Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Rejecting Intelligent Design as Possibly Science
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 46 of 75 (211875)
05-27-2005 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by randman
05-27-2005 3:18 PM


Re: wave function collapse
Unfortuantely it is QM effects rather than simple mechanical effects that the experiment is dealing with. Your question about the photon's "knowledge" applies equally to delayed-choice experiments - the transactional interpretation which has information flowing back in time is one answer. If other interpretatiosn are still held to by the experts - and I beleive that htey are - then they msut also have resolutions.
I would say that "entanglement" automatically exists between the pair of photons produced by a downshifter by the fact that they are produced as a correlated pair. Just as with correlated particles the collapse of one forces the collapse of the other to maintain the correlation.
I'm sure that there's material on quantum easers on the web - I seem to remember some article stating that oen had been made, but I can't rememebr the details.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 3:18 PM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 47 of 75 (211880)
05-27-2005 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by 1.61803
05-27-2005 12:58 PM


Re: wave function collapse
Hey 1.61803, that not wanting not to be pigeon holed makes me think of the Tower of Babel story (things being hidden).
Strange indeed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by 1.61803, posted 05-27-2005 12:58 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 48 of 75 (211887)
05-27-2005 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by PaulK
05-27-2005 3:37 PM


Re: wave function collapse
"Because the signal photons are duplicates of the idler photons. The indeterminacy is solely due to the original photons' path through he beam splitter. When that collapses all the rest follows by necessity."
Not to beat a dead horse, but I really want to get a handle on this, and just want to make sure I follow you here.
Why should the collapse go all the way back to the beam splitter and not just the down converter?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2005 3:37 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2005 4:02 PM randman has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 49 of 75 (211888)
05-27-2005 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by randman
05-27-2005 3:59 PM


Re: wave function collapse
Because the downconverter only has one possibility. It just turns one photon into two - one signal and one idler.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 3:59 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 4:29 PM PaulK has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 50 of 75 (211899)
05-27-2005 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by randman
05-27-2005 10:35 AM


quote:
Actually, there's quite a lot of evidence that Jesus of the Bible existed. The vast majority of serious academics acknowledge that.
Like who?
quote:
It's somewhat humorous to hear people claim there is no evidence when the evidence for Jesus is similar to and sometimes greater than the evidence for other historical figures such as Julius Ceaser.
We have a coin with Julius Caesar's likeness on it, other items with his likeness, as well as written records produced during his lifetime.
We don't have anything even close to that for Jesus.
IIRC, we don't even have any records about him produced by the Romans during the time they were supposed to have persecuted him.
Like who?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 10:35 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 4:35 PM nator has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 51 of 75 (211911)
05-27-2005 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by PaulK
05-27-2005 4:02 PM


Re: wave function collapse
Hmm...it seem thinking along the lines of entanglement being effective over segments of time might be helpful, but getting back to the thread topic:
Let's assume the dominant consciousness-based model is real science, even if some are not sure it is correct. I still want to think about this experiment and the waves moving backwards in time, but I can only learn bit by bit, and may need more time there.
But nevertheless, my point about Intelligent Design having elements being tested within quantum mechanics is still valid. In fact, ID seems to be more based on a quantum mechanics paradigm for physical reality whereas so-called "materialist" theories of evolution are based on an outdated Newtonian paradigm.
There is definite evidence for information, and the dominant model claims consciousness as well, playing an interactive role in matter in a manner that can be instaneous, even, which is outside of the structure of space-time as we conceived of it (limited by the speed of light).
My own thoughts are that part of what makes up our levels of consciousness and being includes this superluminal realm, and is probably responsible for things like intuition, mystical knowledge (not so much a feeling or something but a knowing of something certain without any explanation), and that this is the realm where faith is born, which is not belief without evidence, but begins as belief from spiritual evidence given to the "inner man" and worked out in one's life through testing it, reason, etc,....
If we can develop quantum computers, we may even be able to create consciousness and mind on a level with humanity or greater, but in a mechanized being due the quantum computing being able to access this superluminal realm where action such as entanglement takes place.
It's also interesting that the Bible talks of faith being the way in which God holds things together.
If quantum mechanics is indeed beginning to delve into the spiritual (superluminal?) realm and it's principles, and there is a ton of evidence suggesting that it is since quantum mechanics effects and principles dovetail so well with spiritual traditions, then we may well uncover and duplicate ID, essentially proving it.
But somehow I think there will always be doubters. It seems set up such that there are always at least 2 ways to interpret everything, that makes some sense to the human mind. Faith is a perspective, and at some point, it takes adopting that perspective to even being able to understand and fathom it.
You can tell someone what something looks like, and describe it, but without believing to the point that one take a look at it, well, one might not "see" it.
On quantum physics, I do find the backwards-in-time particle idea very intriguing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2005 4:02 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2005 5:19 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 52 of 75 (211916)
05-27-2005 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by nator
05-27-2005 4:14 PM


Shraf, so the gospels are not historical documents, eh?
I suggest you talk with scholars who study such things for yourself. I am telling you the truth. There is not much debate that Jesus existed. The debate is Who He was, what He did and said.
As far as Ceaser or any world leader, the same debate takes place, but just absent the religious and spiritual angle, for the most part.
Can you believe what the sources state? Are they biased, and what is their motivation?
Would the followers of Jesus be willing to die for a lie, for example, when they could have just said Jesus was a great Rabbi, and kept going on with His teachings?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 05-27-2005 4:14 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Minnemooseus, posted 05-27-2005 5:21 PM randman has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 53 of 75 (211939)
05-27-2005 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by randman
05-27-2005 4:29 PM


