NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS AND GOD

          The book, 50 NOBEL LAUREATES AND OTHER GREAT SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE IN GOD, comprises religious quotations from the most influential scientists and writers in the world.
           In the course of my 11-year research I have studied hundreds of books, articles and letters - primarily those found in the archives of the National Library of Bulgaria (Sofia), Biblioteca Comunale di Milano and the Austrian National Library (Vienna). I have also corresponded with many contemporary Nobel Prize-winning scientists who have shared their personal beliefs about God.
          I believe that this book will inspire believers, will give hope to seekers and that it will challenge those who think that religion and contemporary science are in insurmountable conflict.

Tihomir Dimitrov,
tih777dim@yahoo.com

1. ¨ “I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.” (Einstein, as cited in Clark 1973, 33).

2. ¨ “The most beautiful and most profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior Reasoning Power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible Universe, forms my idea of God.” (Einstein, as cited in Libby Anfinsen 1995).

Clark, Ronald W. 1985. The Life of Ernst Chain: Penicillin and Beyond. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

Anfinsen, Libby. 1995. Memorial speech for Christian Anfinsen at Memorial Garden Dedication, Weizmann Institute. November 16. (The Christian Anfinsen Papers. Profiles in Science.) U.S. National Library of Medicine.

PS. A letter written by Einstein to Gutkind was made public recently which appears to indicate that Einstein became an atheist toward the end of his life. The author of this web site contends that such conclusion is not necessarily justified.

1. ¨ In his famous lecture Religion and Science (May 1937) Planck wrote: “Both religion and science need for their activities the belief in God, and moreover God stands for the former in the beginning, and for the latter at the end of the whole thinking. For the former, God represents the basis, for the latter - the crown of any reasoning concerning the world-view.” (Max Planck, Religion und Naturwissenschaft, Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth Verlag, 1958, 27).

2. ¨ “Religion represents a bond of man to God. It consists in reverent awe before a supernatural Might [Macht], to which human life is subordinated and which has in its power our welfare and misery. To remain in permanent contact with this Might and keep it all the time inclined to oneself, is the unending effort and the highest goal of the believing man. Because only in such a way can one feel himself safe before expected and unexpected dangers, which threaten one in his life, and can take part in the highest happiness - inner psychical peace - which can be attained only by means of strong bond to God and unconditional trust to His omnipotence and willingness to help.” (Max Planck 1958, 9).

Planck, Max. 1958. Religion und Naturwissenschaft. Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth Verlag. XIV Auflage. (Trans. Adam Roman).

1. ¨ Heisenberg wrote: “The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.” [“Der erste Trunk aus dem Becher der Naturwissenschaft macht atheistisch, aber auf dem Grund des Bechers wartet Gott.”] (Heisenberg, as cited in Hildebrand 1988, 10).

2. ¨ In his autobiographical article in the journal Truth, Henry Margenau (Professor Emeritus of Physics and Natural Philosophy at Yale University) pointed out: “I have said nothing about the years between 1936 and 1950. There were, however, a few experiences I cannot forget. One was my first meeting with Heisenberg, who came to America soon after the end of the Second World War. …Our conversation was intimate and he impressed me by his deep religious conviction. He was a true Christian in every sense of that word.” (Margenau 1985, Vol. 1).

Hildebrand, Ulrich. 1988. “Das Universum - Hinweis auf Gott?”, in Ethos (die Zeitschrift für die ganze Familie), No. 10, Oktober. Berneck, Schweiz: Schwengeler Verlag AG. Reprinted by permission of the publisher, Schwengeler Verlag AG.

Margenau, Henry. 1985. “Why I Am a Christian”, in Truth (An International, Inter-disciplinary Journal of Christian Thought), Vol. 1. Truth Inc., in cooperation with the Institute for Research in Christianity and Contemporary Thought, the International Christian Graduate University, Dallas Baptist University and the International Institute for Mankind. USA.

1. ¨ In his famous book Nature and the Greeks (Cambridge University Press, 1954) Prof. Schrödinger writes:

“I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives a lot of factual information, puts all our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.” (Schrödinger 1954, 93).

2. ¨ Schrödinger maintains that the human technical inventions have caused a deterioration in Nature: “The grave error in a technically directed cultural drive is that it sees its highest goal in the possibility of achieving an alteration of Nature. It hopes to set itself in the place of God, so that it may force upon the divine will some petty conventions of its dust-born mind.” (Schrödinger, as cited in Moore 1990, 349).

3. ¨ In the presentation of a scientific problem, the other player is the good Lord. He has not only set the problem but also has devised the rules of the game - but they are not completely known, half of them are left for you to discover or to deduce. …The uncertainty is how many of the rules God himself has permanently ordained, and how many apparently are caused by your own mental inertia, while the solution generally becomes possible only through freedom from its limitations. This is perhaps the most exciting thing in the game.” (Schrödinger, as cited in Moore 1990, 348).

Moore, Walter John. 1990. Schrödinger: Life and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1. ¨ In an interview, entitled “A Scientist’s God” (Collier’s; October 24, 1925) Millikan stated:

“It pains me as much as it did Kelvin ‘to hear crudely atheistic views expressed by men who have never known the deeper side of existence.’ Let me, then, henceforth use the word God to describe that which is behind the mystery of existence and that which gives meaning to it. I think you will not misunderstand me, then, when I say that I have never known a thinking man who did not believe in God.” (Millikan 1925).

“To me it is unthinkable that a real atheist could be a scientist.” (Millikan, as cited in Grounds 1945, 22).

Millikan, Robert A. 1925. “A Scientist’s God,” in Collier’s, The National Weekly. October 24. Collier’s Publishing Company.

1. ¨ On May 24, 2002, Charles Townes wrote a letter to the compiler T. Dimitrov. To the inquiry, “What do you think about the existence of God?” Prof. Townes gave the following answer: “I strongly believe in the existence of God, based on intuition, observations, logic, and also scientific knowledge.” (Townes 2002a).

Townes, Charles H. 2002a. A letter to the compiler T. Dimitrov. May 24. Reprinted by permission of Charles H. Townes.

1. ¨ Arthur Schawlow described the relationship between religion and science in the following way:

“Religion is founded on faith. It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious. For me that means Protestant Christianity, to which I was introduced as a child and which has withstood the tests of a lifetime."

2. ¨ “I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” (Schawlow, as cited in Margenau and Varghese, 1997, 107; and in Clausen 1995, 10).

Margenau, Henry, and Roy A. Varghese, eds. 1997. Cosmos, Bios, Theos: Scientists Reflect on Science, God, and the Origins of the Universe, Life, and Homo sapiens. 4th ed. Chicago and La Salle, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Company.

1. ¨ In his lecture Ordinary Faith, Ordinary Science, delivered at the conference “Science and the Spiritual Quest” (20 April 2002, Paris), Dr. William Phillips said: “Many scientists are also people with quite conventional religious faith. I, a physicist, am one example. I believe in God as both creator and friend. That is, I believe that God is personal and interacts with us.” (Phillips 2002a).

2. ¨ In his letter to the compiler T. Dimitrov (19 May 2002) William Phillips replied to several questions. To the inquiry, “What do you think about the existence of God?” Dr. Phillips gave the following answer:

“I believe in God. In fact, I believe in a personal God who acts in and interacts with the creation. I believe that the observations about the orderliness of the physical universe, and the apparently exceptional fine-tuning of the conditions of the universe for the development of life suggest that an intelligent Creator is responsible. …I believe in God because of a personal faith, a faith that is consistent with what I know about science.” (Phillips 2002b).

Phillips, William D. 2002a. Ordinary Faith, Ordinary Science. А public lecture at the conference “Science and the Spiritual Quest II” (April 20; IUP). UNESCO, Salle 1, Paris. Reprinted by permission of William D. Phillips.

Phillips, William D. 2002b. A letter to the compiler T. Dimitrov. May 19. Reprinted by permission of William D. Phillips.

1. ¨ Prof. Bragg wrote: “Christ’s rule and example showed God as our Father and us as His children, a society in which love governs all. Then if we seek a rule of conduct we should think of what we should like children to be like and what we should wish them to do. We like them to be hardworking, eager, cheerful, sympathetic. We like them to enjoy themselves thoroughly. We must be sad and in pain sometimes, but let us be happy as much and whenever we can, and whilst we are well and happy let us help all who are not. The more we strive to enjoy ourselves the more happiness we shall be able to communicate to others. For we trust that this life is a preparation: not a final probation.” (Bragg, as cited in Caroe 1979, 164).

2. ¨ “What should be the principles of a nation? …Christ stated them in the form of two Commandments: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart’, and ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.’ ” (Bragg, as cited in Caroe 1979, 111).

Caroe, Gwendolen M. 1979. William Henry Bragg (1862 - 1942): Man and Scientist. Cambridge University Press.

1. ¨ "Guglielmo Marconi wrote: “The more I work with the powers of Nature, the more I feel God’s benevolence to man; the closer I am to the great truth that everything is dependent on the Eternal Creator and Sustainer [Creatore e Reggitore Eterno]; the more I feel that the so-called ‘science’ I am occupied with is nothing but an expression of the Supreme Will, which aims at bringing people closer to each other in order to help them better understand and improve themselves.” (Marconi, as cited in Maria Cristina Marconi 1995, 244).

2. ¨ In his letter to his wife Maria Cristina (Savoy Hotel, London, 17 March 1927) Marconi wrote:

“I know how much you love and cherish the beautiful Nature - the expression of God’s Will - where one can find the ideal eternal values: the Truth, the Beauty and the Good (and you possess the three of them). The harmonious unity of causes and laws forms the Truth; the harmonious unity of lines, colors, sounds, and ideas forms the Beauty; while the harmony of emotions and the will forms the Good, which in being the ultimate expression of the Eternal and Supreme Creator brings man to completion and drives us to seek absolute perfection.” (Marconi, as cited in Maria Cristina Marconi 1995, 260).

Marconi, Maria Cristina. 1995. Mio Marito Guglielmo. R.C.S. Libri e Grandi Opere S.p.A. Milano: Rizzoli. (Trans. Raina Castoldi.

“From earliest childhood I have learned to see in Jesus the supreme example of one who loves his neighbors and expresses that love in actions that count, who knows that people can find their souls by losing themselves in something of great value, who will die rather than deny the truth in favor of the popular view held by his most respected contemporaries. That Jesus’ spirit lives so vitally in men today makes me hope that by following in his footsteps in my small way I also may live forever.” (Compton, as cited in Johnston 1967, 372).

3. ¨ Commenting on the first verse of the Bible in Chicago Daily News (12 April 1936), Arthur Compton stated his religious views: “For myself, faith begins with the realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man. It is not difficult for me to have this faith, for it is incontrovertible that where there is a plan there is intelligence. An orderly, unfolding universe testifies to the truth of the most majestic statement ever uttered - ‘In the beginning God.’ [Genesis 1, 1].” (Compton 1936).

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Johnston, Marjorie, ed. 1967. The Cosmos of Arthur Holly Compton. Introduction by Vannevar Bush. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

Compton, Arthur H. 1936. Quoted in Chicago Daily News (Magazine Section, Issue of April 12). Chicago, USA.

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

“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).

Bergman, Jerry. 1994. “Arno A. Penzias: Astrophysicist, Nobel Laureate,” in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 46.3: 183-187, (9/1994). The Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation.

1. ¨ In Reflections on Life, Prof. Carrel expressed his attitude towards Christianity thus:

“We are loved by an immaterial and all-powerful Being. This Being is accessible to our prayers. We must love Him above all creatures. And we ourselves must also love one another.

