Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,911 Year: 4,168/9,624 Month: 1,039/974 Week: 366/286 Day: 9/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Help me understand Intelligent Design (part 2)
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 164 of 173 (272053)
12-23-2005 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Nuggin
12-23-2005 1:39 PM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
Excellent. I suggest you set up a series of boxes and check them regularly. As soon as a giraffe appears in one, you'll be ready to publish. Can you demonstrate this in reality? Can you create an experiment which tests this? Or is this just an existential theory?
Yes. It's been done successfully for over 80 years. The classical double-slit experiments demonstrate this, as well as the variations of it called delayed-choice experiments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Nuggin, posted 12-23-2005 1:39 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Nuggin, posted 12-23-2005 6:17 PM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 170 of 173 (272452)
12-24-2005 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by cavediver
12-24-2005 5:16 AM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
cacediver, or not. I think one can understand the 2-slit experiment enough to understand some of the different interpretations without being a physicist. Sure, that doesn't mean one is qualified to determine scientifically which argument is right in interpretating quantum phenonomena, but thus far, from the things you write, I'd say a great many quantum physicists working in the field apparently don't understand their field, but you do.
You could be right...or not. Thus far, I'd have to say you don't appear to be correct as you don't engage the points that much except to say you think they are wrong.
I know you consider Wheeler a lightweight compared to yourself, but something he says, that we see things appear from an undefined state to a definite state does seem to match up well with the experimental data. Now, maybe you have a different mathematical argument I cannot understand, or maybe you are just too biased to give these ideas a fair hearing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by cavediver, posted 12-24-2005 5:16 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by cavediver, posted 12-24-2005 2:48 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 172 of 173 (272537)
12-24-2005 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by cavediver
12-24-2005 2:48 PM


Re: ID is the Missing Link
cavediver, your problem is you have a mental block, imo, and are not hearing what I am saying. Imo, an ID mechanism is fully naturalistic. God Himself exists as part of nature or the material world, if all forms of energy that can exist here are defined as material.
So when I see QM as ID, I am not asserting anything but the exact same claims Wheeler does. The only difference is I see the process as best described, labelled or whatever as Intelligent Design due to the fact QM demonstrates certain qualities, many not disputed, such as design being fundamental. The design exists at all states, whether positional or superpositional. The form is a by-product of the design, the information/energy set.
I don't think any QM physicist disagrees with that basic evidentiary claim, although they may disagree with applying it to ID.
You seem to think the minute someone mentions God, they are talking about something magical, but my God is not a God of the gaps, but a God of the process. The processes in life are all created and instruments of God, even microevolution...everything in fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by cavediver, posted 12-24-2005 2:48 PM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by arachnophilia, posted 12-24-2005 5:56 PM randman has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024