Re: wave function collapse
My understanding is that the consciousness-based interpetation (it isn't really a model) is not dominant at all - it is very much a minority view.
And it doesn't seem to have anything much to do with intelligent design either. So far as I am aware the ID position is that an unspecified "intelligent designer" intervened in an unspecified waty to design some aspect of life. I suppose Dembski's dodge speculatiosn about infinite wavelength and zero energy photons somehow transferring information might relate to QM somehow but there doesn't seem to be much of a link.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 4:29 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 5:52 PM PaulK has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 54 of 75 (211943)
05-27-2005 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by randman
05-27-2005 4:35 PM


I've used your message to form a "Proposed New Topic"
The message is badly off-topic here.
Here is the PNT.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 4:35 PM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 55 of 75 (211952)
05-27-2005 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by PaulK
05-27-2005 5:19 PM


Re: wave function collapse
The issue is materialists accuse IDers of not being science because they claim IDers rely on non-materialist concepts and things, but ironically, the materialists rely on an outdated paradigm of physical reality, and thus a false concept of what constitutes material.
As far as Demski, etc,...I don't think that matters.
I would also argue that the anthropomorphic principle men such as John Wheeler discuss, without mentioning ID, nonetheless makes such men IDers more than materialist evolutionists, although more of the guided evolution perspective.
This message has been edited by randman, 05-27-2005 05:53 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by PaulK, posted 05-27-2005 5:19 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by PaulK, posted 05-28-2005 5:25 AM randman has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 75 (211965)
05-27-2005 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by randman
05-27-2005 1:15 AM


Buzsaw, I am with you on that. Imo, the old line between supernatural and natural is not proper for talking of science, meaning if it's real, it's part of reality, whether one thinks of it as natural, spiritual, or whatever, and there are spiritual dimensions. You are absolutely correct about that.
Thanks, Randman. You made my day. It's nice to have support from someone who is apprised on quantum physics in my corner for a change, as I've alluded to this higer dimension a lot for the two plus years that I've been here.
Btw, I edited item 5 in my post which had a major error in it. The following is the corrected statement in which I changed "BB explains...." to "ID explains...." :
5. If God created it all by his knowledge and intelligence, imo, ID explains it all. If BB explains it all, there is no ID God. We can't have it both ways. Thus the debate goes on.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 1:15 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 7:05 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 57 of 75 (211970)
05-27-2005 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Buzsaw
05-27-2005 6:53 PM


The edit makes more sense, and glad to be in your corner.
I do think all of the natural sciences need to take stock of quantum physics. Some basic ideas and findings been around a long time, stood the test of time, and are working their way into applied technology. It's not like string theory which may or may not be very testable.
I am not knocking string theory, just pointing out that QM effects and principles are too strongly supported by experiments and applications to be ignored, and that relying on a Newtonian or classical and linear paradigm of physical reality is incorrect.
I look forward to reading your ideas here.
This message has been edited by randman, 05-27-2005 07:06 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Buzsaw, posted 05-27-2005 6:53 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 05-27-2005 7:50 PM randman has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 75 (211973)
05-27-2005 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by 1.61803
05-27-2005 11:05 AM


Re: Interpreting The Observed.
Call it conciouness or Intelligent design if that is what blows your hair back, but others will simply call it nature. When you come down to the nitty gritty it is just a matter of how you want to look at it. And isnt that what matter is all about?
The problem for IDists is that the secularists have the luxury of calling it science with the priviledge of indoctrinating one view into the minds of our students/children, whereas IDists must debate it as theological faith and keep the debate outside of academia.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by 1.61803, posted 05-27-2005 11:05 AM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 75 (211981)
05-27-2005 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by randman
05-27-2005 7:05 PM


I look forward to reading your ideas here.
I have no degree, so I can likely learn more about reading you than you reading me. I did a great debate with Jar on how well my ID hypothesis stood up to the 3 td scientific laws, and imo, it stood the test well. It's in the archives somewhere and might be of interest for you to read. There was an extensive 300+ message followup thread on that debate. My Buzsaw Hypothes is:
In Jehovah God's Universe; time, energy and boundless space had no beginning and will have no ending. The universe, by and through him, is, has always been and forever will be intelligently designed, changed and managed by his providence.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 7:05 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by PaulK, posted 05-28-2005 5:28 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 60 of 75 (212072)
05-28-2005 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by randman
05-27-2005 5:52 PM


Re: wave function collapse
Sorry, but you are talking complete nonsense.
Fiuirst you insist that the view that you are putting forward is dominant and then you attack the people who supposedly hold it as adhering to an outdated paradigm. That doesn't makle any sense at all.
And Dembski certainly matters as one of the leading figures within ID. Why should your ideas be considered part of ID when there seems to be no support within the ID movement for them ? We might as well label the Raelians ID since their views seem closer to the "official" ID position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by randman, posted 05-27-2005 5:52 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by randman, posted 05-28-2005 3:42 PM PaulK has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024