Thanks BenLurkin.
· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·
Posted on 10/23/2022 8:07:06 AM PDT by BenLurkin
One of the earliest realizations in the history of quantum mechanics is that matter has a wave-like property.
Other physicists soon confirmed ...electrons scattered off a thin foil before landing on a target. The way the electrons scattered was more characteristic of a wave than a particle.
What, exactly, is a wave of matter?
Schrödinger...developed his famous equation to describe the behavior of those waves... But Schrödinger's idea flew in the face of more experimental tests. For example, even though an electron acted like a wave midflight, when it reached a target, it landed as a single, compact particle, so it couldn't be physically extended in space.
Instead, an alternative interpretation began to gain ground...the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, and it is by far the most popular interpretation... In this model, the wave function...doesn't really exist. Instead, it's a mathematical convenience that we use to describe a cloud of quantum mechanical probabilities for where we might find a subatomic particle the next time we go looking for it.
When two particles interact, they don't just bump into each other; for a brief time, their wave functions overlap. When that happens, you can't have two separate wave functions anymore. Instead, you must have a single wave function that describes both particles simultaneously.
When we retrace all the steps of a measurement, what comes out is a series of entanglements from overlapping wave functions.
In quantum mechanics, we're never sure what a particle will do — sometimes it may go up, sometimes it may go down, and so on. In this interpretation, every time a quantum particle interacts with another quantum particle, the universal wave function splits into multiple sections, with different universes containing each of the different possible results.
And this is how you get a multiverse.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
The concept of the multiverse was really just a rejection by quantum physicists of the Coppenhagen “collapsing wave function” interpretation. They simply don’t see why anything had to “collapse” when it entangles with the quantum particles of the measurement device.
Since every experiment ever done shows that the quantum fields obey strict rules of probability at the point of decoherence, the simplest model is to accept that every alternative state also happens according to its own probability.
Those of us who exist at the macro level may ponder this for our amusement but it has no effect on the Universe we inhabit. The secret is to not ask the question “What is really real?”. What matters is what information is useful.
‘The Lord works in mysterious ways.’
The more we discover, the more that statement is true.
” ... a miraculous world created by a loving God.”
“I don’t think you understand. This is complete fiction.”
I just keep wondering if you would be saying the same thing if we were 2D entities speculating about a positive 3D universe?
Please let me know if I am wrong, but it appears that while either theory could be true, there is only one observable universe at any given time.
“Same reason there are not more then two genders.”
What reason is that?
We just guess about what’s out there but once our blinders come off look out
Somehow I suspected that this was your viewpoint. There's a bible verse that exactly describes the situation you find yourself in my friend. It's long and bit complex and your reaction is going to be to ignore it. But understand this: This is the great God of the universe personally trying to show you the error of your ways.
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
The truth of a creator God is suppressed in our world today by those who follow the ways of man and not of God.
Rom 1:19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
What Paul is saying here is that the creation, the universe around you, is so miraculous, so deep, so complex, so designed and so ordered that it is intellectually impossible to attribute it to anything but a creator God. The evidence is right in front of your face with DNA and the myriad of miracles that are IMPOSSIBLE to happen on their own.
Rom 1:21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
So instead of believing that there is a God people have instead tried to attribute these miracles to anything BUT God. They pretend to be wise by acting intellectually superior (wise) and talking about how a multiverse makes so much sense.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
You my friend if you do not believe in God are believing in a lie. It's the same lie that billions of people have been sucked into and it literally led to predicable results in our society today.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
This is the world we live in today. A world without God is a world where these values are paramount and are celebrated.
There are other dimensions. That is for sure. God himself exists in a dimension that is beyond our capability to completely understand....just as the flatlander couldn't fully comprehend the sphere.
But that's a far cry from postulating that the miracle of our universe has to be trivialized by finding a "natural" explanation.
“Somehow I suspected that this was your viewpoint. “
That was your words, not mine.
Thank you! Exactly right. If you’ve ever listened to Dr. James Tour he lays it out pretty well (as have others). The Bible says God spoke and everything came into existence. I personally don’t think science will ever be able to figure that out. Nothing wrong with investigating His creation and appreciating His wisdom but trying to figure it out to prove He doesn’t exist... good luck with that.
Jesus was part of the creation process.
The left attacks creationism everywhere and at any cost yet they reap and sew the demonic influences. Yet deny that influence when it shows up in our physical world.
Some stuff turns into matter when it gets here — materializes when it encounters material. I guess other stuff doesn’t. I wonder what that stuff is.
Space, matter, energy, and time only exist as an extension of conscious observers.
No physical event of any kind can take place without an observer. And that observer has a consciousness that cannot presently be explained by science. This is the HARD problem of science.
Many scientists want to believe that consciousness arises as an emergent property of physical systems such as neurons in the brain. While this may not be an unreasonable assumption, there is no scientific evidence to support it.
Relativity demonstrates that there is no such thing as a simultaneity of events except when we superimpose a specific frame of reference on them. The frame of reference is that of an observer. An observer has consciousness. Anything separated by distance is also separated by time because of the universal speed limit of light. So, two events can only be simultaneous from a limited number of perspectives. If one observer is proximally closer to the location of one event that is perceived as simultaneous to another event, then an observer proximally close to the other event will NOT perceive them as simultaneous. (I am assuming that light speed remains constant in all directions in the universe, which is something that has not yet been confirmed with certainty I believe.)
In a sense, every conscious observer experiences the universe in a slightly different way. The difference between various observers will be small or even undetectable at vast distances from the observer because we experience very limited resolution at great distances. Our individual experiences are like “parallel universes” that overlap. Like train tracks that appear to converge in the distance, they are actually parallel to each other.
In this sense, there is a multi-verse, but anything that is not connected to our universe in some way might as well be fiction because if it is undetectable in any way then it is no different than something that doesn’t exist in the first place.
So the moon is not there if nobody is looking at it?
Time, space, matter, and energy were created from a more fundamental reality.
Does our consciousness arise as an emergent property of complex patterns of time, space, matter, and energy? Or does it reside in the more fundamental reality and experience time, space, matter, and energy virtually? I don’t know. I’m not sure science can answer this question.
What’s more, science always involves observation, which implies an observer, which implies consciousness. I don’t think we can have a controlled experiment in which consciousness is removed from the process.
“So the moon is not there if nobody is looking at it?”
It is certain that we can measure and observe things indirectly. So the moon’s existence is not contingent upon someone always looking at it with his or her eyes.
But what is the moon? Like all other objects made of matter, it is comprised of elements from the periodic table. Those are comprised of things like protons, electrons, and neutrons. These are things we know exist without directly observing them.
What I’m asserting is that the moon and even the elements that the moon is made of are not the fundamental reality. They are merely abstractions of the mind. It is not that the moon is not “real” but that it is a virtual object constructed by our minds from our limited set of perceptions and measurements and represents something within the fundamental reality that we cannot observe directly. It is our minds that superimpose the laws of physics upon virtual objects such as the moon.
From a psychological standpoint, from early childhood, our minds try to make sense of the torrent of sensory input it receives. We form the concept of objects. And then, somewhere around 7 or 8 months of age I think, we begin to experience the perception of the permanence of objects. However, this is really a construction of the mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.