Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except that the particle/wave nature of electrons has been unambiguously demonstrated countless times.
Yes, indeed it has.
What are the implications of that? Does that not imply that the electron, as a discrete bit of matter, ceases to exist when not under observation, and it's movements instead of being objective become calculated?
The results of countless experiments seem to indicate exactly that.
In other words, "reasonable", right? I'm sorry, but you seem to think that "serious case" is somehow less than "reasonable argument". If there's a "serious case" for God, then you can't say there isn't a "reasonable argument" for God.
Yes I can and in fact that is what I have been doing so that clearly proves I can say it.
However I reiterate, what I am talking about here is two different failed cases for god. One that fails because it is wrong and appeals to purely ludicrous arguments.
The other fails because it is wrong but at least it appears to serious subjects. It involves sitting down and talking physics, biology, philosophy. It may not still be a valid or credible or reasonable argument for god, but at least you can take such people "seriously".
And again if you stop wasting time talking to me and watch the entire debate in context you will see this is what he meant. "Serious" in this context was meant to mean "not ludicrous" and not to mean "convincing" in any way.
And most people who play the lottery don't win. That doesn't mean that the lottery isn't specifically set up so that there are occasional winners.
The lottery is set up so that the people who manage the lottery make money... they are not out to "reverse" spread the wealth.
Are you suggesting God is like the play, The Tragedy of Dr. Faust portrays?
God is the Director?
Quote:
Prologues
The Prologue in the Theatre In the first prologue, three people (the theatre director, the poet and an actor) discuss the purpose of the theatre. The director approaches the theatre from a financial perspective, and is looking to make an income by pleasing the crowd; the actor seeks his own glory through fame as an actor; and the poet aspires to create a work of art with meaningful content. Many productions use the same actors later in the play to draw connections between characters: the director reappears as God, the poet as Faust and the actor as Mephistopheles.
The implications are profound. It means the whole question of mind/brain duality is answered, because your brain is but a projection and doesn't actually exist. It means that whatever this Universe is, and whatever it's purpose, we can say with certainty that it was designed by an intelligence, as simulated realities don't just pop up on their own. And it says that there is in fact a larger reality, as this is just a subset of something else.
Have you read Descartes? His idea is essentially the same and scientists have know his philosophy is as useless as religion for centuries. I really don't see what good it would do me to believe you... as I mentioned, at least with Einstein's wave-particle duality theory, I can now understand and design lasers. What good does it do, to think gods are having a party? At least with the hypothesis of Christianity, I could get the slight hope or self-assured peace of mind that I will aquire blissful Immortality through certain actions, mainly believing I will acquire certain immortality. What peace of mind did Roman theism bring once all the processes of Earth were discovered not to be led by sentient minds? I mean, if you are going to replace Christianity or Science, you are going to have to give us a little incentive.
Quote:
This larger reality, BTW, can be explored. I have done so myself, though I'm a rank amateur compared to others. But I did so in a way that satisfied myself that it was real. Even were you to hear the story and believe me, you may or may not be convinced, but that's okay for you don't have to be. You can do it yourself.
As for pork, knock yourself out.
I can explore my dreams quite perfectly... I think I'll be fine with that. Why are my dreams being calculated so horribly, yet my wakeful existence is so very persistent? What would be the purpose for this projection? would it be so that the demiurge can look good for the other gods? or so the demiurge makes money entertaining the other gods? or does the demiurge have something more meaningful in mind?
Apparently YOU, a virtual fake unreal imaginary being, have been able to escape the simulation... However, you are completely DEPENDENT on the simulation mechanism, so you simply CANNOT escape... What could be possible is that the demiurge introduced you to MORE fake, unreal, imaginary, virtual, thoughts which you now think model the "Actual" existence. Do you think the demiurge bothers to think its "objective existence" might also be virtual fake and imaginary? Only the MECHANISM ITSELF could possibly "experience"/explored its environment. So unless you ARE the universe, you will never know what is outside it... you will only ever know what is INSIDE your universe... that being your mind... the projection mechanism which is done by your Brain.
But please, do entertain or enlighten us with the details you have explored about the "larger reality."
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 10-10-2011 at 08:43 AM..
That doesn't mean that it is, either. Lotteries are designed to make money for the state, not visa versa. It's a bad analogy.
If they were designed to make money for the state they would be having a "regressive" redistribution tax. In that everyone is taxed the same amount, then the money is mostly redistributed to only on individual. I'm pretty sure that lotteries are private institutions... that the state allows to let the public gamble their pocket change away... and that most of the people who actually participate in the lotteries aren't rich, so the poor are being taxed to redistribute the wealth to one individual... how Reaganomic!
BTW orogenicman, because of the way we use our words, technically any process that comes from our apparent free decisions (anything done using human cognition) would be "not natural"... or "designed by a sentient being" I suppose the theists would have to use our own existence as a method for their induction... since our human cognition has not been explained naturally yet... that will only happen once computers acquire cognition. In which case the computer's cognition mechanism would be a model for how our genes, proteins, and cells can process the function of cognition naturally, since we already know natural evolution can develop many mechanisms... cognition is the only mechanism left to understand naturally and model properly... once that is done, sentience itself will be a part of science's understanding of nature.
