haha...so what about the interpretations of the double-slit experiment like the many-worlds interpretation, Copanhagen, many-minds, consciousness causes collapse, quantum immortality, etc.....you're just dodging what the double-slit experiment implies because of your atheistic faith...
Soul?
- Thread starter Kumar
- Start date
haha...so what about the interpretations of the double-slit experiment like the many-worlds interpretation, Copanhagen, many-minds, consciousness causes collapse, quantum immortality, etc.....you're just dodging what the double-slit experiment implies because of your atheistic faith...
No Im just implying that quantum physics providing any validation towards a spiritual plane, is merely in the mind of retards and is yet another attempt by religion to corrupt science into pseudoscience for their religous purpose and thus steel credibility from a body that actually deserves it(evolotion being another example that you've bastardized into the freakshow of intelligent design).
Further more, you have the faith! I have faith in nothing! dont project your weaked will unquestioning mindset on me!
so Stephen Hawkings is a retard now? He believes in the MWI...
I'm not trying to corrupt science, thats what you're doing, if anything turns out to be just what religion says then no it can't be lets change it to appear differently.....the truth is the truth...so why do you seek the atheistic truth instead of the actual truth...all the evidence is already there...
My weak mindset? You're the one rejecting and denying any POSSIBLITY of a mind independant of matter...hahaha these atheists try anything...
Please, give me a link showing that Stephen Hawkings supports the notion that quantum mechanics implies an immaterial soul.
You may not consciously be aware of it, but you are well entrenched in the domain of pseudo science. You take complex theories, you misinterpret their predictions and you label them as proof for pretty big claims. Science doesn't work that way.
The evidence for what, exactly? Please, try to refrain to concrete and precise terms.
Weak mindset? It takes some courage to look in the mirror and to realize that I'm only mortal, a flash point of life, burning out in an insanely brief time, on a little speck of accumulated dust, rotating around a relatively unremarkable ball of fire.
The next thought might be: then, let's make the best of it. Wondering about souls, gods and whatnot seems, to me, like an awful waste of the little time we have.
If he indeed suggests that anything in the science of Quantum physics has provided evidence for god, a soul or spirit world of any kind , then yes I say he is a retard, but he doesnt!
No Im not trying to corrupt science, if science ever produces repeatable data for anything thiests claim, I will be one of the first to accept said claim.
No Im not denying any possibility of such, just present measurement for it!
Vital do you actually understand QM? do you actually understand uncertainty priciple or superposition? Or are you just repeating the words of others.
Do you know what the MWI (Many-worlds interpretation) implies?
If thats pseudoscience then so is every interpretation of the quantum double-slit experiment from the many-worlds, copanhagen, etc...mouse said:
Well you see there's something called the quantum double slit experiment, and right now we don't know which intepretation from the many are actually true. Some like the many-minds intepretation and the consciousness causes collapse require an immaterial mind. There's currently no evidence distinguishing which interpretation is actually true.mouse said:
Whoever said you weren't a mortal or any of that stuff you said? The weak mindset comes from denying all possibilty of a immaterial mind or a mind independant of matter existing despite the fact that there's many consciousness theories (some which have a mind not made of matter), neurologists don't know what consciousness even is, and some interpretations in QM require a mind to exist...yet to the atheist there's a 0% chance...no possibility...mouse said:
Last edited:
Do you really know what the MWI implies?
Well thats good to hear.imaplanck said:
You know things like zero-point energy were impossible to measure until advances in nanotechnology...measuring the mind is possible, if it really existsimaplanck said:
You should be asking yourself this same question. You should know well what the quantum double-slit experiment implies about the observer, superposition (all states at once)...either way you look at it the observer does affect the outcome...
Unlike you I know the extent of what quantum physics implies, nothing in this area of physics including quantum tunneling implies a seperate soul orwhatever other bollocks you are suggesting because of uncertainty.
But its been possible to calculate its existance for around a century. What is your point?
If you mean the soul? Yes it is, so whereis the data?
No! I know I understand it. Imasking you if you have learnt quantum phyics andthereforunderstad it, or are just repeating other peoples assertions about its aspects.
It implies nothing about the oberver! It merely implies the observed is changed for ever when this observation takes place..[/QUOTE]
Yes that is correct(give yourself a pat on the back). Saying that this in anyway conducive to theism though is totally spasticated.
no
its something that is required if someone has claims of an objective phenomena however
fair enough
- then spit it out
what is that methodology you use , in regard to the fairies, which you claim is identical to 'whatever one" I am using?
No its not, its simply the procedure a given group take to reach an end.
Since you mentioned objectiveness though, since when has religion been objective in how it explains phenomena?
This is getting tiresome:
To demand you believe me without evidence ,as I am a devine prophet of the fairies . My words should not always be taken literally, I will tell you as and when and if the circumstances suit me to alter this.
implanck
and if the group is big enough to include everyone, you have objective reality
the same as any other claim of objective phenomena - apply the process and get the result
then if by accepting you I never come to the point of perceiving evidence, you have no objective basis, which distinguishes you from the claims of bonafide religious paths
Sometimes, color of an object is considered as its sprit, complexion as costitution. Probably, emitted or reflected spectrum from body at death=soul, distorted or from dead body (if no light at death)=ghost.
Can this be thought in science?
No that is pseudoscience bullcrap,.
Oh I see 'a religion must be true if enough people follow
' , but Im not a good enough prophet because I dont have enough followers?Actually objectiveness is the quality of remaining open to evidence and not being influenced by what you want to see.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Lightgigantic: If I answer "yes" how would you know whether I was lying?
If I answer "no" how would you know whether I was lying?
Why would you lie?
LG: how do you determine the credible qualification of claims (not just theistic ones, but any claim) beyond jurisdiction (if one's personal direct perception is everything you are left with a very limited perspective of reality)
Well how do you?
LG you have skirted the issue again by referring back to scripture when I asked you for your own interpretation! You parrot scripture like a pedant as if, because it is written, you no longer need critical thinking. The last illusion posed to Arjuna was the idea of heaven and hell. You posted this:
(actually arjuna, being an associate of the lord, is already transcendental, and his forrays into what are apparently ignorance are to illustrate teachings to our conditioned consciousness)
Your consciousness is also conditioned. You cling to scripture which is also of the 'material'. I don't think you understood the process I was describing concerning the Kali sect. The buddha became the buddha when he began to question what he was taught, the scriptures and techniques and then carved his own path, his own way...at least that's the legend.
If I answer "no" how would you know whether I was lying?
Why would you lie?
LG: how do you determine the credible qualification of claims (not just theistic ones, but any claim) beyond jurisdiction (if one's personal direct perception is everything you are left with a very limited perspective of reality)
Well how do you?
LG you have skirted the issue again by referring back to scripture when I asked you for your own interpretation! You parrot scripture like a pedant as if, because it is written, you no longer need critical thinking. The last illusion posed to Arjuna was the idea of heaven and hell. You posted this:
(actually arjuna, being an associate of the lord, is already transcendental, and his forrays into what are apparently ignorance are to illustrate teachings to our conditioned consciousness)
Your consciousness is also conditioned. You cling to scripture which is also of the 'material'. I don't think you understood the process I was describing concerning the Kali sect. The buddha became the buddha when he began to question what he was taught, the scriptures and techniques and then carved his own path, his own way...at least that's the legend.
This is the early morning joke! Right?
So the earth was once "flat" since enough people believed the earth to be flat, when they were ignorant, the flat earth was objective reality! LOL...
I think you really need to take a look at the meanings of the word, before you start using them! Your vocabulary is growing, however I don't think that you are truly grasping their meaning. First consecutive word you kept using was also misused, "espitemology" then you seem to have a hang up wiht "methodology" now it seems it's "objective" There's no such thing as an "objective religion" Now that!!! it's an OXYMORON!
I have no idea. What does it imply?
I wouldn't say every interpretation. I didn't read up on every interpretation. My point remains: if you make a big claim, then it needs evidence. Well, on the table with it. I'm dying to know, enlighten me.
Expand, if you will, on "consciousness causes collapse", and how this will require an immaterial mind.
There may be many theories regarding the tooth fairy. Yet, due the glaring absence of evidence, I find the existence of a tooth fairy to be unlikely.
Exactly. What we do know is that consciousness reacts on events in our observable world. For example, tinker a bit with the chemical make up of your brain, e.g. by the intake of drugs, and there you go, your consciousness is altered. No need for quantum theory here, just chemistry and an understanding of the physical nature of our brains.
How, exactly, do they require a mind to exist?
The term atheist only implies a lack of belief in a god or gods. I'm not sure if it says anything about souls, by definition.
It may be that a portion of those who claim to be atheists, are doing so because they don't see the evidence for any god. Lack of evidence, for them (and me) may mean that it can be considered unlikely. On the same token, an atheist (or any other individual, for that matter) may find the evidence for a soul unconvincing.
I dont know if you have an understanding of Quantum physics('quantum mechanics', to use the old fashioned term), but its impossible to predict where in a wavefunction a partical-wave will hit('collapse'), until it has already hit('collapsed'). Many dishonest/moronic theists use this science to suggest that a supernatural power is at work. This Richard present here is using hizenburg to tell us we have a soul in this instance.
Up to this point, I'm with you.
Here is where I start to get a bit confused. It may be impossible to predict what will happen, it may be that, according to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, we can't know the exact position and direction for every particle, but that in no way implies or suggests a higher power, a soul or whatnot.