., when light appears and why, when and how stars and planets are formed). Abiogenesis is explained using some basic chemistry, especially the requirement for hydrogen bonding between long-chain molecules.
Math appears peripherally in the description of Schrodinger’s equation and the nature of probability distributions. But again, it’s just descriptive. Here’s a typical phrase: “in the quantum world a quantum particle exists as a probability distribution given by a wave equation.” However, probability distributions are fully explained by analogies, not math.
Here’s an example of the content:
Genesis 1:11-12 reveals that processes within the universe lead to variable, not predetermined outcomes. Given this, evolution by divine selection is proposed and explained in terms of how quantum tunneling causes spontaneous mutations. Selection is applied to these mutations by God using TSVF to lead to the desired phenotype, e.g., humans.
I thought of seeking reviewers from Biologos because for those who seek a scientific understanding of creation that aligns with the Genesis creation account (Gen 1:1-2:4a) and incorporates contemporary science will find the book illuminating. OTOH, the book is not another God In The Gaps work. I explicitly explain why science aligns with, but doesn’t validate, divine creation and vice versa.
I once heard it described in Dungeons and Dragons terms: a lord regularly sends servants to the other side of a mountain; mostly they have to struggle to get there and sometimes don’t succeed – but every now and then the servant happens to be a troll, and he just goes through the mountain.
In the World of Warcraft, there existed a hack where a warlock could die on one side of a wall and then resurrect on the other side. Truth be told, that’s a great analogy because quantum tunneling works exactly like that. For example, consider the hydrogen bonds between two DNA nucleic acids. There’s a small chance the wave function of one of hydrogen bond’s proton might collapse and “resurrect” in the other nucleic acid resulting in a mutation called a tautomeric shift. It’s more complex than than of course, but this particular example illustrates one mechanism by which spontaneous mutations occur.
As for length, the book is about 225 pages, but I’m working hard to reduce it to 200. But there’s no need to read the whole thing. I would be grateful for a close reading of any single chapter. So, I could send you a PDF copy of the book and you could pick a chapter of interest and have at it.
That’s manageable! I reviewed a book about the Council of Chalcedon that was twice that long, took three weeks but that was because I was so fascinated with the content that I ended up reading many of the sources cited.
Yours is a strong point and, I must admit, I thought long and hard about including the mathematics. But, I did an informal survey of my fellow Church members and none cared about the math. Of these members, one was a chemical engineer and another was a Harvard-educated astrophysicist (who wrote the forward). Both advised me to leave the math out as unnecessary since the science is secondary to the theology divined from the Hebrew translation.
Nevertheless, If, when reading the book (or parts thereof) if you come across explanations that you believe could use a deeper dive into the math, post a note and I’ll do the math and post it for you to look at. Then, we can discuss. Anyway, I’m not adverse to including more mathematics so, thanks for the input.