Page 33 of 54 FirstFirst ... 2329303132333435363743 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 540

Thread: Evolutionism vs creationism

  1. #321
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by littlebrather
    quantum physics abuse the world 'choice' strongly
    Quantum physics does not talk about choice at all. This is going to come across as very rude, but I feel the need to say it anyway: if you don't know anything about quantum physics, it's probably best not to try to make any claims about it. Especially if there are people around who actually do know something about the field.

    Quote Originally Posted by minchazo View Post
    Four completely separate points here

    I personally believe that god is an actual, physicial being.
    Think very carefully about this before you answer. What exactly do you mean when you say that God is "physical"?

    Quote Originally Posted by minchazo View Post
    Just because he knows what you're going to do doesn't limit your free will. Sherlock Holmes is a good example of this. He could determine what his opponent was going to do and plan for it. God can do the same thing, but to a much greater degree. Some people will bull-headedly refuse his help, no matter what intervention is provided.
    Two things. First, Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character. Therefore his abilities to predict human behaviour have no particular bearing on the real world. Second, even if he was a real person, Sherlock Holmes does not have the ability to know the future; he can only predict the actions of people to varying degrees of success. There is a big difference between saying that God has the ability to know with a high degree of certainty which outcome will come about, and saying that the only outcome that come about is the one that God has foreseen. Omniscience is incompatable with free will; superior knowledge, wisdom, and intelligence to what is available to us is not.

    Quote Originally Posted by minchazo View Post
    I think one reason we are so upset about Hell is because we don't understand the alternative. I mean, *everyone* knows that Hell is "fire & brimstone" (though afterwards the explanations would split off mightily). But what's the other option, the 'choose not to play' option? Is that better or worse than going to Hell?
    Well, to a Buddhist, non-existence is their closest equivalent to Heaven, so they'd probably be okay with it. A lot of other people would probably be pretty happy taking non-existence over eternal torture. The Bible expressly does not give non-existence as an option, however (at least not to people who were born after the death of Jesus). There are a fairly substantial group of Christians who do not believe in a literal Hell (or believe in annhiliation as opposed to Hell); this is presumably because they recognize how unreasonably unjust and immoral the idea of a literal biblical Hell actually is.
    Hoping to win with every class, doomed. Archer, Barbarian, Bard, Beastfighter, Druid, Elementalist, Farmer, Fighter, Monk, and ULE Priest down.

  2. #322
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Quantum physics does not talk about choice at all.
    delayed choice experiment

  3. #323
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by littlebrather View Post
    This is an experiment about choice, in the normal sense of the term, by the experimenter, as to whether or not they want to view light as a particle or a wave.
    Last edited by JellySlayer; 09-09-2010 at 04:31 AM.
    Hoping to win with every class, doomed. Archer, Barbarian, Bard, Beastfighter, Druid, Elementalist, Farmer, Fighter, Monk, and ULE Priest down.

  4. #324
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Esslingen, Germany
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    ADOM Guides - whatever you wanted to know about playing a certain class, but have been afraid to ask!

    Check out my youtube channel to see my ADOM videos, including a completed playthrough of the game. I try to give instructions, so if you want to see some place you haven't been before and get some hints on how to deal with it, this might help! There's also some other games featured there that you might find interesting.

  5. #325
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Posts
    171

    Default

    This is an experiment about choice, in the normal sense of the term
    While photons have to choose their way - A or B slit.
    So for photons to make choice is also mean normal sense?

  6. #326
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by littlebrather View Post
    While photons have to choose their way - A or B slit.
    So for photons to make choice is also mean normal sense?
    The photons are in superposition; they go through both slits simultaneously. Hence the interference pattern. The (particle) measurement causes the wavefunction to collapse into one state or the other, entirely randomly, destroying the superposition state. The photons do not have the choice of A or B any more than a flipped coin has the choice between heads or tails.
    Hoping to win with every class, doomed. Archer, Barbarian, Bard, Beastfighter, Druid, Elementalist, Farmer, Fighter, Monk, and ULE Priest down.

  7. #327
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Novosibirsk, Russia
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Ok, that the force makes photon to occurs in A nor B?
    lets come to it from another part - wave-particle dualism of photons in normal experiments (without delay) is given by the experimental implementation - is it coordinate or impulse measurements. And so on we can say - photons are like wave and their diffraction is just a reflection of wave-function squared. But when 'superposition' state is destroyed, why not we have two less intensive flashes in both detectors? It seems to be enough just to say that photon can not split and decided to go A or B randomly.
    I know enough about quanta and hv to explain it for myself, but all it will come to the world 'probability'. So after some time i decided for myself, that world 'choice' is enough to set aside all this deep-math stuff and after accepting some literature i understand that 'choice' is a common world to bypass such a 'probability moment'.

  8. #328
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by littlebrather View Post
    that world 'choice' is enough to set aside all this deep-math stuff and after accepting some literature i understand that 'choice' is a common world to bypass such a 'probability moment'.
    You're basicly saying that humans have no free will, and are ruled by statistics? Why not? However, till you prove it, i'll stay with my idea that we have a free will, because of the following thing : if i don't know, WTF does it change????





    Some space to annoy blank readers ^^









    Haven't won with : Druid, Priest, Elementalist, Weaponsmith, Ranger, Merchants, farmers, Necromancer,Thief
    Currently trying : Entertaining girlfriend. Very, Very, VERY hard.

    Just a silly online game

  9. #329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JellySlayer View Post
    Think very carefully about this before you answer. What exactly do you mean when you say that God is "physical"?
    *ponders before answering* I stated that God is an "actual, physical being." Meaning that He's not simply a 'force' pushing people to do good or a concept that controls nature. He is an actual being with a physical, tangible body having mass and occupying a three-dimensonal area.

    Two things. First, Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character. Therefore his abilities to predict human behaviour have no particular bearing on the real world. Second, even if he was a real person, Sherlock Holmes does not have the ability to know the future; he can only predict the actions of people to varying degrees of success. There is a big difference between saying that God has the ability to know with a high degree of certainty which outcome will come about, and saying that the only outcome that come about is the one that God has foreseen. Omniscience is incompatable with free will; superior knowledge, wisdom, and intelligence to what is available to us is not.
    Sherlock Holmes was a good example. No one considers his (albeit fictional) ability to predict actions as removing free will. Taking that ability to the Nth degree gets you someone who can (with 100% accuracy) predict the actions of another person. You're making the argument that God not only predicts the future but adjusts it to fit his whims. Omniscience is compatible with free will. Combining Omniscience with Omnipotence can cause problems...

    A lot of other people would probably be pretty happy taking non-existence over eternal torture.
    Who says we didn't exist? I was assuming we did exist and had the choice. Using the logical argument someone else used earlier, our options would be:
    A. Choose not to play. Avoid the whole Heaven/Hell thing
    B. Choose to play
    B1. Go to Hell
    B2. Go to Heaven

  10. #330
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minchazo View Post
    our options would be:
    A. Choose not to play. Avoid the whole Heaven/Hell thing
    B. Choose to play
    B1. Go to Hell
    B2. Go to Heaven
    What about B3. Play on both sides equally well?
    Haven't won with : Druid, Priest, Elementalist, Weaponsmith, Ranger, Merchants, farmers, Necromancer,Thief
    Currently trying : Entertaining girlfriend. Very, Very, VERY hard.

    Just a silly online game

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •