|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,766 Year: 4,023/9,624 Month: 894/974 Week: 221/286 Day: 28/109 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: I Know That God Does Not Exist | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I read it! What I'd said wasn't intended to be anything more than an attempt to say materialism and naturalism are basically the same words.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
I read it! What I'd said wasn't intended to be anything more than an attempt to say materialism and naturalism are basically the same words. No you did not!!! As is blatantly obvious to all observers! You forking lying ####! Those are not basically the same words. You read nothing! You lying ####! As I stated in such clear terms that even a lying deceptive c##t such as yourself could not fail to comprehend: quote: AdminPhat writes: Stop with these types of verbal reactions or face suspension. Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 99 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Sarah Bellum writes:
Next you'll be claiming that dumb molecules built the nuclear fusion reactor that is our sun and that dumb molecules built the first life-form! I've given examples of how extraordinarily complex results can come from quite simple basic stuff. Do you think those examples are fantasies?Wait! It gets better - dumb molecules produced a human being!! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 99 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
NosyNed writes:
No kidding? Any idea involving God looks foolish to an atheist. God of the gaps has been used to death over the centuries and always ends up looking foolish. God-of-the-gaps is obviously not a scientific theory, but for some odd reason, you access it according to the rules of science. That's a bad argument. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 99 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Sarah Belllum writes:
Perhaps science will one day explain that mysterious voice that saved my life and that vision of the future I had . as well as countless other miracles that have been reported. But I don' think so. Science can only scratch the surface of reality.
Beyond the purview? Who knows? Perhaps some day there will be a scientific explanation for such things as why there are three spatial dimensions, why mass and inertia are so closely linked, why there is an imbalance between matter and anti-matter in the universe . . .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Oooo a mysterious voice and a vision. No, science can't touch anything in that area, so you know their reaction will be simply to impute it to some kind of insanity.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8551 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
BCRPS is a recognized scientific disposition that can explain auditory/visual hallucinations in these cases precisely.
Science is not limited by *any* phenomenon humans can experience. We can science anything. Batshit Crazy Religious Person Syndrome is just another example.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Goku Inactive Member
|
I hesitate to respond as this is well above my pay grade. I do confuse the "observer effect" with the "uncertainty principle" and only have the vaguest grasp of either.
Note below in order to be accurate to quantum theory I have to use very belaboured language. Electrons for example don't have positions or momenta. When we measure the surface of a metal certain types of detection screens will develop marks. In common expositions we say that's "where the atoms are", but fully accurately quantum theory only says those marks are just marks on our screens not actually where atoms are. So I can't say "the position of the electron", only "the result of position measurements". Can you in the layest in laymen's terms tell me how consciousness plays into all of that. What tends to be called the "observer effect" or similar names in popular expositions is a name for the combination of two aspects of quantum theory. One is the "uncertainty principle" and the other is "state reduction". The Uncertainty Principle:The Uncertainty Principle states that there's maximum limit to the ability to predict the results of measurements on quantum systems. It's not possible to be more certain of what will occur than that limit. If you've already hit that limit the Uncertainty Principle means that any attempt to gain further information about one type of measurement will cause a loss of information about another type of measurement. So if you've already hit the limit and you try to do a very accurate position measurement, so that you can narrow the range of future position measurements, you'll have made future momentum measurements more uncertain. Any attempt to get more accurate than the fundamental knowledge limit causes some kind of irremovable disturbance of quantum systems causing a loss of information at least equal to the amount you gained State Reduction:This is the part of QM that causes some elements of consciousness to enter popular discussions. State reduction says that when you perform an experiment and obtain a result you update your probabilities. This isn't very unusual. If somebody has rolled a dice that you haven't seen yet, you give a 1/6 chance to each outcome:
If you then hear that the number rolled was even, you would update this to:
Because of the information you've gained the chance for some results has gone to zero and others have increased to 1/3. So there is an assumption of some kind of "reasoning agent" who changes their expectations because of what they've learned, but it's not invoking some mysterious power of consciousness. It's unlike classical theories which are written as a description of the world and don't assume the presence of an agent. However this agent is present for the same reason it is in gambling theory: parts of the mathematics represent what they've learned. Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given. Edited by Son Goku, : Had to put in 0.0 to stop the 0 values from vanishing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Just for the sake of having some context for your comments, would you tell us if you've ever had a similar kind of experience, a vision or a voice or the ilke?
Thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Goku Inactive Member |
In the meantime, consider this: everything in the universe, the locations of every atom, the history of where every atom was throughout history could be encoded as a string of numbers
It can't be, due to what is known as the Kochen-Specker theorem. Atoms don't have positions or histories of where they were.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
I wasn't thinking of any experimental data on the positions of atoms, I was merely thinking of the similar question, "Is the universe just a simulation?" and removing the simulator, leaving a pure number.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
Perhaps there will always be more to learn.
But that is no excuse for superstition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined:
|
You, yourself, believe a highly complex intelligence can develop without being built by some intelligent agency. That is, you believe that your god exists.
If you believe that, you cannot claim it is impossible for our material universe (a thing far less intricate than your god) to develop without being built by some intelligent agency.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sarah Bellum Member (Idle past 622 days) Posts: 826 Joined: |
Is the holographic theory anything like the hypothesis that our universe is just "a program on someone else’s hard drive"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9197 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
So Dwise1 gets admonished but Dredge continues as always? Your bias is showing Phat. As always.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024