Science Backs Up The Bible Again

[edthecynic]

If you're going to kill someone by deliberately hitting them with your car, the act was predetermined, but the choice to do it was on you.

If the act was predetermined, then you had no choice.
Again you are trying to have it both ways.

 

[james bond]

Ah, backing down now. I was saying show us your logic of my title being a lie..

It shows that John Bell has the best theory. Over that of Einstein's spooky action at a distance or other physicists' communications at a speed faster than light.

I did show it was not true. I didn't back down. "Science" is not equivalent to "John Bell". You don't understand the physics involved.

Determinism has been investigated by many others nobody has found a mechanism for determinism in QM, therefore it remains an unfounded hypothesis. You can believe what you want, but it's not part of the science of physics.

Thus, we have been able to apply this fact of life and now have quantum computers and communications faster than the speed of light -- Ask Ethan: Can We Use Quantum Entanglement To Communicate Faster-Than-Light?.

Entanglement does not lead to communication faster than the speed of light. Your reference explains why.

.

You are one of the worst posters in regards to science. You cannot even argue against how science backs up the Bible. You belittled John Stewart Bell's theory when experiments have been carried out to back it up. I'm starting to wonder if you are also one of the worst posters in regards to logic.

What Bell and others have postulated was how two aspects of quantum physics are often cited in the discussion of God or religion. It has become an addendum to "the spooky actions at a distance." My thinking is that it's probably in our nature that we relate what happens in nature to spirituality or something beyond it.

1. We look at the nature of cause and effect in quantum-level interactions. Before Bell, the quantum level actions and reactions appeared to violate barriers such as the speed of light and to occur without a logical relationship between cause and effect.

Depending on how one chooses to interpret these observations, this property either makes God’s existence seem more likely, as it provides an unpredictable opening for some unknown “choice,” or a claim that God does not play dice; or it makes God’s existence less likely, since it makes what is normally considered impossible just a question of long odds. Bell's theory showed the former. The experiments show long odds aren't related. The experiments showed quantum entanglements happen every single time and locality has nothing to do with it.

2. The second is the Many World hypothesis or the Multiverse hypothesis. This emanated from the wave-particle duality demonstrated by quantum physics and the necessity for probability rather than an objective, determined system. Since there are many possible states of a measured system and no objective way to know which ones do or do not exist, some philosophers claim that all of them exist, simultaneously, in parallel universes. Of course, there is no possible physical evidence to support this. The thinking persists mostly because it serves to deflect fine-tuning and intelligent design arguments, as well as evidence suggesting a universe of a finite age. Stephen Hawking believed this and took it to his grave.

 

[Terri4Trump]

God has predetermined the course of things.

I'd be careful with that stuff. I am a believer, but usually this stuff is BS. The Bible was never meant to be a scientific book.

Therefore there is NO "free will!"

See what I mean?

 

[james bond]

If you were predestined to make a left turn, then you were going to make a left turn. If you're going to kill someone by deliberately hitting them with your car, the act was predetermined, but the choice to do it was on you.

And if your left turn kills someone with your car, then your killing them WAS predetermined since your left turn WAS predetermined and they were predetermined to be there when you made your predetermined left turn.

This is making you go off your rocker, edthecynic. Calm down. You can't just write this off using logic. Read my post #22 that shows how the science of quantum mechanics leads us into these discussions. I follow what written in the Bible, so demonstrating the speed of light isn't violated, but the quantum particles are still entangled despite no locality shows science backs up the Bible. You have your own multiverse theory based on another experiment.

 

[james bond]

I'd be careful with that stuff. I am a believer, but usually this stuff is BS. The Bible was never meant to be a scientific book.

Understood. I agree the Bible was not meant to be a science book, but science ends up backing the Bible. We have many examples of it. What's important here is that we have free will and it gives us a choice whether to believe in God's objective moral values or not. Our physical choices as whether to make a left turn, right turn, stop, continue going straight, etc. seems to have been predetermined for us, i.e. God doesn't play dice.

 

[Terri4Trump]

I'd be careful with that stuff. I am a believer, but usually this stuff is BS. The Bible was never meant to be a scientific book.

Understood. I agree the Bible was not meant to be a science book, but science ends up backing the Bible. We have many examples of it. What's important here is that we have free will and it gives us a choice whether to believe in God's objective moral values or not. Our physical choices as whether to make a left turn, right turn, stop, continue going straight, etc. seems to have been predetermined for us, i.e. God doesn't play dice.

Absolutely we have free will. God knowing the future merely means that he knows the free will choices that we will make. God exists outside of time - there is no future or past for God. He sees all of history the way we might look at a giant mural. Thats a crappy analogy but not too crappy.

Science will never contradict the Bible since God is the author of all natural law.

159 Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth." "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."

Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[007]

I'd be careful with that stuff. I am a believer, but usually this stuff is BS. The Bible was never meant to be a scientific book.

