Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-07-2015, 04:38 PM (This post was last modified: 11-07-2015 08:13 AM by Rahn127.)
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
Idea - If you see the universe as information and some grand cosmic computer processes that information, you also have to realize that the grand cosmic computer is also information and then it must be processesd by some greater cosmic computer thingy.

It boils down to the idea that everything and I mean everything you can conceive of is information. There can't be a computer cosmic thing processing it, because it too is information. If you view things this way, all you are ever going to get is information. You will never get anything that ultimately processes or manipulates that information.

The information changes according to physical laws.

In other words, it's nature. Its always been nature.
The nature of the universe is a natural process.

Edited for Bucky.
His reply made me realize that I needed to make my thoughts a little clearer.

Smile

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2015, 01:30 AM (This post was last modified: 11-07-2015 05:48 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
..................................

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-07-2015, 07:31 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
What happened to this link you posted? Did you realize how ridiculously religious the source website was and change it?

(11-07-2015 01:30 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  http://www.seekfind.net/Logical_Fallacy_...aJoWvlB-FA

This one may have been a better choice:
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-distin...rence.htm#

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ideasonscribe's post
12-07-2015, 01:45 PM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
...............................

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 11:21 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(08-07-2015 01:02 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Because god/gods is an idea. When one is first born, one is unaware of a god or religion until told so. Until educated and indoctrinated into a particular religion, such as Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism etc.

Uhm, this is not supported by the evidence. You can't explain the over abudance of religious beliefs found among every society that has ever existed, by implying that without indoctrination one would be an atheists. That's more wishful thinking on your part than anything else.

The research shows that children, even those raised in non-religious homes, intuitively hold teleological beliefs. They are inclined to be some vague variety believer. More defined religious beliefs may be a product of indoctrination, but the inclination to be vague sort of believer, seems to be present even among very young children, and offers a far better explanation for the over abundance of religious beliefs found pretty much in every nook and cranny of human societies, past and present.

http://www.amazon.com/Born-Believers-Sci...1439196540
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 11:30 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
At work

Can we get a different study by some one who's not so biased, perhaps?

Or at least something peer reviewd and not just some book.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 11:35 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(05-07-2015 04:39 AM)ideasonscribe Wrote:  I'm not sure if many of you remember me. I used to post quite a bit on here a couple years ago.
At the time, I was a devout Christian. However, since I've been gone, I've actually been an atheist for a good while, and then started studying Quantum Physics and Superstring Theory. After a good amount of research, I realized my materialistic stance was no longer tenable. Shortly after, I then realized my atheistic stance was untenable as well.
I am a Philosophical Theist. I believe in the probable existence of what can be defined as 'god'. I am not religious, so whatever it is I believe in, I have attributed no doctrine or dogma to. There are also no religious characteristics to associate with this being as I don't find it necessary.
I actually came on here not too long ago and shared something similar to this a while back. That was during the beginning of my Philosophical Theism. Since then, I have done a lot more research and have found myself even more convinced of it's validity.

During my research, I had a massive compilation of notes and relevant papers collected. I eventually found some time to organize them all into a shorter argument.
NOTE: This argument/essay has been intentionally articulated to beg more questions while simultaneously providing the necessary substance for it's validity. This is so that people are encouraged to ask the right questions in order to continue the conversation at the lay level.
This information can get a bit technical, and I don't want to scare anyone away from joining the conversation.
I am willing to answer any and all questions, and to elaborate further on any point, paper or concept.

Keep in mind that this argument is also designed to demonstrate two main points:
1.) That Local Realism has been experimental falsified - consequently, so has Materialism.
2.) The existence of Intelligent Platonic Information-Processing Consciousness (AKA - IPIC [Cosmic])

On the existence of IPIC, I will also demonstrate how this being can be comfortably defined as 'god' in a more religiously-neutral sense.

So without further ado, I present -
The Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of god:

What I want to demonstrate in my argument is this:

1.) Local Realism is false and Quantum Mechanics has demonstrated this.
2.) Quantum Mechanics (weirdness) applies to everything.
3.) There are ways in which you can attempt to falsify this via showing Bells Inequality has not been violated.
4.) The universe is likely a hologram or virtual simulation and we can test this.
5.) The information processing the hologram is coming from a mind - rather than a highly advanced computer.

“Quantum experiments hint at a worldview that has not yet been grasped. The existence of something beyond what we usually consider physics – beyond what we usually consider the “physical world”.
- The Quantum Enigma: Physics Encounters Consciousness

------> Local Realism is false and Quantum Mechanics has demonstrated this. <------
Quantum mechanics began it's tests with particles (i.e. electrons, protons, etc.)
The particles (or matter) behaved like waves of probability when not being measured, and like balls of matter while being measured.
(http://physics.mq.edu.au/~jcresser/Phys2...tExpt.pdf)
(http://physics.about.com/od/lightoptics/...eslit.htm)
(http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/v...ide14.pdf)
This implied either that the detectors were screwing up the results, or that matter is not really as stable as we originally thought it was.
The results of experiments seemed to show that matter is dependent on observation, or 'measurement', to exist in any defined location.

We also found that two particles connected by Entanglement can somehow communicate with each other instantaneously at any distance in space. This phenomena was called "spooky action at a distance" by Albert Einstein.
Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (Later known as the EPR Paradox) came together to find a 'local hidden variable'. This hidden variable is something that would connect the particles somehow to show that reality wasn't as "spooky" or strange as the experiments were implying.
(http://www.drchinese.com/David/EPR.pdf)


Other experiments were devised to remove the problem of the detectors in order to show that it wasn't the detectors causing the problem.
The Delayed Choice Quantum Erasure proposed by Scully and Dr ̈uhl in 1982 (http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9903047.pdf) (http://einstein.drexel.edu/~bob/TermPape...ayed.pdf), was the experiment that drove us further down the rabbit hole.
The experiment succeeded in showing that the detectors played no role in the interference and clump patterns shown by the particles.


However, local realism has been violated:
http://phys.org/news/2010-11-physicists-...alism.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/107/46/19708.full

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10....ett.37.465


------> Quantum Mechanics (weirdness) applies to everything. <------

The data has been done for large enough objects to see with the naked eye. As the experiments use larger and larger subjects, physicists no longer doubt the results will be the same.
Time moves along less like an analog clock and more like a digital clock with individual, computable states. Each state containing a specific amount of information

As the experiment is scaled up in size, at some point quantum behavior (interference) should give way to classical behavior (no interference). But how big can the particles be before that happens?

Quantum Mechanics shows that not only particles are defined by interference, but much larger objects as well. The results repeat no matter how large the object being used in the experiments.

Quantum Interference is shown in large organic molecules -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104521/

Imaging of the experiment, as well as the equipment used:
http://www.nature.com/articles/nnano.201...chnica.com


------> There are ways in which you can attempt to falsify this via showing Bells Inequality has not been violated. <------

If you can show that Bell's Inequality has not been violated, you will win a Nobel Prize:

The Quantum Randi Challenge: http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.5294

Bell’s Inequality:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v40...9791a0.pdf

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v39...189a0.html

Leggits Inequality:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.5133


------> The universe is possibly a hologram or virtual simulation and we can test this. <------

Physicists such as Yoshifumi Hyakutake and colleagues of Ibaraki University in Japan have previously provided convincing evidence for the idea of holographic universes:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.5607v1.pdf
"In this article we provide the first quantitative evidence for the gauge/gravity duality at the level of quantum gravity. We perform Monte Carlo simulation of the dual gauge theory in the parameter regime that corresponds to a quantum black hole. Our results agree precisely with a prediction for an evaporating black hole including quantum gravity corrections. Thus we find that the dual gauge theory indeed provides a complete description of the quantum nature of the evaporating black hole."
The evidence provided by the Physicists at Ibaraki University of Japan show that the information that is projected into a black hole by information at the edge or the "event horizon", actually occurs at a cosmic scale.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.7526v3.pdf

- Yoshifumi Hyakutake

Is this concept testable?
Absolutely. The concept is currently being experimentally tested at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/presspass/press_...40826.html

I've sent an email to FNAL with a request for the results of the experiment. The data is expected to be reviewed this year.

The experiment is searching for "holographic noise" at the fundamental level.
“If we find a noise we can’t get rid of, we might be detecting something fundamental about nature – a noise that is intrinsic to space-time,” - Fermilab physicist Aaron Chou
The noise is found by using two separate interferometers situated on top of one other. Each interferometer sends a one-kilowatt laser beam (the equivalent of 200,000 laser pointers) at a beam splitter. Then, once the light beams are split, they travel down two perpendicular 40 metre arms. Next, the light is reflected off a mirror back to the beam splitter, where the two beams finally recombine. However, during this journey, even the tiniest vibrations can interfere with the light's frequency, causing fluctuations in the brightness of light.
The analysis of the light fluctuations is critical to the results of the experiment. It enables them to discover whether space itself is vibrating.
These vibrations will be the "holographic noise".

