Quantum reality and Idealism
- Thread starter lifegazer
- Start date
RussDill
Philosopher
lifegazer said:
When did anyone ever say you had to by a quantum physicist? You don't. However, you have to know a hell of a lot more about QM than you do. You understanding is incomplete and incorrect, and thus, your conclusions are incompelete and incorrect.
Your incomplete and incorrect understanding has caused you to instead show that your philosophy is inconsistent with QM.
UndercoverElephant
Pachyderm of a Thousand Faces
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2002
- Messages
- 9,058
Iacchus said:
This has to be the most transparent sock-puppet of all time.
[edit]
Oops! No. I forgot the hamster.
RussDill
Philosopher
lifegazer said:
[RE: "You say perceived reality is a vast illusion created be a superior intelligence."]
ah yes, the upchurch's question thread, I remember I provided a solid argument against each one of your points, to which you responding "you are a poopie head", er, no wait, sorry "Russ, up the quality or get back to the back row."
Pretty similar to this thread, I've provided a number of solid arguments, and you've responded to none of those arguments.
I was reading about this sort of thing last night, in regards to creationist nonsense...and how they look for a "magic bullet", a single piece of science that 'confirms' their crackpot ideas. The problem, of course, is that scientific ideas don't exist as isolated bits of information, from which you can pick and choose. If you decide to use information from QM, for instance, you are stuck with either using the MAJORITY of QM in your argument, or none at all. You can't pick one tiny part that you agree with, and disregard the parts which contradict your crackpottery.
Iacchus said:
I believe everyone does ( just my opinion) why do you ask?
If you mean that we need except an "original thought" as fact simply because someone demands it is fact but fails to support it with any facts I believe you may need to reexamine your postion.
May I ask AGAIN do you believe everything anyone tells you simply because they tell you it is the truth?
Actually I don't know what a sock-puppet is? Is this one of those things you would term a "James Randi" colloquialism? Hmm ... Whose puppet are we referring to here?JustGeoff said:
This has to be the most transparent sock-puppet of all time.
[edit]
Oops! No. I forgot the hamster.
Iacchus said:Well, we'll just have to take "your word" for that one I guess.
You can change that by proving him wrong. This can be done by actually answering a question and presenting supporting facts and logical conclusion.
The fault does not lie with Zero and his statement it lies with you and your proving his statement to be valid.
The proof is in your own posting...if Lifegazer posts something that runs contrary to what he claims it does, and you post in defense of him, we are forced to think something about you; namely, that you care more about 'original thinking'(even though Lifegazer shows neither originality or thinking), and don't have very much respect for the accepted ideas that science and real philosophers have to offer.Iacchus said:Well, we'll just have to take "your word" for that one I guess.
This post doesn't make any sense...which is par for the course, I suppose.Iacchus said:Boy it's just way over your heads now isn't? But then again I suppose that's where people would point when you asked them where god is now wouldn't they?
Particles only exist within awareness. This is a fact which can be shown with an experiment I can cite, pertaining to 1 electron and two paths.
Until seen within an observing awareness, things do not exist as definite particles or definite objects.
The world of definites is something only occuring within the consciousness of an observer.
Hence, a divisible reality (of definites) is something only occuring within the consciousness of an observer.
Hence, reality is truly indivisible, devoid of definites.
Hence, reality is the Mind itself.
Say hello to God ladies and gents.
Until seen within an observing awareness, things do not exist as definite particles or definite objects.
The world of definites is something only occuring within the consciousness of an observer.
Hence, a divisible reality (of definites) is something only occuring within the consciousness of an observer.
Hence, reality is truly indivisible, devoid of definites.
Hence, reality is the Mind itself.
Say hello to God ladies and gents.
Whatever...you make several untenable leaps of logic there...go back, and insert a few more steps, and make them rational. Usually, you screw up as soon as you use a word like 'hence' or 'therefore'...lifegazer said:
That's ignoring the utter uselessness of your philosophy, which is a whole other topic, linked to your selective use of materialism to 'prove' idealism.
lifegazer said:
My friend you are living proof a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.
Wrong. Matter and energy are not created nor distorted, “they” exist and they exist far beyond what we humans can see even with the most powerful telescope.
Particles, matter and energy do not simply come into existence when you look at them.
You have confused a tiny bit of information you heard with what is reality.
Particles, let us say red or green light particles do not simply come into existence one observed they change color. I.e. a wave of red Particles will by ½ or ½ of them change into green Particles.
You are making yourself look foolish here. Go read, read and learn about what you speak before you speak.
I will ask you this question [/quote]again[/quote].
Everyday our technology improves so as we can see deeper and deeper into space. We find planets or suns we had not yet seen or we see the light remnants of the death of suns or planets.
In the case of the light remnants of the death of suns or planets these planets or suns/starts died billions of years ago and were “born” hundreds of billions of years before that.
Do you know anything about light speed?
No humans as we know them as to Earth observed these suns/planets yet there is proof they existed. Do you REALLY believe that on Monday when a new telescope finds and identifies a new star, that that star did not exist as a star the second before they observed it?
Billions of years of the causes and conditions behind the rising/birth of a star, the forming of gasses to solids simply happened in that split second…
HELLO…. THINK!!!!
WRONG…
Wrong. Again did that sun just simply come into existence when the first scientist observed it?
1st there is no word in the English language “definites” .
2nd “occuring” is spelled occurring.
3rd you are living proof a little bit of knowledge is a danger.
well no one can say you are wrong here as no one but you knows ( if you do) what definites means.
What is funny is in the greatest reality you are right you just do not know why you are right.
Allow me to again show you what Einstein had to say concerning this ( I know I know you said you are smarter then Einstein. But allow me to let you in on a secret Einstein knew how to spell occurring.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. Albert Einstein
You are such a silly boy.
Even if you were right you have proven minds not God..
Again you seek to say because a known exist it proves your unknown..
Such a silly boy..
Here is a site for you http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/home/home.html/104-0881426-7338347 they sell things called BOOKS there. Buy some and read them.
Iacchus said:No, he's the one who's making the claim, not me.
Not at all. YOU made the claim, God is a fact and that lifegazer is right and we are wrong for not believing him.. Prove it and we will all agree with you.
Are you new to this thinking thing?
Be nice, he can't help himself...maybe you should take him under your wing, teach him to be rational?Pahansiri said:
Not at all. YOU made the claim, God is a fact and that lifegazer is right and we are wrong for not believing him.. Prove it and we will all agree with you.
Are you new to this thinking thing?
Zero said:
lol..
No Zero my friend I believe he is a rational person just not when it comes to things he wants to be true like lifegazer They first set what they want to be true then seek to use what is true to make their belief seem true.
The desire for what they want to be true blinds them to the facts and realities that demonstrate what they believe is not true or has yet to be proven to be true.
Both smart kids/ guys just lead by ego rather then rational thinking on some things.
Just what I believe.