4. ¨ “Christianity offers men the very highest of moralities. …It presents to them a God who can be adored because He is within our reach and Whom we ought to love.” (Carrel 1952, Chap. 9, Part 4). “I want to be like smoke in the wind at God’s disposal.” (Carrel, as cited in Newton 1989).

Newton, James D. 1989. Uncommon Friends: Life with Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Harvey Firestone, Alexis Carrel, and Charles Lindbergh. Harvest Books.

1. ¨ In his article “Modern Biology and the Turn to Belief in God” that he wrote for the book, The Intellectuals Speak Out About God: A Handbook for the Christian Student in a Secular Society (1984), John Eccles came to the following conclusion:

“We come to exist through a divine act. That divine guidance is a theme throughout our life; at our death the brain goes, but that divine guidance and love continues. Each of us is a unique, conscious being, a divine creation. It is the religious view. It is the only view consistent with all the evidence.” (Eccles 1984a, 50).

2. ¨ In an interview published in the scientific anthology, The Voice of Genius (1995), Prof. Eccles stated: “There is a Divine Providence over and above the materialistic happenings of biological evolution.” (Eccles, as cited in Brian 1995, 371).

Eccles, John C. 1984a. “Modern Biology and the Turn to Belief in God,” in The Intellectuals Speak Out about God: A Handbook for the Christian Student in a Secular Society, ed. Roy A. Varghese. (Preface by the former United States President Ronald Reagan). Chicago, IL: Regnery Gateway.

Brian, Denis, ed. 1995. The Voice of Genius. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing.

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).

Meyer, Gabriel. 1996. “Pontifical Science Academy Banks on Stellar Cast.” National Catholic Register (a weekly Catholic newspaper, founded in 1927). December 1-7. Circle Media, Inc., North Haven, CT.

1. ¨ Concerning the Darwinian theory of evolution Professor Ernst Chain (who is a theistic evolutionist) states:

“I would rather believe in fairies than in such wild speculation. …I have said for years that speculations about the origin of life lead to no useful purpose as even the simplest living system is far too complex to be understood in terms of the extremely primitive chemistry scientists have used in their attempts to explain the unexplainable that happened billions of years ago. God cannot be explained away by such naïve thoughts.” (Chain, as cited in Ronald W. Clark, The Life of Ernst Chain: Penicillin and Beyond, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1985, pp. 147-148).

2. ¨ In his public lecture “Social Responsibility and the Scientist in Modern Western Society” (University of London, February 1970) Sir Ernst Chain declared:

“As far as my own actions are concerned, I am trying to be guided by the laws, ethics and traditions of Judaism as formulated in the Old Testament, which are, of course, also the basis of Christianity. I am convinced, and have been for many years, that it is impossible to construct a sort of absolute and generally applicable code of ethical behaviour on the basis of scientific knowledge alone, if only for the reason that our knowledge about the basic problems of life is far too fragmentary and limited, and will always remain so.

Clark, Ronald W. 1985. The Life of Ernst Chain: Penicillin and Beyond. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

Chain, E. “Social Responsibility and the Scientist in Modern Western Society,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, Spring 1971, Vol. 14, No. 3, p. 366).

1. ¨ In 1954 Prof. George Wald (who was still an atheist at that time) wrote in Scientific American:

2. ¨ “The reasonable view was to believe in spontaneous generation; the only alternative, to believe in a single, primary act of supernatural creation. There is no third position. …Most modern biologists, having reviewed with satisfaction the downfall of the spontaneous generation hypothesis, yet unwilling to accept the alternative belief in special creation, are left with nothing.” (Wald 1954, “The Origin of Life,” Scientific American, 191 [2]: 45-46).

3. ¨ Nevertheless, George Wald underwent an astonishing change of mind during the early 1980s, and he came very close to religious mentality.

