Author Topic: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit  (Read 7383 times)

Online Drew_2017 (OP)

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #945 on: Today at 04:13:40 PM »
Hakurei Reimu,

Quote
Yes, this is the excuse you use to cover up the fact that you have not demonstrated any reason to belive that a very necessary part of your conception of this creation you speak of is not in evidence. You ignore the fact that any change to the state of the univere (including from going from non-existent to existent) requires some sort of time to even state, let alone construct and effect, because you think that by very virtue of the fact that you think your god is omnipotent gives you leave to construct impossible scenarios. Sorry, chum, but even hardcore apologists shy away from stating that god can do the logically impossible. Change without time is logically impossible. Therefore, without time, change cannot happen no matter how powerful you think your god is, and without change and time, there can be no creation.

Sorry Hakurei Reimu, regardless of how all knowing you portend to be reality even within our universe and space time acts as it does without any regard to how you feel or think it should. If we had this discussion 150 years ago you would declare that the passage of time is the same everywhere and movement in space has nothing to do with the passage of time. You would say that's logical and its impossible for reality to act differently. You wouldn't say that today because we know it doesn't act according to our definition of logic. We know now time is relative to a host of things such as gravity and speed of travel. If we were to travel at or close to the speed of light time would slow down drastically for us compared to those standing still but the perception of time for both parties would seem the same no matter how illogical that might seem. The reason we still revere Einstein is because he was willing to throw traditional physics (your kind of logic) under the bus and think outside the box...way outside.

At the quantum level things are even more murkier. I assume you've heard of the double slit experiment? I'm pretty sure you conducted the experiement in your basement.

The idea behind the double-slit experiment is that even if the photons are sent through the slits one at a time, there's still a wave present to produce the interference pattern. The wave is a wave of probability, because the experiment is set up so that the scientists don't know which of the two slits any individual photon will pass through.

But if they try to find out by setting up detectors in front of each slit to determine which slit the photon really goes through, the interference pattern doesn't show up at all. This is true even if they try setting up the detectors behind the slits. No matter what the scientists do, if they try anything to observe the photons, the interference pattern fails to emerge.

It gets even weirder than that.

A group of scientists tried a variation on the double slit experiment, called the delayed choice experiment. The scientists placed a special crystal at each slit. The crystal splits any incoming photons into a pair of identical photons. One photon from this pair should go on to create the standard interference pattern, while the other travels to a detector. Perhaps with this setup, physicists might successfully find a way to observe the logic-defying behavior of photons.

But it still doesn't work. And here's the really weird part: It doesn't work regardless of when that detection happens. Even if the second photon is detected after the first photon hits the screen, it still ruins the interference pattern. This means that observing a photon can change events that have already happened. (Is this defiance of logic causing smoke to come out your ears?)

Scientists are still unsure how exactly this whole thing works. It's one of the greatest mysteries of quantum mechanics. Perhaps someday someone will finally be able to solve it.


Haven't you already solved this problem along with proving how life got started? I assume you use a pseudonym because we'd all know how famous you are and be asking you for autographs or money if we knew.

Quantum entanglement-

I assume you've already solved this puzzle by employing your keen logic but to the rest of us mere mortals its still quite baffling and seemingly illogical which according to you is synonymous with impossible.

Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance—instead, a quantum state must be described for the system as a whole.

Measurements of physical properties such as position, momentum, spin, and polarization, performed on entangled particles are found to be appropriately correlated. For example, if a pair of particles are generated in such a way that their total spin is known to be zero, and one particle is found to have clockwise spin on a certain axis, the spin of the other particle, measured on the same axis, will be found to be counterclockwise, as to be expected due to their entanglement. However, this behavior gives rise to paradoxical effects: any measurement of a property of a particle can be seen as acting on that particle (e.g., by collapsing a number of superposed states) and will change the original quantum property by some unknown amount; and in the case of entangled particles, such a measurement will be on the entangled system as a whole. It thus appears that one particle of an entangled pair "knows" what measurement has been performed on the other, and with what outcome, even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances.


