Evolution: Science, Pseudo-Science, or Both?

Ex, I just want to say that was a very impressive post.I've gotten on this thread a little late in the game and will probably sit it out, but that was an awesome piece of argument there.I will add one thought, our concept of what constitutes nature or physical reality is being pushed and altered significantly in the field of quantum physics. It may be that QM observations is resulting in an eclipsing of aspects of whether naturalism alone is valid or not since we may very well be beginning to study what has been considered the spiritual realm and spiritual principles. In other words, if it's real, it's part of reality whether known before as spiritual, supernatural, natural, material, or whatever.This message has been edited by randman, 05-29-2005 01:16 AM

I think we've already arrived there to a degree. In some ways, the findings of quantum physics have already eclipsed all of the a priori arguments against ID, and we may in fact wind up duplicating some direct engineering ID processes of creation.When someone criticizes ID for positing non-material or non-natural means, they have already shown they are still clinging to an outdated classical paradigm of what material and physical reality consist of, imo.

You are missing the point. The principles of QM are remarkably the same as principles taught in spiritual traditions about the true nature of reality.Let's dispense with the labels for "science" because if it is real, it is real, period, whether spiritual, natural, or whatever you want to call it.You say for instance that QM studies the physical, but that's not really correct from a classical concept of physical. QM really is as much redefining what is physical or real, and in very interesting ways.In fact, QM basically states that what we think of as physical is at root something non-physical, just as spiritual traditions have taught all along. QM presents the fundamental existence of particles as information, as patterns which contain or are held together as energy, and which manifest according to probability of the particle appearing according to a design in a certain manner.QM suggests that what material and physical objects first consist of are energy patterns.I could go on and discuss every single major discovery of quantum physics and how it parallels the same ideas presented in spiritual traditions, but just dealing with the fundamental nature of existence is a good one to illustrate the point.To use the term physical or material in a scientific discussion requires one to accept the paradigm presented in QM which substantially alters older classical concepts of what "material" and "physical" really are.

But others do.

I am pretty busy with another thread, but you are incorect here.Take the comment of a "probability function." What does that mean?I suggest you go back and consider that that means. I didn't get this stuff from creationists or IDers, but from physicists. Here is a famous quote that says the exact same thing I have. I apologize for the source. The full quote and speech are much better, but I think even the abbreviated statement is useful here. http://www.ufoteacher.com/portfolio/quotes.htmlYou also said: Let's look at how another giant in the field describes the fundamental existence of things. http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/qphil.htmlHmmm... without "physical form" or "probability pattern", is there a difference here?This message has been edited by randman, 06-05-2005 02:57 AM

Sure, here are 3.The idea physical things exist as a probability pattern, which is by definition information rather than a determined state. The root of what we observe as a physical thing is actually merely an energy pattern with a high probability of repeating itself in a certain manner.One prominent quantum physics researcher made this same observation. Page not found - MetanexusAnother parallel involves the concept of what is possible. Take the concept of quantum tunneling. Classical physics says it's impossible to throw a ball against a wooden wall without the ball either bouncing back, or going straight through the wall.Quantum physics says the opposite, that it is law of physics that there is always the possibility that the wall will go straight through the wall to the other side without damaging the wall.An experiment in classical physics could for example test this with repeated observations, maybe even bouncing a ball against a wall a million times, and thus prove this is impossible.But is it impossible? No, quantum physics is right. It's always possible, but not very likely with such a large object. We do see it with very small objects, such as electrons, and it's an important principle.Of course, if we could discover how to manipulate quantum tunneling, then maybe we could make it happen more than would be mere chance.How does this relate to spiritual traditions? Well, science has bashed miracles as being impossible, but here we see that it is not impossible. In fact, what is miraculous could well just be the timing and manipulation of a completely "natural" process. And most miracles in the Bible, for example, entail some specific action of faith (higher consciousness) interacting with God, and thus the requirement of a specific process would fit the idea that there are other processes that need to be tapped or activated to make this happen.A third area is the consciousness interpretation of QM effects, namely the so-called collapsing of the wave function. From what I can tell among quantum physicists, consciousness-based models are the dominant explanation of what we see. Some here argue otherwise, but regardless, giants in the field like George Mandel, John Wheeler, and many, many others are on record as stating they see interaction or potential interaction with consciousness in some form as fundamental to matter taking a definite form.That's pretty strong evidence for a direct connection between the energy of one's consciousness and thoughts with the energy that makes up the probability pattern that manifests into matter. That in turn offers a scientific explanation for how the principle of "reaping what we sow" indirectly works.This message has been edited by randman, 06-05-2005 03:18 AMThis message has been edited by randman, 06-05-2005 03:23 AM

Can you elaborate?The reason I ask is even when I hear someone explain how QM effects are not the way I see them, it always pretty much comes back to them obeying principles that were presented in another arena as "spiritual."I realize there is a certain concern over calling something spiritual, but spiritual could just mean the informational realm governing over the non-informational and visible realm.Let me ask you something to be more specific.Do you consider the comment I quoted from a prominent current QM researcher to be accurate? Page not found - MetanexusI think it's accurate because indeterminedness but an existing pattern governing that indeterminedness seems exactly like the information pattern is fundamental, and physical existence is a secondary effect.

Mr Ex Nihilo, you seem like a smart and well-informed guy. When you have a minute, would you consider strolling on over to the "convergent evolution" thread and take a stab at it?