god created the universe and let it evolve without any furth

Post Reply New Topic

There is a lot of randomness in our universe, if we look more exactly. An example stands directly in front of my: A hot cup of coffee. I can on a macroscopic level give a quite good rule for the development of the temperature of the coffee over time and how this temperature will come ever closer to room temperature. When I would look closer the term "temperature" will transform in a statistical mean of the movements of the atoms in this particular coup. When I would try to bring the exact state of this cup of coffee by given locations and movement vector of a given time, with all computer power of this world I couldn't calculate the exact position and movement vectors of just a ms later.

An this is just the case with classical mechanical models, if I would introduce in my model quantum mechanics, it be not only a matter of mere computer power, but a theoretical impossibility. The same is to say e.g. about radioactive decay: e can say, that statically in a given time 50% of a radioactive substance decayed into an other substance, but it is even theoretical impossible to state that a particular atom will have decayed at a particular time. We can work here only with statistical probabilities.

What you experience as an "non-random" world, is only a statical mean of a very random world.

The variance is at least as important as the mean. Fortunately for us large critters, Planck's constant is very small. As a result Heisenberg indeterminacy does not kill us outright.

ruveyn

so you can only be religious if you let your religion get in the way of your talent?

that is the silliest thing I have every heard. Nothing you said makes a difference whatsoever to the point I was making with v0lume. Which was not all religious people are evil disgusting horrible disgraceful idiots who the world is better off exterminating. All of those people had professed to be somehow connected to the Judeo-Christian beliefs, which v0lume was arguing made people worth disgust and hatred.

And there are several Christian denominations that deny the Trinity. If you want to argue whether or not they can be qualified as Christian you will have to start a new thread.

I'm glad someone finally explained to me the nature of the universe. I used to think it was impossible for anyone to know, but my eyes have been pried open.

All is well as long a religion does not negate logic and reason. That is why churchgoing scientists can do science. They can compartmentalize their thinking. Nowadays a majority of scientists are not religious in the orthodox sense. Many are spiritual (how can one behold the heavens and not be spiritual?), but their thinking cannot be contained in a Judeo Christian or Islamic box.

As to your last remark, orthodox Christianity is firmly based on Pauline doctrine and has been so since the Council of Nicea.

ruveyn

there is nothing such as "randomness" i think.

i think that when the epitome of human logic can not find a cause for an effect, then they consider the effect "random". it is rather conceited and defensive on the part of the thinkers to conclude that something is "random" because they can not predict it.

one may consider the result of the rolling of a die "random". but it is the variability in the state of the picked up die before rolling, and the variability of current contour of the die gripping hand, and the variability of muscular contractions in the throwing, and other variables such as air pressure etc that result in variable values of a rolled die.

like a die may have 2 spots facing upward and it may be rotated at a particular angle to your hand as you pick it up. then there is the manner that the die is thrown that can not be constant in humans.

if a die set in a particular way is picked up and thrown by a robotic hand that is perfect in its consistency of all characteristics involved in the dice rolling sequence, and it is thrown to the same surface in exactly the same way, then the same number will always be the result of the throw.

i agree with Einstein (i have to use a capital letter for his name i think) that god does not play dice with the universe, because if he did, the result would always be the same, so it makes the concept of "chance" redundant.

quantum explanations of probability factors that excuse false predictions by arguing that nothing is certain are like blaming things on chance.

for an event to be based on "chance" is to say that there are places where laws do not exist.
this can not be because if there are no laws, then there is no form and no manifestation.

one may say that there are indeed laws, but they are completely different to our laws of physics and that explains the uncertainty (or "chance").

but it really explains that if those laws were understood, then the notion of "chance" is further quashed. if alternate laws of physics can be discovered and their relationship with our laws can be plotted, then explanations will fill the universe.

there is no uncertainty in the procedure of existence.

Horse puckey! That standard model of particles and fields predict all know non-gravitational phenomena to 12 decimal places. The theory may be ugly and counter intuitive but it is dead on accurate. The problem with physics, as things stand, as that gravitational and non-gravitational actions can not be accounted for in a single (unified) theory.

ruveyn

predicts what about them? to 12 decimal places of accuracy about what aspect?


i am looking for it to read. i do not often read about others discoveries. i am too busy in my own world to peek out.



the initial argument was asking whether "god set off the universe and it all happened hence without interference" (or equivalent).

it means "were there mistakes made in the inception of the universe ? and did interference by a conscious correcter correct those mistakes on the fly?".

my argument is that there is no such thing as chance and therefore the concept of correction due to variables distorting universal expansion is moot.

you seem to have your eyes rolled back like a pitbull terrier locked on a bone of defensiveness of quantum theory.

just because humans have not resolved the nature of their world, it does not mean that the world is random in any aspect.

hang on...i know what happened!! !

god lit the fuse on the wick of the "big bang", and he ran and hid behind a......hmmmmm.....there was nothing to hide behind. so he got killed in the explosion and we are left to our own devices.

The prediction are not "false" they are very precise when it comes to big numbers. As my example with radioactive decay. We tell very exactly how many % of a substance still exists after a given period, but we can not tell, when a particular atom will decay.

quite a few of the people I put up eventually left their field of study to pursue religious study and some did studies in both simultaneously. Your point is moot.

and as for your last remark now you are defining Christianity by orthodox Christianity... Still, if you wanted the hairs to be split you need to start a new thread.