Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-09-2015, 11:54 PM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(08-09-2015 09:53 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  We can argue if a hangnail is excessive or not but that would be a waste of time. "Excessive" is an opinion....It is not a fact of nature. Arguing about it is silly because nobody can be right or wrong.

This is hilarious! All you ever present is your unsupported personal opinions!

"God is a non causal first cause added to the second and third cause with a pinch of salt. Therefore god.

Which god?

Oh I don't think in terms of which god. You are forgetting the salt. Therefore you are stupid."

Seriously mate, your apologetics is about the worst I've seen on the nonsensical scale.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-09-2015, 11:57 PM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  When theists talk about the "First Cause" they are talking about a cause and effect chain that goes back to the creation of the universe.

That is what I said.

This "first cause" has never been shown to exist, or even to be necessary.

(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  How can the cause of the universe logically be local to the universe?

You assume that the universe requires a cause.

(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The effects without any local causes observed at the quantum level is the same class of thing as the First Cause.

No, they aren't. You ought to read up on stochastic systems.

(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If you want to call my God a garage dragon, that is fine with me. Just keep in mind that in this thread you are now making more claims about God's nature than I am.

No, I'm not. I'm using your given definition.

I just happen to recognize that said definition is nonsensical.

(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Non-local.....refers to the mundane? Do you see you have completely contradicted yourself there.

No, I haven't. You don't understand the terms in play.

(08-09-2015 11:02 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Something cannot be both mundane and non-local.

You ought to learn the definitions of words before trying to use them.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
09-09-2015, 10:21 AM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2015 10:29 AM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(08-09-2015 11:57 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(08-09-2015 10:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The effects without any local causes observed at the quantum level is the same class of thing as the First Cause.

No, they aren't. You ought to read up on stochastic systems.

Stochasticity is a property of models built around incomplete information. It isn't a property of the real world. In the real world every effect can be mapped to a cause. If the cause isn't local then it must be non local. The First Cause of theistic arguments is by it nature non local and therefore in same category. The First Cause is a non local causal agent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 10:35 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(09-09-2015 10:21 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Stochasticity is a property of models built around incomplete information.

No, it isn't.

"Stochastic" literally means "random". Stochastic models of quantum mechanics posit that the second-to-second state of the universe is, indeed, random, but it is still affected by its previous state. The individual particles in an elephant may do unexpected things, but you're still going to have an elephant when the dust settles.

Stochastic systems are truly random. The only case in which this apparent randomness can be said to be the result of "incomplete information" is if you assert that there is no randomness at all, just non-local causes that we can't see.

And that is, as noted, just an assertion. Beyond that, unless you posit some way to differentiate between randomness and your posited non-local causes, it is a garage dragon.

And garage dragons don't exist.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
09-09-2015, 10:56 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(09-09-2015 10:35 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(09-09-2015 10:21 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Stochasticity is a property of models built around incomplete information.

No, it isn't.

"Stochastic" literally means "random". Stochastic models of quantum mechanics posit that the second-to-second state of the universe is, indeed, random, but it is still affected by its previous state. The individual particles in an elephant may do unexpected things, but you're still going to have an elephant when the dust settles.

Stochastic systems are truly random. The only case in which this apparent randomness can be said to be the result of "incomplete information" is if you assert that there is no randomness at all, just non-local causes that we can't see.

And that is, as noted, just an assertion. Beyond that, unless you posit some way to differentiate between randomness and your posited non-local causes, it is a garage dragon.

And garage dragons don't exist.

Except that they are not.

Random means there is not predictable or discernible pattern. It does not mean there is no pattern. Randomness is and has always been a function of ignorance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 11:24 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(08-09-2015 10:23 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(08-09-2015 08:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  That is not "the atheist's argument".

Good, next time some atheist clown brings up the problem of evil, I expect you to be there telling everyone its not an atheists argument.

It's not an argument about the existence of god.

It's an argument about the nature of god.

This is not complicated. For what purpose do you pretend to be so stupid?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 11:42 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
At work.

About the 'Randomness' thing.

The 'Brownian motion of particles' is random, right? As in completely random, hence all the work and study into such?

Sorry, just Heywood's comment of 'Randomness product of lack of knowledge' kind of threw me.....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 11:45 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(09-09-2015 11:42 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

About the 'Randomness' thing.

The 'Brownian motion of particles' is random, right? As in completely random, hence all the work and study into such?

Sorry, just Heywood's comment of 'Randomness product of lack of knowledge' kind of threw me.....

It is random to us because we have incomplete information.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 11:47 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(09-09-2015 11:24 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(08-09-2015 10:23 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Good, next time some atheist clown brings up the problem of evil, I expect you to be there telling everyone its not an atheists argument.

It's not an argument about the existence of god.

It's an argument about the nature of god.

This is not complicated. For what purpose do you pretend to be so stupid?

Its an argument, employed by atheists to deny the existence of a particular God. Why do you now pretend to be so obtuse so as not to believe it can be properly described as an atheistic argument?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2015, 11:57 AM
RE: Quantum and Digital Physics argument for the existence of God.
(09-09-2015 10:56 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Random means there is not predictable or discernible pattern. It does not mean there is no pattern.

Except in the case of quantum mechanics, where it is posited that events are truly random. Do you even know what you are arguing for at this point?

Are you arguing that quantum mechanics is effectively random, but God is determining the results of every dice roll in such a way that it is indistinguishable from a truly random system? If so, your god is a garage dragon, and does not exist by definition.

Or are you arguing that quantum mechanics is not random at all, but that everything that appears to be random is simply the result of non-local causal relationships that we currently lack the practical ability to observe? If so, you simply have no evidence for your god, as these non-local causal relationships have mundane mechanics posited for them.

Either way, it's nonsensical.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: