Existence of the soul and God: Scientific proof

[marcobiagini]

In the following site I analyse the incongruencies of the materialistic conception of the mind, on the basis of our present scientific knowledges about brain and matter.
This analysis points out how the laws of Physics prove that the brain cannot generate consciousness, which existence implies the presence in man of a unbiological/unmaterial element. The problem of consciousness is then strictly connected to the one of the existence of the soul and, consequently, the existence of God.


http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf.html


Marco Biagini

Ph.D in Solid State Physics

hmm..you probably have something very great to offer, but you're not presenting it fairly, in my opinion.

You see, I come here to debate, and when you simply point me to your site to learn what you're getting at, it shows me that you might not be here to debate.

Perhaps if you presented an argument, and then linked to parts of your site, it would seem more legitimate.

[Pooeypants]

I'd like to see a peer review for your article, I'll be curious at what the other physicists have to say.

[waterfalllife]

Am I incorrect in thinking that a theoretical physicist would disagree with you? It goes against most ofthe theoretical physics that I know, with the idea of extra dimensional branes and states.

[dannyp]

spelling errors in the first paragraph in 'mind and brain'.

[Pooeypants]

More interestingly, science specifically does not and can not deal with a deity entity whom is omniscient and omnipotent...

[Highwayman]

Originally posted by Pooeypants, More interestingly, science specifically does not and can not deal with a deity entity whom is omniscient and omnipotent...

Not to mention invisible, incommunacable and untraceable, and living in a place where souls go and some people even went in the flesh...

[marcobiagini]

Originally posted by dotComa, hmm..you probably have something very great to offer, but you're not presenting it fairly, in my opinion. You see, I come here to debate, and when you simply point me to your site to learn what you're getting at, it shows me that you might not be here to debate. Perhaps if you presented an argument, and then linked to parts of your site, it would seem more legitimate.

I am certainly here to debate, but a clear presentation of my arguments would have required a rather long post.
My basic argument can be summarize as follows:

1)Quantum Electrodynamics proves the irriducibility of consciousness and every psychical experience to physical/chemical/biological processes. This represents the failure of materialism. The cause of the existence of our psychical life cannot be identified with the brain, hence an unphysical/unbiological element must exist in us (the soul or psyche).

This represents a scientific proof of the existence of the soul.

Best regards,

marco

PS: English is not my first language so I apologize for my grammar and spelling errors.

[5010]

Consciousness exists due to the presence of relationships between component bodies that make up the mind. Try to isolate components and the relationships cease.

So saying that consciousness is supernatural because it cannot be isolated it like saying that salt is supernatural because there is neither salt in sodium nor in chlorine.

[Pooeypants]

The deductive reasoning used does not represent scientific proof, certainly not enough to be accepted worldwide. Infact, this reminds me of Michael Behe's Irreducible complexity...

[marcobiagini]

>>>>Consciousness exists due to the presence of relationships between component bodies that make up the mind. Try to isolate components and the relationships cease.

The laws of physics prove that no relationships exist between component bodies, except the basic physical interactions. In particular, biological and chemical processes consist only in some successions of kinetic (that is motion of particles) and electromanetic processes (that is emission and absorption of photons). Since none of these processes generates consciousness, conscounsess cannot be generated by the brain; hence, science denies the basic hypothesis of materialism.


>>>So saying that consciousness is supernatural because it cannot be isolated it like saying that salt is supernatural because there is neither salt in sodium nor in chlorine.

The point is that "salt" is ony the arbitrary name you chose to give to a set of sodium and chlorine. Since consciousness is a necessary preliminary condition for the existence of arbitrariness, it is obvious that you cannot explain the existence of consciounsess as a the name "salt". I have discussed this kind of errors in detail in my article entitled "Scentific contradictions in materialism", present in the site above.


Marco

[waterfalllife]

Im still interested in what some of your collegues and other well knows physicists say about this.

[Samildanach]

I'm afraid that argument is complete and utter rubbish. You are more or less arguing that a system because one of its components is removed won't work any more therefore it must be some kind of magic. Thats always going to be rubbish. Take a car engine. Isolate its components and they don't do anything, even take one away the carberettor and the engine won't do anything. However put them all together and wham, it works like magic. The consciousness you say that can't be isolated would be like the hum the car engine makes when its working. Its a byproduct of the engine fireing, likewise consciousness is a byproduct of the brain working, of course it can't be isolated any more than the engine idol can be isolated when the car isn't running.

[marcobiagini]

Dear Samildanch,

you have completly missed the point. In fact, the car engine can generate only motion, and motion is a basic property of the laws of physics. The laws of physics prove that every molecular system (which includes brain) can generate only successions of kinetic and electromagnetic processes. Hence the existence of our consciousness presupposes the existence of a soul.

Marco

[marcobiagini]

Originally posted by waterfalllife, Im still interested in what some of your collegues and other well knows physicists say about this.

I have reported some comments from some other physicists on my site.

Marco

[Samildanach]

hmmmm lets see have I missed the point. Lets start with a quote from you.

">>>>Consciousness exists due to the presence of relationships between component bodies that make up the mind. Try to isolate components and the relationships cease."

I agree completely with this hence my car analogy. another quote follows

"The laws of physics prove that no relationships exist between component bodies, except the basic physical interactions. In particular, biological and chemical processes consist only in some successions of kinetic (that is motion of particles) and electromanetic processes (that is emission and absorption of photons). "

Also true, however we can program computers to have operating systems using just these properties. An OS is a basic type of mind if you will which relies on physical interactions to operate.
A final quote

">>>So saying that consciousness is supernatural because it cannot be isolated"

You are saying that because something cannot be isolated it becomes supernatural? thats a bit of an illogical leap if you ask me.
there are plenty of things out there we can't isolate and have been for years. We theorise on them but they are still there. Just because we don't have the means to isolate them doesn't mean we won't be able to one day.
another point for you to consider

Only the laws of physics which we currently understand validate your point to some degree, last time I looked we didn't have a universal field theory, unless of course you have come up with it in which case I would be highly interested in seeing it. The current laws of physics may agree with you to a certain degree, the ones we don't know about may disagree entirely.

[5010]

Originally posted by marcobiagini, The point is that "salt" is ony the arbitrary name you chose to give to a set of sodium and chlorine.

The name has nothing to do with the point. Let's replace the word "salt" with "sodium-chloride".

"So saying that consciousness is supernatural because it cannot be isolated is like saying that sodium-chloride is supernatural because there is neither sodium-chloride in sodium nor in chlorine."

Each sodium-chloride body (molecule) exhibits properties due to the relationship between its component bodies (sodium and chlorine). It is more than merely a set of elements. The properties of the set are different before and after the members of the set form bonds. Yet we consider these properties natural.

[samsara15]

What IS a soul? I have no idea. We blather about them, but I'm not sure what a soul is. Or WHAT God is. Tell me. If it is our DNA, then the Hindu religions have much to say about such things. They even have incarnations of their Gods who fail to achieve decent lives. We all have bad days.

[marcobiagini]

Dear Samildanach,

you have completely misunderstood my previous message; in fact the sentences preceded by a >>>> where a quotation from you post; they do not express my opinion, but yours. I have reported them in order to comment them. With this in mind, now try to read again my previous message.


You also wrote >>>The current laws of physics may agree with you to a certain degree, the ones we don't know about may disagree entirely.

The present laws of physics agree with me entirely, which represent a scientific proof of the existence of the soul.

As far as future developments in science, I have some considerations for you.


There are many strong arguments against the possibility of a future scientific explanation of consciousness and the psychical life.
In order to give a scientific explanation of consciousness, a new set of laws of physics would be necessary. However the laws of physics consist of a system of mathematical equations. Their mathematical structure exclude the possibility that these equations can be modified; in fact, even a slight change in a mathematical equation would generates radical changes in all its solutions. We have already found billions and billions of correct solutions from the laws of physics; if we changed them, we would suddenly cast away all these correct solutions. On the other hand, every day we find a systematic experimental confirmation of the laws of physics on ever new systems. To hypothesize that the laws of physics are wrong would be equivalent to say that all these billions and billions of systematic and quantitative experimental confirmations are only a lucky coincidence. In these last decades, we have done many more experiments than in all history, but the laws of quantum electrodynamics, discovered in the beginning of last century, have never been changed. On the basis of the number of experimental tests, we can say that quantum electrodynamics is the oldest scientific theory in history.

Since the laws of physics are the foundations of all modern science, I think that the hypothesis of a new set of laws of physics represents a jump out of science into the field of phylosophical speculations; the fact itself that those who want to deny the existence of the soul are forced to hypothesize a new set of laws of physics proves the incompatibility between science and materialism.


Advances in science has never dethroned and can never dethrone well established facts, supported by billions and billions of systematic and quantitative experimental data. It would be equivalent to hypothesize that one day science will discover that the earth does not orbit around the sun, but it is motionless at the center of the universe. The statement "maybe one day science will discover that..." is no longer a rational statement, because of the wide and systematic experimantal confirmation obtained by the laws of physics. The laws of physics establish some firm points, which must always be considered when we make a rational and scientific hypothesis.
Today we have billions of billions of data confirming that cerebral, biological, chemical and molecular processes are determined uniquely by Quantum Electrodynamic. Since no Quantum Electrodynamic processes generate consciousness, this is equivalent to say that we have billions and billions of data conferming that no cerebral processes generate consciousness.
Advances in physics allow us to discover new processes at higher and higher energies; this is the only possible advances in physics, but this kind of advances lead us farther and farther from consciousness, because no high energy processes occur in our brain. Consider that in modern particle accelerators, it is possible to reach energies a billion of times superior to the energies of chemical and biological processes. Nevertheless, in the hope to discover some new processes, scientists have to design new accelerators, able to reach even much greater energies.
There is another fundamemtal point; history shows that scientific progress has been possible only when scientists began to compare theoritical results with experimenal data. Since all our measurement instruments work and are designed on the basis of the laws of physics, and since consciousness transcends such laws, it is not possible to design any instruments able to measure consciousness. Without such measurement instruments, it will never be possible to reach any scientific progresses in the explanation of the existence of consciousness. It is useful to observe that, in spite of the great scientific progresses reached in the fields of the natural sciences, no steps have ever been done in history in such direction, as it is proved by the fact that science is not able to explain, neither in principle, the existence of consciousness, neither the existence of the most banal sensation.


Marco

[marcobiagini]

[quote=5010
The name has nothing to do with the point. Let's replace the word "salt" with "sodium-chloride".

"So saying that consciousness is supernatural because it cannot be isolated is like saying that sodium-chloride is supernatural because there is neither sodium-chloride in sodium nor in chlorine."

Each sodium-chloride body (molecule) exhibits properties due to the relationship between its component bodies (sodium and chlorine). It is more than merely a set of elements. The properties of the set are different before and after the members of the set form bonds. Yet we consider these properties natural.[/QUOTE]

Replacing the word "salt" with the word "sodium-chloride" does not change my point. Bot "salt" and "sodium-Chloride" are only arbitrary names you give to a set of elementary particles in a given geometrical arrangement.
The properties of sodium-Chloride are only some of the basic properties of the laws of physics. Since consciousness is not a basic property of the laws of physics, no arrangements of elementary particles can generate consciousness. Hence a soul must exist in man as the necessary cause of the existence of our consciousness.

Marco