You may ask "Which Universe Am I In?"

[ding]

HORSESHIT

What a dumbass.

Living things versus inanimate objects is self evident.

Cause and effect is self evident.

 

[scruffy]

Living things versus inanimate objects is self evident.

Cause and effect is self evident.

Sure. You cite yourself as the ultimate authority.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Sure. You cite yourself as the ultimate authority.

 

[ding]

Sure. You cite yourself as the ultimate authority.

I cite reality. Feel free to dismiss cause and effect though.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

It always amazes me how the pseudo-scientists and cranks in these forums, are always the first to get frustrated, angry that the more rational amongst us refuse to respect their unhinged beliefs. I've debated in many forums like this and found very few truly decent science advocates.

I've encountered very few competent educated scientists in these forums over the years, there are one or two here but that's about it. The competent, confident and secure scientists are usually rather quiet, don't try to show off, don't speak down to others.

The cranks though are downright rude, insecure and constantly striving to establish their importance, their unique insights and so on, it's never really about science but about them, their opinions, their superiority.

This goes to show that obtaining a degree in science far from guarantees intelligence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It always amazes me how the pseudo-scientists and cranks in these forums, are always the first to get frustrated, angry that the more rational amongst us refuse to respect their unhinged beliefs. I've debated in many forums like this and found very few truly decent science advocates.

And it neither surprises nor amazes me that the posters who deny true scientific theories try to calm everyone else pseudo scientists and cranks.


Because they do it every single time. There are only about 4 tools in their toolbox. And not one of them is scientific evidence. So instead we are treated to, charlatan's parlor tricks, appeals to emotion, and dimestore gaslighting.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

And it neither surprises nor amazes me that the posters who deny true scientific theories try to calm everyone else pseudo scientists and cranks.

Theories are not absolute truths and should not be treated as if they are. To question a theory is to engage in science, theories should be questioned, one should not be attacked or accused of gaslighting or fakery for questioning any claim in the natural sciences.

Because they do it every single time. There are only about 4 tools in their toolbox. And not one of them is scientific evidence. So instead we are treated to, charlatan's parlor tricks, appeals to emotion, and dimestore gaslighting.

In the case of the Cambrian explosion, I (and plenty of other people) are concerned that the absence of expected evidence, is itself a form of evidence. You might not and that's fine, but I am and I should not be attacked for my position.

There's no "parlor trick" or "emotion" here, I personally do not find the absence of the evidence to be reconcilable with the empirical expectations of the theory, I simply do not find them compatible.

One of two things is wrong:

1. The absence of evidence is only an apparent absence.
2. The theory is wrong, certainly when speaking of 500 MYA - the Cambrian explosion.

I've been looking at this for over forty years, I regularly read and update myself on the subject and the protagonists on each side of the debate and I simply cannot accept 1. above.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

People like Richard Dawkins are on record as saying "evolution is a fact" but no scientist should ever make such an assertion, no theory is beyond question, as soon as one teaches that they are no better than the dogmatic Catholics who imprisoned Galileo.

It arouses in me the very same suspicions that it would have aroused if I'd witnessed the dogma of the church back in Galileo's' day.

Dogma is the antithesis of science and sadly evolution theory has been elevated by some to the status of an absolute, unquestionable truth with a penalty for those who do dare to doubt.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Theories are not absolute truths and should not be treated as if they are.

Nobody stated or implied otherwise, nor would anyone state or imply such a universal truth. The typically poor logic, in the form of a non sequitur/ red herring, that I have now come to expect from you in these discussions.

 

[scruffy]

I cite reality. Feel free to dismiss cause and effect though.

Your linear thinking is very primitive.

Time doesn't exist for photons.

We have no idea WHATSOEVER what causality means at that level.

As a matter of fact, it's quite controversial right now. There is a great deal of research going on.

But go ahead, cling to your beliefs. It's your comfort zone.

I choose to work outside of mine. I DISCOVER how God works, I don't claim to know.

And I'm certainly not going to take anyone's word from 3000 years ago.