In 1984 Prof. Wald wrote: “In my life as scientist I have come upon two major problems which, though rooted in science, though they would occur in this form only to a scientist, project beyond science, and are I think ultimately insoluble as science. That is hardly to be wondered at, since one involves consciousness and the other, cosmology.

1) The consciousness problem was hardly avoidable by one who has spent most of his life studying mechanisms of vision. We have learned a lot, we hope to learn much more; but none of it touches or even points, however tentatively, in the direction of what it means to see. Our observations in human eyes and nervous systems and in those of frogs are basically much alike. I know that I see; but does a frog see? It reacts to light; so do cameras, garage doors, any number of photoelectric devices. But does it see? Is it aware that it is reacting? There is nothing I can do as a scientist to answer that question, no way that I can identify either the presence or absence of consciousness. I believe consciousness to be a permanent condition that involves all sensation and perception. Consciousness seems to me to be wholly impervious to science.

2) The second problem involves the special properties of our universe. Life seems increasingly to be part of the order of nature. We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds life?

It has occurred to me lately - I must confess with some shock at first to my scientific sensibilities - that both questions might be brought into some degree of congruence. This is with the assumption that Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.”

Wald, George. 1954. “The Origin of Life,” Scientific American, 191 [2]: 44-53, August.

George Wald, 1984, “Life and Mind in the Universe”, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry: Quantum Biology Symposium 11, 1984: 1-15.

1. ¨ Prof. Barton wrote: “God is Truth. There is no incompatibility between science and religion. Both are seeking the same truth. Science shows that God exists.” (Barton, as cited in Margenau and Varghese 1997, 144).

2. ¨ “The observations and experiments of science are so wonderful that the truth that they establish can surely be accepted as another manifestation of God. God shows himself by allowing man to establish truth.” (Barton, as cited in Margenau and Varghese 1997, 145).

1. ¨ To the question, “Many prominent scientists - including Darwin, Einstein, and Planck - have considered the concept of God very seriously. What are your thoughts on the concept of God and on the existence of God?” Christian Anfinsen replied:

“I think only an idiot can be an atheist. We must admit that there exists an incomprehensible power or force with limitless foresight and knowledge that started the whole universe going in the first place.” (Anfinsen, as cited in Margenau and Varghese, Cosmos, Bios, Theos, 1997, 139).

1. ¨ In the interview, entitled “Dr. Walter Kohn: Science, Religion, and the Human Experience” (July 26, 2001), Dr. Kohn stated:

I would say I see myself as religious simultaneously in two ways. One is that I have found that religion, specifically the Jewish religion, has very much enriched my own life and is something that I have conveyed to my children and feel their lives also have been enriched by.

Secondly, I am very much of a scientist, and so I naturally have thought about religion also through the eyes of a scientist. When I do that, I see religion not denominationally, but in a more, let us say, deistic sense. I have been influenced in my thinking by the writings of Einstein who has made remarks to the effect that when he contemplated the world he sensed an underlying Force much greater than any human force. I feel very much the same. There is a sense of awe, a sense of reverence, and a sense of great mystery.” (Kohn 2001a).

2. ¨ On May 23, 2002, Professor Kohn wrote a letter to the compiler T. Dimitrov. To the question, “What do you think should be the relationship between science and religion?” Walter Kohn replied: “Mutual respect. They are complementary important parts of the human experience.” (Kohn 2002).

And to the inquiry, “What do you think about the existence of God?” Walter Kohn gave the following answer: “There are essential parts of the human experience about which science intrinsically has nothing to say. I associate them with an entity which I call God.” (Kohn 2002).

Kohn, Walter. 2001a. “Dr. Walter Kohn: Science, Religion, and the Human Experience.” An interview in The Santa Barbara Independent. (July 26, 2001). Dr. Kohn was interviewed by John F. Luca. Santa Barbara, CA.

COPERNICUS / BRAHE EINSTEIN / FARADAY GALILEO / KEPLER NEWTON / PASTEUR / NOBELISTS / OTHER SCIENTISTS