9 Responses to Bio

  1. Regarding Mark 16:9-20 -- I have done some research on this and I would be glad to send a copy to you, as a sort of couter-point to the textual critics who have argued that it is not part of the original text. My research, published as a Kindle ebook, "Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20," is for sale at Amazon, but if you would like a free digital copy, formatted as a Word document, I would be glad to send one on request.

    Yours in Christ,

    James Snapp, Jr.
    Minister, Curtisville Christian Church

  2. Aron Wall says:

    Dear James Snapp Jr.

    I would indeed be interested in seeing your book; you can send the Word file to the email address which can be found by clicking through the "Website" link on the top bar.

    I suppose you must be aware that there exists a manuscript of the Gospel of Mark in which the ending is attributed to a certain "Ariston" who seems to have been a disciple of Jesus, though not one of the 12. My current opinion--though this might of course change after reading your book--is that the long ending probably wasn't written by Mark but nevertheless probably does contain accurate information about Jesus' post-Resurrection sayings and deeds. Of course, when arguing with nonbelievers one has to argue based on what can be proven to their satisfaction, and so I avoided relying on the long ending for that reason. But that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be factually wrong.

  3. Thanks for commenting on my blog! I'm sending my physics and spacing-loving husband over here to check out your website as I'm sure he'll find it fascinating.

  4. Victoria Dassen says:

    Hi Aron
    I found your web site from a link that was posted over at biologos.org.
    As a Christian physicist myself, I will look forward to reading your posts, and commenting from time to time.

    Yours in Christ,

  5. Aron Wall says:

    Welcome to my blog, Victoria. Glad you're here.

  6. Tomislav Ostojich says:

    James Snapp, Jr. is mistaken.


  7. Mason Green says:


    My name is Mason Green and I've been interested in physics for a very long time. About 80% of my knowledge is self-taught, and I've read quite a few papers in my spare time.

    I have read about Shan Gao's . His view is that dark energy results from the quantum fluctuations of spacetime bounded by the cosmic event horizon. It nicely predicts the observed density of dark energy.

    What I find most interesting about this theory is its paradoxical nature: dark energy drives the expansion of the universe which sets the area of the event horizon, but the area of the event horizon also determines the density of dark energy. There's a kind of duality here.

    I have my own hypothesis as well: dark energy might also be related to objective wavefunction collapse in some way. Gravitationally separated superpositions might decohere not because they're unstable on their own (as in the Penrose interpretation) but rather because they generate and interact with the quantum fluctuations of spacetime (i.e. dark energy, according to Gao).

    Perhaps these three things (the cosmological event horizon, dark energy, and objective wavefunction collapse) are all related to one another in a kind of Trinitarian way. Instead of a clear chain of causality, any one of them could equivalently be viewed as the cause or effect of the other two.

    This modified Penrose interpretation easily meshes with one of Penrose's other theories: . If human consciousness occurs due to the brain's interaction with dark energy, that might imply that dark energy (I. e., spacetime itself and its fluctuations) is conscious too, or is the source of all consciousness.

    As a Christian, I find this idea would have a lot of theological implications if true. Hopefully I expressed it in the clearest way possible.

  8. Jakub Supeł says:

    Dear Aron,

    God willing, this October I will start my PhD at DAMTP. I look forward to meeting you there! Could you please contact me by email? I was unable to find your email address...

    [Email removed from comment to prevent its author from being spammed. I can see the email you put into the comment form, so there is no need to include it in the comment as well--AW]

  9. Greetings Aron, found your post through a Christian page that's discussing the origin of the universe.
    Seeing the address of your blog immediately made me somehow "uncomfortable" for unclear reasons, till I realized wall.org refers to "that" Lary Wall, which is one of the most smartest computer programmer ever exist.

    :) :D

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

My comment policy, including help with leaving LaTeX equations. Place these between double dollar signs, for example: $$\hbar = 1.05 \times 10^{-34} \text{J s}$$. Avoid using > or < since these may be misinterpreted as html tags.
If your comment fails to appear do NOT submit it again.  Instead, email me so I can rescue it from the spam filter.  You can find my email by clicking on "webpage".