Understood. I agree the Bible was not meant to be a science book, but science ends up backing the Bible. We have many examples of it. What's important here is that we have free will and it gives us a choice whether to believe in God's objective moral values or not. Our physical choices as whether to make a left turn, right turn, stop, continue going straight, etc. seems to have been predetermined for us, i.e. God doesn't play dice.

Absolutely we have free will. God knowing the future merely means that he knows the free will choices that we will make. God exists outside of time - there is no future or past for God. He sees all of history the way we might look at a giant mural. Thats a crappy analogy but not too crappy.

Science will never contradict the Bible since God is the author of all natural law.

159 Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth." "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Have you ever wondered where God gets his power? Does he not have to be a very powerful entity? Where does his power come from? Where did God come from? If God is the creator of everything, is it that he used MAGIC, or did he use a science, and where he did get this knowledge and power?

Now before you fly off the handle, I am a Christian, but I don't believe wondering those things will condemn someone to hell. It's natural for us to wonder.

 

[edthecynic]

If you were predestined to make a left turn, then you were going to make a left turn. If you're going to kill someone by deliberately hitting them with your car, the act was predetermined, but the choice to do it was on you.

And if your left turn kills someone with your car, then your killing them WAS predetermined since your left turn WAS predetermined and they were predetermined to be there when you made your predetermined left turn.

This is making you go off your rocker, edthecynic. Calm down. You can't just write this off using logic. Read my post #22 that shows how the science of quantum mechanics leads us into these discussions. I follow what written in the Bible, so demonstrating the speed of light isn't violated, but the quantum particles are still entangled despite no locality shows science backs up the Bible. You have your own multiverse theory based on another experiment.

You know less about quantum mechanics than you do about the bible, and you know NOTHING about the bible.

 

[edthecynic]

science ends up backing the Bible. We have many examples of it.

Give us scientific proof that a snake can speak the king's English.

 

[Terri4Trump]

Give us scientific proof that a snake can speak the king's English.

A snake is more intelligent than you obviously are.

 

[Wuwei]

You are one of the worst posters in regards to science. You cannot even argue against how science backs up the Bible. You belittled John Stewart Bell's theory when experiments have been carried out to back it up. I'm starting to wonder if you are also one of the worst posters in regards to logic.

That kind of vitriol is very unbecoming for a Christian.

John Bell is highly respected. Many experiments along his lines were successfully done. However the experiments had no ability to judge superdeterminism. It is not falsifiable, and therefore not science. I said his determinism "is not not popular among scientists." That is not "belittling" him.

Bell test experiments - Wikipedia

"For example, the hypothesis of superdeterminism in which all experiments and outcomes (and everything else) are predetermined cannot be tested (it is unfalsifiable)."​

For another theory that covers entanglement, goggle “transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics” That is much more physically justifiable than superdeterminism. You should read more from science sources, and not a youtube video.

1. We look at the nature of cause and effect in quantum-level interactions. Before Bell, the quantum level actions and reactions appeared to violate barriers such as the speed of light and to occur without a logical relationship between cause and effect.

That's right, they only "appeared to violate" causality.

Depending on how one chooses to interpret these observations, this property either makes God’s existence seem more likely, as it provides an unpredictable opening for some unknown “choice,” or a claim that God does not play dice; or it makes God’s existence less likely, since it makes what is normally considered impossible just a question of long odds. Bell's theory showed the former. The experiments show long odds aren't related. The experiments showed quantum entanglements happen every single time and locality has nothing to do with it.

God is unnecessary to explain entanglement.

2. The second is the Many World hypothesis or the Multiverse hypothesis. This emanated from the wave-particle duality demonstrated by quantum physics and the necessity for probability rather than an objective, determined system. Since there are many possible states of a measured system and no objective way to know which ones do or do not exist, some philosophers claim that all of them exist, simultaneously, in parallel universes. Of course, there is no possible physical evidence to support this. The thinking persists mostly because it serves to deflect fine-tuning and intelligent design arguments, as well as evidence suggesting a universe of a finite age. Stephen Hawking believed this and took it to his grave.

I don't personally abide by the Multiverse hypothesis.


.

 

[BreezeWood]

That kind of vitriol is very unbecoming for a Christian.

what planet are you from ...

 

[james bond]

That kind of vitriol is very unbecoming for a Christian.

John Bell is highly respected. Many experiments along his lines were successfully done. However the experiments had no ability to judge superdeterminism. It is not falsifiable, and therefore not science. I said his determinism "is not not popular among scientists." That is not "belittling" him.

Your vitriol is very unbecoming an atheist. It's just my opinion from the kind of posts you make.

Finally, you mention Bell's superdeterminism. He meant it as there is no free will. That's what the atheists are saying. However, it's just for physical states, not moral ones. So, for moral questions, such as do I obey God's commandments and objective moral values, humans still have free will and the Bible states it as such. The Bible also states superdeterminism as predestination. Now, is it falsifiable? In other words, can I have an experiment on predestination that is falsifiable? I don't know. I know we can do the experiments to demonstrate Bell's inequalities. Those are falsifiable. As for testing moral values and ethical behavior, I think there are tests that can. They probably can be falsified, too, if we are discussing God's objective moral values. As for human moral values, I don't know.

Here's a start on God's objective moral values vs. absolute moral values -- “Objective” or “Absolute” Moral Values? | Reasonable Faith.

As for the rest of your argument, I'm going to ignore because you cannot explain what you mean. I'm not going to read something just to understand what you cannot express yourself.

That's right, they only "appeared to violate" causality.

Agreed. There was also Einstein thinking there was information was being passed. There was no information being passed. We know the cause and effect, but still do not know how it works. One hypothesis from Stephen Hawking was that it is related to unifying the 4 fundamental forces of gravity and the standard model. Under quantum mechanics, the best theory is virtual particles are thought to mediate the actual interactions. However, that's impossible without locality.

God is unnecessary to explain entanglement.

Sez you. The Bible states otherwise. It goes to show you have no understanding of the tests for Bell's inequities.

I don't personally abide by the Multiverse hypothesis.

Than you have no understanding of wave-particle duality.

 

[SweetSue92]

God has predetermined the course of things.

"He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you." 1 Peter 1:20

Quantum mechanics just busted everything up for them

 

[SweetSue92]

Science ain't what it used to be

Neither is goD.

For a person as grown as you, you have some surprisingly juvenile habits

 

[james bond]

Give us scientific proof that a snake can speak the king's English.

You even have this wrong. Everyone knows snakes can't talk. Thus, it was Satan doing the talking.

I don't expect edthecynic to explain. Mostly, all he does is insult and complain.

Anyway, I was hoping someone would explain free will as Hitchens (dead now) or how Dawkins explains it. Does it have to do with quantum mechanics? QM is basically higher level math and physics.

I think the Christians have explained how quantum mechanics backs up what is said in the Bible. Whether you accept the theory or not is another matter. We don't accept the multiple worlds (multiverse) hypothesis.

 

[Crepitus]

Science ain't what it used to be

Neither is goD.

For a person as grown as you, you have some surprisingly juvenile habits

Are you referring to my lack of respect and reverence for things I feel undeserving of respect and reverence?

 

[Wuwei]

Finally, you mention Bell's superdeterminism. He meant it as there is no free will. That's what the atheists are saying. However, it's just for physical states, not moral ones.

Atheists in general are not saying that. Back to my first point. There is no need to try to justify the meaning of Bell's superdeterminism. Most scientists don't agree with superdeterninism anyway, but do agree with his theorem on local hidden variables. What Bell is doing in a sense is throwing in the towel as far as an explanation. But other scientists are continuing a deeper exploration.

As for the rest of your argument, I'm going to ignore because you cannot explain what you mean. I'm not going to read something just to understand what you cannot express yourself.

What you are ignoring is a concept that comes from classical electromagnetic physics and is adopted in QM. The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics involves the idea of advanced and retarded waves. That concept moves the idea of locality from our perspective to the perspective of the photon. From a photon's frame, there is no such concept as distance traveled and a time of flight.

In the unlikely event that you will look into the transactional interpretation further, here are some further notes that are glossed over in any account you might find. Advanced waves may seem like they violate locality, but think of the Fitzgerald contraction. The faster an object goes the shorter the universe appears in the objects frame of reference. As the object approaches the speed of light, the apparent distance to it's destination diminishes to zero. That also happens with time. The conclusion is that from the perspective of the photon, it is absorbed immediately after emission. The vanishing temporal and spatial variables make the photon's flight local.

To me that is a much more satisfying viewpoint than determinism in understanding entanglement. That is why I say God is unnecessary to explain entanglement.

As far as the multiverse hypothesis, you replied,

Than you have no understanding of wave-particle duality.

??? They are two different phenomena. Wave-particle duality is an integral part of mathematics of quantum mechanics. Particles traveling through space act as a wave. Interactions act as particles. The multiverse is a hypothesis that addresses the superposition of states and the fact that only one set of states is manifested and observed in an interaction. That is different from duality.

.

 

[SweetSue92]

Science ain't what it used to be

Neither is goD.

For a person as grown as you, you have some surprisingly juvenile habits

Are you referring to my lack of respect and reverence for things I feel undeserving of respect and reverence?

Your childish capitalization, yes. Every name is capitalized thus: Jim, Mary, Bob, Joe, Kate, God.

But in your childishness, we have goD.

I mean it. Stupidity.

 

[Crepitus]

Science ain't what it used to be

Neither is goD.

For a person as grown as you, you have some surprisingly juvenile habits

Are you referring to my lack of respect and reverence for things I feel undeserving of respect and reverence?

Your childish capitalization, yes. Every name is capitalized thus: Jim, Mary, Bob, Joe, Kate, God.

But in your childishness, we have goD.

I mean it. Stupidity.

Nope. There is no "tone" on the internet, I choose this way to demonstrate my contempt for certain people and ideas.