the God game

[MerlinsByte]

Is our universe deterministic and playing a known game of natural law? Or is it still in creation, with some wild cards thrown in? According to classical physics the universe started from a set point and is unfolding according to natural law. Quantum physics tells us another story. And that story is ; the universe makes the rules as it goes along, and we ,as observers change the game constantly. That is we change the future by our intervention of observing. We are the minor observers and god is the major observer, only the frames of reference are different.

mb

[Starboy]

Quote by: MerlinsByte Is our universe deterministic and playing a known game of natural law? Or is it still in creation, with some wild cards thrown in? According to classical physics the universe started from a set point and is unfolding according to natural law. Quantum physics tells us another story. And that story is ; the universe makes the rules as it goes along, and we ,as observers change the game constantly. That is we change the future by our intervention of observing. We are the minor observers and god is the major observer, only the frames of reference are different. mb

As usual Merlin you have exposed you basic ignorance of science. The dirty little secret of determinism was that the universe was deterministic in principle but not in practice. That trivial problems, such as the three body problem, can only be solved in a few special cases. That even though some equations could be stated crisply they contained non-linear terms and were thus intractable. And that was just under the deterministic regime. But a fellow as well schooled as you and a fan of Newton should have known this.

And yet again you also expose your profound ignorance of QM. Why I bet that you didn't know that the most basic formulation starts with the Hamiltonian which is a particular formulation of classical (deterministic) mechanics.

Merlin you are either a lying sack of shit or you need to go back to the university that supposedly gave you the education you seem so impressed by and get your money back. You were robbed.

Starboy

[rcne]

There are less than 100 people (and that number may be to large) in the world who have a firm grasp of QM. The rest of us are just curious hobbyists to greater or lessor degrees.

Even Rodger Penrose does not claim to have a firm grasp on the subject. He has interesting ideas and some well founded suspicions on where the next areas of investigations will lead, but fully understands that some current ideas will have to be scrapped when new theories are tested and lend their weight to the picture.

[Starboy]

Quote by: rcne There are less than 100 people (and that number may be to large) in the world who have a firm grasp of QM. The rest of us are just curious hobbyists to greater or lessor degrees.

Are you talking about QM the explanation or QM the phenomena?

Even Rodger Penrose does not claim to have a firm grasp on the subject. He has interesting ideas and some well founded suspicions on where the next areas of investigations will lead, but fully understands that some current ideas will have to be scrapped when new theories are tested and lend their weight to the picture.

Why is Penrose considered some kind of authority on the matter? My understanding is that he is distinguished in mathematics not physics. Why defer to him in matters of QM and not someone like Feynman who at least received the Nobel Prize in physics for his work in the area.

Starboy

[MerlinsByte]

Are you talking about QM the explanation or QM the phenomena?

Does the above even justify a response?

Penrose is an expert on the subject of QM he teaches or has taught it. Although I don't care for the man I admire his intellect.

I have the same take on Quantum theory as William Fuchs here is an excerpt of an article from scientific American Sept 2004 "there is no one way the world is because the world is still in creation, still being hammered out" Fuches (http://netlib.bell-labs.com/who/cafuchs/)

Starboy If you have a problem with understanding my threads I suggest that you ask me to explain, before you jump to the wrong conclusions. All of what you assumed my post suggested was wrong.

Please learn a question before you make up an answer.
And RCNE while I do not claim to understand all the details of QM I do have a good grasp on the basics, and am gaining on the more difficult aspects of QFT.

mb



mb

[FIFI]

[quote=Starboy
Merlin you are either a lying sack of shit or you need to go back to the university that supposedly gave you the education you seem so impressed by and get your money back. You were robbed.

Starboy[/QUOTE]

Calm down Starboy, I am sorry it upsets you that not everyone seems to be a master of QM, as you seem to be :rolleyes:

I know very little of mathmatical equations, but I believe Merlin is asking what we believe in when it comes to universe / fate.
Is this correct Merlin?

[Starboy]

Quote by: FIFI Quote by: Starboy Merlin you are either a lying sack of shit or you need to go back to the university that supposedly gave you the education you seem so impressed by and get your money back. You were robbed. Starboy Calm down Starboy, I am sorry it upsets you that not everyone seems to be a master of QM, as you seem to be :rolleyes: I know very little of mathmatical equations, but I believe Merlin is asking what we believe in when it comes to universe / fate. Is this correct Merlin?

I have posted with Merlin on more than one occasion regarding QM. He claims to know far more than is evident in his posts. It would be one thing if he had the integrity and honesty to just fess up and admit he knows very little about the subject but he just continues to bluff. Merlin is a person that thinks that alchemy and astrology are sciences. He is a person who confuses abiogenesis with evolution and will expound on subjects where it is clear he is clueless. He will just blunder on. He will continue on even when his bluff has been called repeatedly. He well represents the more reprehensible human traits of arrogance, superstition, dishonesty and deception. He fits very well into the ranks of magical thinkers.

Starboy

[Starboy]

Quote by: MerlinsByte Does the above even justify a response? Penrose is an expert on the subject of QM he teaches or has taught it. Although I don't care for the man I admire his intellect. I have the same take on Quantum theory as William Fuchs here is an excerpt of an article from scientific American Sept 2004 "there is no one way the world is because the world is still in creation, still being hammered out" Fuches (http://netlib.bell-labs.com/who/cafuchs/) Starboy If you have a problem with understanding my threads I suggest that you ask me to explain, before you jump to the wrong conclusions. All of what you assumed my post suggested was wrong. Please learn a question before you make up an answer. And RCNE while I do not claim to understand all the details of QM I do have a good grasp on the basics, and am gaining on the more difficult aspects of QFT. mb mb

Mb, one day you will learn enough about intellectual integrity to know that rattling off a list of papers doesn't make you an expert. And I am well aware of Penrose's books. All sorts of people write all sorts of books. So what? Feynman has huge recognition for his knowledge and his work by the physics community. Penrose has scant recognition compared to many other physicists. But be that as it may I have taught QM at the graduate level. I have taken courses on QM from P.A.M. Dirac. He received the Nobel Prize in physics as co-creator of QM. I have attended colloquia by Feynman, Weinberg, Dirac and many other big names in physics. In my youth I studied QM extensively and was considered to be very well versed on the subject by the rest of the faculty. You read a few general audience articles in Scientific American and now you think you are an expert. However from what I have seen of your posts you lack the basic mental abilities to understand much of anything let alone science or QM. It is painful to read your dreck, and the world does not need another idiot such as yourself spewing nonsense all the while pretending as if they were actually educated.

Starboy

[rcne]

True, Feynman was unique in his field and I have read a fair amount of his work, at least what has been published on the web.

Penrose I came to know by his work in a theory in which human consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules. He is highly regarded for his work in mathematical physics, in particular his contributions to cosmology.

I look on Penrose as I do Freynman, as a person who thinks outside the box of normal academia.

Each of these men I consider leaders in the field. Penrose though is still contributing to multiple fields.

I only know them from their books and lectures, each have a unique personality. I can only imagine what listening to one of their lectures would be like.

I fit into the category of armature enthusiast. It's all interesting. Tell me have you published?

[MerlinsByte]

By ..FIFI……… know very little of mathematical equations, but I believe Merlin is asking what we believe in when it comes to universe / fate. Is this correct Merlin?

Yes you are 100% correct FIFI, and thanks for asking. Does the universe have a start middle and end? Or is it as some theoretical physicists have postulated a work in progress. Some, even einstine thought that the future affects the present, which is strange indeed. Einstine of course didn’t put much stock in QM and the quantum entanglement question. I however (I feel) that the quantum entanglement and the collapse of the wave function which would include the instantaneous faster than light information exchange (what einstine called spooky action at a distance) is the key to a Unification of quantum and classical physics, as well as metaphysical events. Again thanks for your response .

mb

[MerlinsByte]

BY RCNE... I look on Penrose as I do Freynman, as a person who thinks outside the box of normal academia.

Yes RCNE, I feel that most great thinkers were dreamers were blessed with an unorthodox intellect blissfully unhindered by their peers. I admire all imaginative wondrous people from the infant to the 80 year old freshman.

mb


"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Albert Einstein

[Starboy]

Quote by: rcne I look on Penrose as I do Freynman, as a person who thinks outside the box of normal academia.

I'll give you that but it is not necessarily a good thing. Some of Penrose's ideas are just nutty.

I fit into the category of armature enthusiast. It's all interesting. Tell me have you published?

Nope. I am an ABD.

Starboy

[MerlinsByte]

Nope. I am an ABD.

then remove the growth of yourself