But you be ding and I'll be me.

 

[ding]

Your linear thinking is very primitive.

Time doesn't exist for photons.

We have no idea WHATSOEVER what causality means at that level.

As a matter of fact, it's quite controversial right now. There is a great deal of research going on.

But go ahead, cling to your beliefs. It's your comfort zone.

I choose to work outside of mine. I DISCOVER how God works, I don't claim to know.

And I'm certainly not going to take anyone's word from 3000 years ago.

But you be ding and I'll be me.

That's nice. Living things versus inanimate objects is self evident. Cause and effect is self evident.

 

[scruffy]

That's nice. Living things versus inanimate objects is self evident. Cause and effect is self evident.

Whatever. If you've convinced yourself it's true it must be true. You're the authority.

 

[ding]

Whatever. If you've convinced yourself it's true it must be true. You're the authority.

Reality is the authority. I'm just an observer.

 

[scruffy]

Reality is the authority. I'm just an observer.

No, you're a troll.

 

[Nobody911]

#quantummechanics



Probabilities. Sean Carroll's '"Many World's Theory" We have "The Quantum Measurement Problem"
We also have "The GRW Theory" touched on.
GRW Theory and Quantum Entanglement touched on.

Moderated by Brian Greene

I wonder what thee great minds think of Climate Change and human contributions?

Wave function collapse is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics that arises from the act of measurement. When a measurement is made on a quantum system, its wave function collapses to a specific state corresponding to the measurement outcome.

This is commonly referred to as the measurement problem in quantum mechanics.The issue of wave function collapse is at the heart of the debate over the interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Some interpretations, such as the Copenhagen interpretation, consider wave function collapse as a real physical process that occurs during measurement. Others, like the many-worlds interpretation, argue that wave function collapse is an illusion and that all possible outcomes of a measurement actually occur in parallel universes( I don't think that makes sense ).

The true nature of wave function collapse remains a topic of ongoing research and debate in the field of quantum mechanics. It is not yet fully understood whether wave function collapse is an inherent property of particles at the microscopic level or a result of the measurement process itself( but I think measurement affects reality at quantum level ).

Wave function collapse in quantum mechanics can be analogized to making a decision in daily life. Just as a particle exists in a superposition of states before measurement, a person may have multiple options or choices before making a decision.

When a decision is made, it collapses the possibilities into a single outcome, much like how measuring a quantum system collapses its wave function into a definite state.

In both cases, the act of observation or decision-making determines the final outcome. Just as observing or measuring a quantum system changes its state, our choices and actions in daily life can significantly impact our future outcomes.

So, the process of wave function collapse can be seen as similar to the moment when we make a choice or decision that determines our path forward.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Nobody stated or implied otherwise, nor would anyone state or imply such a universal truth. The typically poor logic, in the form of a non sequitur/ red herring, that I have now come to expect from you in these discussions.

I rest my case on this particular point, that you don't know these kinds of things doesn't surprise me.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

View attachment 1003787

I rest my case on this particular point, that you don't know these kinds of things doesn't surprise me.

See, you are confusing universal and existential statements again. I implore you to look up the difference. You keep making the same, silly errors.

Yes, some theories are facts.

Some theories are true. True things are facts.

You are not going to "put words in just the right order" to make this not so, so stop wasting your time.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

See, you are confusing universal and existential statements again. I implore you to look up the difference. You keep making the same, silly errors.

Yes, some theories are facts.

Theories must be falsifiable to even be called a "theory" in the serious sense. Therefore theories always carry the possibility of a future refutation. A fact carries no possibility of refutation.

Some theories are true. True things are facts.

No theory can be proven to be "true".

You are not going to "put words in just the right order" to make this not so, so stop wasting your time.

Putting them in the right order is what I do, putting them in the wrong order is your specialty.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Theories must be falsifiable to even be called a "theory" in the serious sense.

And they are.

You could falsify evolution. But you won't. Because it's true.

 

[Dante]

and...