The bottom line is its absurd and ludicrous for you to demand reality even within this universe behave according to some dictates of logic you vainly imagine to be true. Moreover you continually blur the line between what is an established fact and what you fantasize is fact by extension of you're thinking it should follow your brand of logic which you also think is a fact.

Do scientists who program virtual universes have to follow rules of logic?

Quote
YES. A computer follows a prescribed list of steps to perform some discrete, well-defined task: a program.

I'm going to be kind and assume you're merely being obtuse. Do you think it would be taxing for someone to write a program where when 2 and 2 are added it comes to 12? Do you think it would be daunting for any programmer simulating the universe to make time flow backwards, gravity repel instead of attract? They wouldn't have to follow any rules of logic including the ones from your imagination of how things should be. 

Quote
Empty posturing. Everyone can read your posts and mine and see that the above quoted is merely wishful thinking on your part. You are factually wrong in this accusation, and I'm absolutely unafraid of anyone looking back and reading my previous posts. It is clear to me that you are even failing to comprehend what I am saying, and I'm trying to dumb this down as much as possible. You see demands for you to support necessary parts of your argument as me arguing "incontrovertible facts". No, I'm not doing that, and everyone can see that I'm not doing that. What they see is you flailing in the shallow end of the pool of knowledge and shaking their heads.

The only reason your responses aren't bashed from pillar to post is because you argue the majority position in here.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Albert Einstein

Offline Baruch

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #946 on: Today at 04:14:44 PM »
Would you mind walking me through that accident? Sounds interesting :)

Frankenstein (the original story by Mary Shelley) was a take on The Golum (a folk tale from Jewish Prague).  In The Golum (which figured in one episode of the original X-files) a head rabbi (a historical figure) uses a bit of "practical Kabbalah aka Jewish incantation" to animate a clay zombie.  With Mary Shelley, who was a brilliant teenager ... she brings this story into the Enlightenment ... when Dr Frankenstein animates a corpse zombie, using lightning from the sky (aka G-d).  Dr Frankenstein is taken in part from a Christian story of the Middle Ages, Dr Faustus.  In Hebrew, "adamah" means earth, hence "adam" means earthling.  The Golum is an artificial earthling.  The Monster (of Dr Frankenstein) is an artificial resurrection ... we have moved the scenery from Late Judaism to Late Christianity.  Of course, while the intent of the rabbi, or the doctor ... is good in both cases ... the Monster in both cases ... falls to the rule of unexpected results.  You have people playing G-d (and of course G-d plays G-d too) and results are less than optimum, just like with Mickey Mouse as the sorcerer's apprentice in Fantasia.  Take all three examples and project them to G-d, as Kabbalist (the world was created instrumentally thru the Hebrew letters).

In Lurianic Kabbalah, it is semi-gnostic.  Nature isn't the opposite of Spirit, it simply is inadequate for what G-d intends.  And the Jewish god isn't omniscient nor omnipotent nor omnipresent.  The Jewish god is originally the first among equals, just as this god's people are first among equals .. but eventually under pressure from various Gentile cultures, the Jewish god becomes the one and only god (aka G-d).  This creates a lot of conflict with Gentiles of course.  Think of Jews 3000 years ago as henotheists (they have a primary god with subordinate gods) to 2000 years ago as monotheism (there is only one god).  Of course in popular terms, the other gods had been demoted to angels and demons.  By 1000 years ago, under pressure from Islam, Jews had discarded angels and demons (in most cases).  What survived of the older form of Judaism ... they called Kabbalah.

So what happens is the unexpected happens, and Creation is broken at the start (not original sin, but original brokenness).  The purpose for Jews in that system, is to reassemble Humpty Dumpty, on the spiritual plane, by being prayer warriors.  This involves speculative Kabbalah (metaphysics), meditative Kabbalah and practical Kabbalah (the occult).
« Last Edit: Today at 04:18:21 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #947 on: Today at 04:21:47 PM »
Drew -

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. - Albert Einstein

You don't really believe that, or you would not bother with naturalism or un-naturalism ... since both are illusory.
שלום

Online Drew_2017 (OP)

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #948 on: Today at 04:37:32 PM »
Drew -

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. - Albert Einstein

You don't really believe that, or you would not bother with naturalism or un-naturalism ... since both are illusory.

No I just thought it was interesting he said it. I don't think he believed it was an illusion either. Suppose in the future a virtual reality world is so real that we can't tell the difference between the two?
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Albert Einstein

Offline Baruch

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #949 on: Today at 04:48:07 PM »
No I just thought it was interesting he said it. I don't think he believed it was an illusion either. Suppose in the future a virtual reality world is so real that we can't tell the difference between the two?

Human reality is already virtual ... our memes control what we can see, and how we interpret what we see.  We imbibe these memes starting with our mother's milk.  The result is Naive Realism.  It is an open philosophical question if anything exists beyond the merely psychological.  Most here, including you, assume that there is ... and that is the reality you think is virtual.  That is a violation of Ockham's Razor ... if we can only experience the psychological, and that is already artificial, then even if there is something beyond the psychological, an such belief is itself merely psychological.  I am not skeptical of the psychological, and for me it doesn't matter if there is anything beyond that.  Science is merely a technically sophisticated version of Naive Realism.  That what I touch with my hands, has some hard reality.
שלום

Online Drew_2017 (OP)

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #950 on: Today at 05:05:55 PM »
There has been a lot of discussion about the existence of time. I came across this book 'From Eternity to Here;The Quest for the Ultimate Theory of Time'. Its a bit dated (2010) I have no idea what his conclusions are since I've only read part of the first chapter but it looks interesting.

It’s clear that the universe evolves as time passes—the early universe was hot and dense; the current
universe is cold and dilute. But I am going to be drawing a much deeper connection. The most
mysterious thing about time is that it has a direction: the past is different from the future. That’s the
arrow of time—unlike directions in space, all of which are created pretty much equal, the universe
indisputably has a preferred orientation in time. A major theme of this book is that the arrow of time
exists because the universe evolves in a certain way.
The reason why time has a direction is because the universe is full of irreversible processes—
things that happen in one direction of time, but never the other. You can turn an egg into an omelet, as
the classic example goes, but you can’t turn an omelet into an egg. Milk disperses into coffee; fuels
undergo combustion and turn into exhaust; people are born, grow older, and die. Everywhere in
Nature we find sequences of events where one kind of event always happens before, and another kind
after; together, these define the arrow of time.
Remarkably, a single concept underlies our understanding of irreversible processes: something
called entropy, which measures the “disorderliness” of an object or conglomeration of objects.
Entropy has a stubborn tendency to increase, or at least stay constant, as time passes—that’s the
famous Second Law of Thermodynamics. 2 And the reason why entropy wants to increase is
deceptively simple: There are more ways to be disorderly than to be orderly, so (all else being
equal) an orderly arrangement will naturally tend toward increasing disorder. It’s not that hard to
scramble the egg molecules into the form of an omelet, but delicately putting them back into the
arrangement of an egg is beyond our capabilities.
The traditional story that physicists tell themselves usually stops there. But there is one absolutely
crucial ingredient that hasn’t received enough attention: If everything in the universe evolves toward
increasing disorder, it must have started out in an exquisitely ordered arrangement. This whole chain
of logic, purporting to explain why you can’t turn an omelet into an egg, apparently rests on a deep
assumption about the very beginning of the universe: It was in a state of very low entropy, very high
order.
The arrow of time connects the early universe to something we experience literally every moment
of our lives. It’s not just breaking eggs, or other irreversible processes like mixing milk into coffee or
how an untended room tends to get messier over time. The arrow of time is the reason why time
seems to flow around us, or why (if you prefer) we seem to move through time. It’s why we
remember the past, but not the future. It’s why we evolve and metabolize and eventually die. It’s why
we believe in cause and effect, and is crucial to our notions of free will.
And it’s all because of the Big Bang.

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Albert Einstein

Online Drew_2017 (OP)

Re: Goddidit Vs Naturedidit
« Reply #951 on: Today at 05:11:20 PM »
Human reality is already virtual ... our memes control what we can see, and how we interpret what we see. 

Do you really believe that?
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.
Albert Einstein