DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Do you mean is an observer necessary?
Well, the universe got along for a little less than 10 billion years without any observers at all, so...
WHO is GOD in terms of SCIENCE ?
- Thread starter hansda
- Start date
Do you mean is an observer necessary?
Well, the universe got along for a little less than 10 billion years without any observers at all, so...
The way mass and energy play some role in Physics ; I think an Observer also plays some role in Physics .
May be you are right . That doesnt mean an observer doesnt play any role in Physics or Science .
An observer intrudes on the natural process. Grass has paths through it because people walk on it. Observers stomp all over physics.
You may be overlooking that the above is observer-dependent information. We can say that there are parts of the universe which appear to be much older than we are because we have 'created a history' by observing.
What does it mean to be self-caused when there is no self without the cause?
It means that something can come from nothing.
Are you trying to use quantum physics to prove a God?
Quantum mechanics is shown to provide no basis for cosmic consciousness or the belief that the human mind makes it own reality. It is also shown not to provide a viable basis for divine action, with or without chaos theory. Some theologians have proposed a new kind of deism in which God creates a universe with many possible pathways determined by chance. However, since the universe began in chaos it retains no memory of such a God. This leaves as the only possible God one who plays dice with the universe.
NO. ABSOLUTELY NOt . Unless your 'nothing' means something that we dont know or which is not yet proven .
Something can not come from nothing . It will just violate Physics .
Something(1) has to come from something(0) . It may so happen that an observer can percept something(1) but the observer is unable to percept something(0). Just because an observer is unable to percept something(0) ; we can not say that something(0) is nothing .
I have only used the term observer .
What do you mean ?
Einstein explains his Theory of Relativity with relative to an observer . So, an observer also must be playing some role in Quantum Dynamics .
A theoretical observation point, not an eternal all knowing celestial king. And besides Einstein didn't invent Quantum theory and wasn't too thrilled with it.
May be you are right but certain quantum events are also dependant upon an observer .
And how do you get from there to the God that you describe?
Behaviour of some Quantum particles are depended upon an observer .
So you are agreeing that , observer plays some role in Physics/Science .
@hansda --
Ah, quantum uncertainty. Do you know why the act of observing such tiny particles affects the outcome of the experiment? It's because the particles are so minute that anything we do to observe them will affect either them or our results accordingly. For example, if we were to try to measure the position of a particle by bouncing high frequency photons off of it(and it has to be high frequency to determine the position of a particle to any usable degree) the fact that the photons are bouncing off the particle has an effect on the velocity of the particle, thus making it impossible for us to determine it's velocity through that experiment. Conversely if we try to measure the particle's velocity using low frequency photons this causes data about the particle's position to become fuzzy and inaccurate.
This is simply a function of the scale and energies we're working with in quantum theory, it's not because the simple act of a consciousness observing something magically has an effect on it. Size and energy explains this best, not your woo.
Ah, quantum uncertainty. Do you know why the act of observing such tiny particles affects the outcome of the experiment? It's because the particles are so minute that anything we do to observe them will affect either them or our results accordingly. For example, if we were to try to measure the position of a particle by bouncing high frequency photons off of it(and it has to be high frequency to determine the position of a particle to any usable degree) the fact that the photons are bouncing off the particle has an effect on the velocity of the particle, thus making it impossible for us to determine it's velocity through that experiment. Conversely if we try to measure the particle's velocity using low frequency photons this causes data about the particle's position to become fuzzy and inaccurate.
This is simply a function of the scale and energies we're working with in quantum theory, it's not because the simple act of a consciousness observing something magically has an effect on it. Size and energy explains this best, not your woo.