What good does it do, to think gods are having a party? At least with the hypothesis of Christianity, I could get the slight hope or self-assured peace of mind that I will aquire blissful Immortality through certain actions, mainly believing I will acquire certain immortality. What peace of mind did Roman theism bring once all the processes of Earth were discovered not to be led by sentient minds? I mean, if you are going to replace Christianity or Science, you are going to have to give us a little incentive.
I said nothing about gods having a party. I said our reality is a digital simulation. The implications are that it was designed by an intelligence and that our consciousness exists separately from it. This means, in fact, that 'physical' death doesn't mean the end of consciousness as 'physical' death is merely an aspect of the simulation. Your body dies, but your body was never real, just your consciousness and experiences.
Quote:
I can explore my dreams quite perfectly... I think I'll be fine with that. Why are my dreams being calculated so horribly, yet my wakeful existence is so very persistent? What would be the purpose for this projection?
How do you mean they're being calculated horribly? The dream reality is no less real (or not real) than is this one.
Quote:
Apparently YOU, a virtual fake unreal imaginary being, have been able to escape the simulation... However, you are completely DEPENDENT on the simulation mechanism, so you simply CANNOT escape...
I am not a fake imaginary being. My consciousness is real. My experiences are real. As are you and all other conscious beings. It's just that those experiences are being played out in a 'world' that is nothing more than a giant computer program that we're all experiencing simultaneously.
As for my personal experiences, I have observed things happening thousands of miles away from me that were later indepently confirmed to have actually occurred. More than once.
You seem to think my idea is a bit nutty. That's okay, many ideas once thought nutty are now commonly accepted as fact. But let me ask you this:
Forget everything else about our discussion, and explain how objectively real electrons, shot one at a time through a double slit apparatus, can create an interference pattern? An objectively real electron does one of three things. It goes through the left slit, the right slit, or it bounces off the apparatus and does neither. If it goes throught the left slit, it should impact directly (more or less) behind it. Ditto for the right slit.
Yet they do not. Explain how an objectively real electron manages to go through both slits and interfere with itself.
If they were designed to make money for the state they would be having a "regressive" redistribution tax. In that everyone is taxed the same amount, then the money is mostly redistributed to only on individual. I'm pretty sure that lotteries are private institutions... that the state allows to let the public gamble their pocket change away... and that most of the people who actually participate in the lotteries aren't rich, so the poor are being taxed to redistribute the wealth to one individual... how Reaganomic!
BTW orogenicman, because of the way we use our words, technically any process that comes from our apparent free decisions (anything done using human cognition) would be "not natural"... or "designed by a sentient being" I suppose the theists would have to use our own existence as a method for their induction... since our human cognition has not been explained naturally yet... that will only happen once computers acquire cognition. In which case the computer's cognition mechanism would be a model for how our genes, proteins, and cells can process the function of cognition naturally, since we already know natural evolution can develop many mechanisms... cognition is the only mechanism left to understand naturally and model properly... once that is done, sentience itself will be a part of science's understanding of nature.
But that assumes that cognition is not a natural phenomenon of the human brain. And I for one would like to see the details of the research that makes this conclusion. It's the same argument theists make with regard to the universe itself, that somehow, all the natural processes that generate the universe in which we reside somehow came to be through other than natural means. The human brain is a product of the natural environment. It stands to reason that human cognition is also a product of the natural environment in which it finds itself.
If it were shown that the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation was not evidence for the big bang, that would go a long way towards falsifying it. Get busy now, and dig up evidence refuting the CMBR. I can't wait for your scholarly report. Now doubt it will be a hit.
I'm not arguing against the Big Bang, only against naturalistic creation. How does the CMBR suggest that the universe has a naturalistic origin rather than "God did it"? Would we not have CMBR if God created the universe rather than nature?
Quote:
See above. Did you know that bearing false witness is still a mortal sin, according to your own religious tenents? As is "lying for Jesus".
Then prove that I'm bearing false witness by FINALLY telling us how naturalistic creation can be tested and falsified instead of avoiding the question yet again.
When Newton discovered the cause of rainbows, it was very much thought to be an act of god. Sadly, many today still see it that way. Yes, rainbows are a natural phenomenon, as is every other detectable natural process. Can you name a single one that isn't? If you can't, then why would you think that all of the natural processes in the universe are derived from a universe that isn't itself naturally derived?
I know that you think this argument makes sense, but it's no different than someone pointing to a top spinning on a table and pointing out how it remains spinning without any guiding hand, and then determining that no guiding hand set it spinning in the first place.
Quote:
Actually, several phyisicsts believe that it can be repeated. And many of the processes that are thought to have been involved are being run in computer simulations. Whether it is ethical to actually create another universe and possibly destroy ours in the process just to satisfy your unreasonable demand is the real question.
I'm not asking anyone to do it, just for you to explain how naturalistic creation is testable and falsifiable. Saying that purposeful beings (physicists) can hypothetically cause universes to exist doesn't suggest that our own universe wasn't caused by any purposeful being. So even if, hypothetically, scientists were to purposefully cause a universe to exist, how would this prove that ours was created naturalistically?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
