Philosophy Now Forum

Ginkgo wrote: No, I don't think Deism is dead, but I have problems with the creation aspect.
If you are saying that God is an emergent property of a hugely complex universe
then you have got my attention.

God is not "an emergent property of a hugely complex universe " ,
God is something unknown.
For example: so-called "Nothingness" . . ." Zero Vacuum" . . . . . . .
a)
Paul Dirac wrote:
‘ The problem of the exact description of vacuum, in my opinion,
is the basic problem now before physics. Really, if you can’t correctly
describe the vacuum, how it is possible to expect a correct description
of something more complex? ‘
b)
‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive
of as God within the universe of the new physics,
this ground state, coherent quantum vacuum might be
a good place to start.’
/ Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208 by Danah Zohar. /
==.

socratus wrote: ‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive
of as God within the universe of the new physics,
this ground state, coherent quantum vacuum might be
a good place to start.’
/ Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208 by Danah Zohar. /
==.

I haven't read his book. Can you outline his main thesis for me please?

socratus wrote:

negative numbers are just a mathematical illusion never to be observed in actual reality, every thing is just a positive quantity some way.

Ginkgo wrote:

socratus wrote: ‘If we were looking for something that we could conceive
of as God within the universe of the new physics,
this ground state, coherent quantum vacuum might be
a good place to start.’
/ Book ‘The quantum self ’ page 208 by Danah Zohar. /
==.

I haven't read his book.
Can you outline his main thesis for me please?

Sorry . . . . . . .
In the book ‘The quantum self ’ ( by Danah Zohar) there are others
arguments to prove God's existence but I am too lazy to copy them.
=.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danah_Zohar . . . . .and many others.
=..

Questionmark wrote:

socratus wrote:

negative numbers are just a mathematical illusion never to be observed in actual reality
, every thing is just a positive quantity some way.

. . . ."virtual particles " are "negative numbers" but . . .
. . . . somehow they can become "real numbers"
=.

socratus wrote: . . . ."virtual particles " are "negative numbers" but . . .
. . . . somehow they can become "real numbers"
=.

Hmm, particles are waves and the distance/force of the spin between them creates a certain value of energy/tendency. From the center it may appear like a value is negative, but this is only the result of measuring something compared to something else. If you isolate an atom, the complete energy adds up to zero, with tendencies to interact with other waves and their frequencies etc. if you isolate protons and neutron their values add up to zero in the end, because its part of the atom.

Even though there are half-integral spins in those neutrons and protons, no complete isolated value can exist on its own.

helium atom

and an isolated neutron

Real numbers only exists in a dimension, either time or spatial, and are always the result of two or more locations, relative to one another.

5 kilometers/miles is a distance, in a single dimension, two or more points.
15 square feet is an area, in two dimensions, three or more points.
20 cubic meters is a capacity, in three dimension, four or more points.
25 seconds is a period of time, the fourth dimension.

Speed is the result of course from two other and sadly not another dimension, but nothing new here i assume. Energy is just, as Kelvin states, movement, and thus a certain speed too.

Anyway, -34 is as real as 456. dimensionless.

zero amount of time always fascinated me..

The tendency to understand Deism in the modern physics.
a)
Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God?
https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/cont ... elieve-god
b)
Does Quantum Physics Prove God's Existence?
http://physics.about.com/od/physicsmyth ... tumGod.htm
c)
Does quantum theory prove God exists?
http://www.asktheatheists.com/questions ... od-exists/
==..
" If He understands Maths and Physics then He exists."
/ Mathematical physicist and cosmologist Frank Tipler /
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Tipler
==..

socratus, this, is your reply..?

no, no, and no.. Science, nor QM in specific have anything to do with a claim about the possibility of a Deity or not, what so ever...

you cannot be serious

Questionmark wrote:socratus, this, is your reply..?

no, no, and no.. Science, nor QM in specific have anything to do
with a claim about the possibility of a Deity or not, what so ever...

you cannot be serious

I don't know if they posted these articles seriously or for joke.
==..

socratus wrote:

Questionmark wrote:socratus, this, is your reply..?

no, no, and no.. Science, nor QM in specific have anything to do
with a claim about the possibility of a Deity or not, what so ever...

you cannot be serious

I don't know if they posted these articles seriously or for joke.
==..

The way you defend your point of view reminds me of classic theists.

Christian; Just look yourself, its written here!
Someone; <handing paper saying the opposite>
Christian; *laughs* but that is not the bible..

Anyway, you don't know if these articles are seriously posted or as a joke, yet you do know something concrete about the actual creator of our cosmos?