Other experiments are being done by a group of Physicists at the University of Washington looking for "signatures" that would indicate our universe is graph-like, much like you would use in a 3-dimensional world in a virtual system.
(http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.1847.pdf)
And here's the laymen presentation of the PDF:
(http://www.int.washington.edu/users/mjs5...Universe/)


------> The information processing the hologram is coming from a mind - rather than a highly advanced computer. <------

If the cosmos is a hologram, where is the information coming from?
We know that simulations of virtual realities can be processed via computers. However, in order to build a computer to process every qubit of our universe, one would need to create a computer larger than the universe itself. It's not practical and largely unnecessary to postulate.
However we do know that our brains can process information much more smoothly and compactly into platonic information.
The above science has shown, however, that the brain is also a part of the hologram. Therefore, the matter that makes the brain is also observer dependent.
That means that the mind is fundamental and can be a separate entity. (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20...MvW5NB-FA)
(http://www.projects.science.uu.nl/igg/jo...igner.pdf)
If this is true, then our universe can more simply be explained by inferring a mind processing the universe through platonic information processing.
This mind would be a cosmic mind that envelopes all of space-time in our four dimensions.


"What I mean by 'consciousness' is, consciousness is the one thing that cannot be an illusion."
- Sam Harris

A lot of this is above my pay grade. But I do have some question though.

When you say local realism, is that same as what's typically implied by the "manifest image"?

And secondly, is the belief in the God you purpose to be supported by these observations, more or less an irrelevant God? Just a matter of acceptance of a fact, which has no real bearing on one's life one way or the other?

And I also wonder, if you'd be better served in these parts, by removing God all together from the post, and merely arguing for some form of dualism, which seems to be what you are doing here? Folks here tend to think that attributing something to God, is like attributing something to Frank. People here are prone to question what does Frank have to do with anything, without ever realizing their categorical error. I think you'd likely face less resistance if you crafted your argument as one in support of dualism, than God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 11:45 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(16-07-2015 11:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 01:02 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Because god/gods is an idea. When one is first born, one is unaware of a god or religion until told so. Until educated and indoctrinated into a particular religion, such as Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism etc.

Uhm, this is not supported by the evidence. You can't explain the over abudance of religious beliefs found among every society that has ever existed, by implying that without indoctrination one would be an atheists. That's more wishful thinking on your part than anything else.

The research shows that children, even those raised in non-religious homes, intuitively hold teleological beliefs. They are inclined to be some vague variety believer. More defined religious beliefs may be a product of indoctrination, but the inclination to be vague sort of believer, seems to be present even among very young children, and offers a far better explanation for the over abundance of religious beliefs found pretty much in every nook and cranny of human societies, past and present.

http://www.amazon.com/Born-Believers-Sci...1439196540

Children learn from the cultures they are born into, even if subliminally.
There is no evidence for a "belief in god" gene.

So you're saying religious belief is childish ? Thumbsup

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 12:03 PM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(16-07-2015 11:45 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Children learn from the cultures they are born into, even if subliminally.
There is no evidence for a "belief in god" gene.

So you're saying religious belief is childish ? Thumbsup

And where does cultures acquire it's belief from?

If you wanted to explain the over abundance of religious beliefs, why it has arose in nearly every culture that has ever existed, you'd have attribute it to factors beyond just cultural learning. Specific religious beliefs are layered on top of intuitive assumptions, that incline folks to accept those beliefs in the first place.

Folks are surely not inclined to be intuitive ontological naturalist, all the evidence seems to suggest the exact opposite. As early as we can trace what our intuitive beliefs are, teleological beliefs are present.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-07-2015, 03:52 PM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(16-07-2015 12:03 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(16-07-2015 11:45 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Children learn from the cultures they are born into, even if subliminally.
There is no evidence for a "belief in god" gene.

So you're saying religious belief is childish ? Thumbsup

And where does cultures acquire it's belief from?

If you wanted to explain the over abundance of religious beliefs, why it has arose in nearly every culture that has ever existed, you'd have attribute it to factors beyond just cultural learning. Specific religious beliefs are layered on top of intuitive assumptions, that incline folks to accept those beliefs in the first place.

Folks are surely not inclined to be intuitive ontological naturalist, all the evidence seems to suggest the exact opposite. As early as we can trace what our intuitive beliefs are, teleological beliefs are present.

Ancient man looks at the world around him. He sees the sun rise and set each day, the stars shine at night, sometimes the moon appears, on rare occasions the sun disappears during the day, rivers flow and sometimes flood, volcanoes erupt, the earth occasionally shakes, there's thunder and lightning. Ancient man wonders what is causing all this? POOF...man creates god in his image and likeness as the explanation of natural events.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JakSiemasz's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: