randman writes:
Here is where you make the error. What constitutes "physical"? You have already conceded that what is physical can be thought of as energy patterns. The fact that these patterns obey laws is quite obvious and uncontested. The suggestion they obey "physical laws" is misleading since they do not seem to obey laws derived from classical physics and the observation of the classical concepts of physicality. They obey laws within the realm they exist. You can call them physical laws, and if you are going to do that, I can just relabel all things called "spiritual" per science as "physical", and the same result is acheived, or vice versa. In other words, they seem to obey strict "spiritual laws" as presented in various spiritual traditions as oppossed to classical concepts of physicality, but per modern science, these "spiritual laws" are physical, once physical is defined as including all of reality, including the energy patters that all things consist of.
I'm just looking for information. I understand you to say that all of what is physical can be thought of as energy patterns. What do you mean by "thought of as"? Do particles have mass as a basic constituent, or is their mass just a result of the particular nature of their energy?
I have been told on another thread that string theory has been largely discounted and is no longer considered at all probable. Are there theories, other than the string theory, that suggest that all particles are made up of energy with a variety of properties?
I have read Schroeder who suggests that in turn the basis of the energy is information. His theories seem similar to the view that you seem to be espousing. How mainstream are his ideas?
I realize this sounds like it is going off topic but it seems to me that if ID is present in physics then ID also exits in the biological. If ID became normative thinking for physicists then I would think that the biologists would have to take that into account in their view of evolution. (I am not saying that I believe that by accepting ID that evolution would be abandoned, but it would mean that a different approach would have to be taken for the impetus for evolution.)
™ Version 4.2
