• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is wrong with Quantum Mechanics?

That is something to look forward to
 
Re: The family business

Mr Person said:
That is not the atheist position, and I am agnostic.

Your first and most fundamental mistake is expecting reality to make sense. Reality is.




Thus far the Hartle-Hawking no boundary proposition stands, until disproven.



This means that there was a point at which all energy (and matter, though if Einstein is right there is no mass in itself rather, there is only energy, and mass is an emergent property of that energy) existed in a dimensionless point. The statement "Time does not exist" was true at that point.

There was a first point at which "time does not exist" was false. The temporal dimension, along with three large spatial dimensions, existed from that point on.

But if this is the correct view, it is not logical to speak of a before time. How could there be? "before" is a temporal term. The only sense that can be made of this is in the language of mathematics, one that you do not at all understand, and one which I begin to understand but will probably spend the rest of my life trying to learn.

But the direct implication here is that it is not logical to speak of the universe being "created". "ed" indicates past tense. Temporal terms only make sense after the statement "there is time" is true. There is no before because there cannot be a before, there being no temporal dimension extending in that particular dimension.

The big bang is the indescribable, incomprehensible difference between the statement "spacetime exists" being false and it being true. I doubt we can ever describe it, for whatever it is exists in dimensionlessness. And dimensionlessness is incomprehensible for us beings who exist at points where the statement "there is spacetime" aka "there are dimensions" is true.




Does this seem like nonsense? Good. Because reality is nonsense. It doesn't owe you anything, so how dare you demand it make sense to you? Reality is. Is is. And I'm going to give you your rejoinder. You should quote me the following: "I am that I am".

Why? Because God has the same problem the universe has. What made God? If the concept of "before reality" makes sense, if "there is God" is true, AND if your way of derping about reality is true, then there must have been a BEFORE GOD.

And how is that possible?




Your God is my big bang. The difference is, as uncanny as it is, I am comfortable with the concept and the uncertainty of never being able to explain in English how it could possibly be that reality could go from a dimensionless point to the statement "there is time, and there is space-time" being true. I don't expect it all to make sense to me. And I'd probably be as bored as I was frightened if it did.


My reality doesn't need to have an intent. It doesn't need to look out for me. It doesn't have to have agency. Yours does. My reality is testable, thus possibly always wrong, possibly always capable of expansion. Yours is tiny, narrow, and stupid. I think I'm sitting pretty.

;)
Click to expand...

Other ways of saying some of that:





I've run my mouth about it before.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/cons...l?highlight=big+bang+time+true#post1068862709

https://www.debatepolitics.com/beli...l?highlight=big+bang+time+true#post1068179640

https://www.debatepolitics.com/phil...l?highlight=big+bang+time+true#post1065144193

<gives self a gold star>
 
Re: The family business

Quantum Field Theory is pretty cool.


Quantum field theory - Wikipedia

Hard to grasp at first, it makes sense only when simplified to say, “**** pops up out of nowhere all the time, then it disappears.”
 
zyzygy said:
Since that time, there has been ample evidence that wavefunction collapse is not driven by conscious observers alone. In fact, every interaction a quantum particle makes can collapse its state. Careful analysis reveals that the Schrodinger Cat "experiment" would play out in the real world as follows: as soon as the radioactive atom interacts with the Geiger counter, it collapses from its non-decayed/decayed state into one definite state. The Geiger counter gets definitely triggered and the Cat gets definitely killed. Or the Geiger counter gets definitely not triggered and the cat is definitely alive. But both don't happen.

In summary, quantum state collapse is not driven just by conscious observers, and "Schrodinger's Cat" was just a teaching tool invented to try to make this fact more obvious by reducing the observer-driven notion to absurdity. Unfortunately, many popular science writers in our day continue to propagate the misconception that a quantum state (and therefore reality itself) is determined by conscious observers. They use this erroneous claim as a springboard into unsubstantial and non-scientific discussions about the nature of reality, consciousness, and even Eastern mysticism. To them, "Schrodinger's Cat" is not an embarrassing indication that their claims are wrong, but proof that the world is as absurd as they claim. Such authors either misunderstand Schrodinger's Cat, or purposely twist it to sell books.

What did Schrodinger's Cat experiment prove? | Science Questions with Surprising Answers.
Click to expand...
That last part - those guys should be shot!-> QM is hard enough to grasp without cons like that adding bad information and flat-out lies.
 
marke said:
Strangely, there are theories in QM in which it can be said a living creature could be dead and alive at the same time. I know it's weird.

Dead or Alive, Schrodinger's Cat Can Be in 2 Boxes at Once | Live Science

Not only can the quantum cat be alive and dead at the same time — but it can also be in two places at once, new research shows
Click to expand...
I probably understand QM better than most laymen since I've been reading pop-sci theoretical (esp particle) physics books for several decades now. My first was in HS when I found a book with the "particle zoo" idea from before quarks were fully theorized, which was just a decade earlier. The last line of all my posts here for the last several years says it all ...

"After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg"
 
calamity said:
No one except for the religious zealots declares anything. Scientist propose solutions, back up theories with lots of math and then seek verifying evidence via experimentation. Again, this should not be hard to understand.
Click to expand...

Science is not hard to understand. For example, how could the Colorado River cut through 8,000 feet of hardened floodwater sediments if those sediments had all been formed under shallow ocean waters? Logic demands a few "possible" solutions. One, the sediments were formed first x 8,000 feet in depth. Two, the Colorado River which currently flows through the Grand Canyon at 5,000 feet below the Kaibab sedimentary rock at the top could not have been responsible for cutting the canyon from the rock after the rock was formed.
 
Mr Person said:
Mass is an emergent property of energy. Ask Einstein. Most of the property we observe as mass arises from the behavior color states of gluon fields (see quantum chromodynamics).

Also there is no such thing as "spirit matter" or "spirit mass". That is a very stupid thing to have copy/pasted.
Click to expand...

Thoughts are not physical, but spiritual. You cannot see thoughts. Thoughts cannot be created in the lab. Thoughts come from without the body, not from chemical reactions or electrical charges within the body.
 
bomberfox said:
There is the i dont know part but for the biblical stories and god you not only have the geological strata, but also population mechanics, and the fact we know evolution happens that shows there was no global flood.
Click to expand...

Folded strata in the Grand Canyon testifies of geological catastrophism while the flood-deposited sediments were still soft.
 
bomberfox said:
We call it evolutionary theory which is different from abiogenesis. Your last paragraph is just word salad.
Click to expand...

Evolutionary theory has no clue how life began, which makes the title of Darwin's book on the preservation of favored races, "The Origin of Species," a misnomer.
 
marke said:
Thoughts are not physical, but spiritual. You cannot see thoughts. Thoughts cannot be created in the lab. Thoughts come from without the body, not from chemical reactions or electrical charges within the body.
Click to expand...

What gives you that idea?

When a single neuron fires, it is an isolated chemical blip. When many fire together, they form a thought.

Mind Aglow: Scientists Watch Thoughts Form in the Brain - Scientific American
Click to expand...

If thoughts originated outside the body, brain injuries would not matter. But, we all know they do. Drugs, alcohol and brain injuries all result in scrambled thoughts. Ergo, thoughts are definitely a function of the brain.
 
calamity said:
What gives you that idea?

If thoughts originated outside the body, brain injuries would not matter. But, we all know they do. Drugs, alcohol and brain injuries all result in scrambled thoughts. Ergo, thoughts are definitely a function of the brain.
Click to expand...

There is little doubt that thoughts cannot be processed in damages brains, but that does not mean that thoughts are chemical or electrical in nature. Science cannot prove thoughts are born of ignorant accidental electrical impulses, but they are free to speculate such.
 
marke said:
There is little doubt that thoughts cannot be processed in damages brains, but that does not mean that thoughts are chemical or electrical in nature. Science cannot prove thoughts are born of ignorant accidental electrical impulses, but they are free to speculate such.
Click to expand...
I'll say
 
Thoughts, for the most part, are reactions to impulses driven by hormones and other chemical callings from throughout the body that are tempered by memories. Hormones influence us to overeat. Remembering how crappy we feel after overeating convinces us to stop, overriding the urge to eat the whole thing. Multiply that by 1000000000000 and you get a glimpse of how thoughts and actions correlate.
 
calamity said:
Thoughts, for the most part, are reactions to impulses driven by hormones and other chemical callings from throughout the body that are tempered by memories. Hormones influence us to overeat. Remembering how crappy we feel after overeating convinces us to stop, overriding the urge to eat the whole thing. Multiply that by 1000000000000 and you get a glimpse of how thoughts and actions correlate.
Click to expand...

Is racism due to bad electrical impulses in the human brain? Are bad electrical impulses to blame for racism or are racists to be blamed for thinking the thoughts themselves? Can atheist science fix the problem of bad thoughts resulting from ignorant electrical impulses while at the same time trying to fix the weather they think is broken?
 
marke said:
Is racism due to bad electrical impulses in the human brain? Are bad electrical impulses to blame for racism or are racists to be blamed for thinking the thoughts themselves? Can atheist science fix the problem of bad thoughts resulting from ignorant electrical impulses while at the same time trying to fix the weather they think is broken?
Click to expand...

Tell us all about what religious science can do. Atheist science, what a silly phrase!

kj8gn.webp
 
marke said:
Is racism due to bad electrical impulses in the human brain? Are bad electrical impulses to blame for racism or are racists to be blamed for thinking the thoughts themselves? Can atheist science fix the problem of bad thoughts resulting from ignorant electrical impulses while at the same time trying to fix the weather they think is broken?
Click to expand...

lol...that post is too stupid to take serious. I 'll let you figure out where from racism originates and why. I already know.
 
To get back on topic, perhaps marke can tell us what is wrong with QM? He can pray for some good electrical impulses from god to help him answer.
 
calamity said:
lol...that post is too stupid to take serious. I 'll let you figure out where from racism originates and why. I already know.
Click to expand...

Atheist science! :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
calamity said:
lol...that post is too stupid to take serious. I 'll let you figure out where from racism originates and why. I already know.
Click to expand...

Racism got a huge boost when Darwin came out with his famous book on the preservation of favored races. Darwin is famous for his racist evolutionary views about blacks being the link between apes and white humans.

darwin 22.webp
 
Wrong with Quantum Mechanics? You know - double time on Sundays

marke said:
Science which bans God without proof or just cause is atheist science, not unbiased science.

View attachment 67291237
Click to expand...

We've covered this one before; it doesn't make any more sense the second time. Nor the nth; please spare us ...
 
Wrong with Quantum Mechanics? Hard to get the parts

marke said:
Racism got a huge boost when Darwin came out with his famous book on the preservation of favored races. Darwin is famous for his racist evolutionary views about blacks being the link between apes and white humans.

...
Click to expand...

Actually, you mean Darwin's gormless nephew, I think it was. Who shall go nameless ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom