Question about intelligent design theory

[her209]

The quantum double slit experiment would disagree with your assertion.

All possible choices have, are, and will be made, until the choice is actually observed.

Free choice and omnipotance are not mutually exclusive, because all possible choices are taken, and every possible outcome is known.

Let me pose a problem:

You are given a coin with two sides. The coin is not weighted. You flip the coin two times and they both come up heads. You ask yourself, "What is the probability that it came up heads two times in a row?" Is it 25% (since it could have come up heads-tails, tails-heads, or tails-tails) or is it 100% because it happened the way it happened and didn't happen any other way?

 

[DominionSeraph]

The quantum double slit experiment would disagree with your assertion.

All possible choices have, are, and will be made, until the choice is actually observed.

If an omniscient being exists there is no such thing as, "unobserved."

 

[her209]

If an omniscient being exists there is no such thing as, "unobserved."

Yeah, sounds like predestination/determinism to me.

 

[Modelworks]

The belief that everything comes from something will never provide the answers that those who think that way want. Until we can accept that some things just exist, without cause, we will never fully understand.

 

[JulesMaximus]

*slowly draws arm across the air, trailing rainbow*

Imagination!

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

LOL, this is what I get with arguing with non-technical people.

That's fucking rich. What do you do for a living?

In any given moment in time, the probability of something happening is not 1.

That's what's being debated, numbnuts.

When a dice is rolled on XYZ date and time, the probability of rolling a 6 is not 100%. This is mathematically, logically, and patently obviously FALSE.

You are still begging the question. You do not get to assume the conclusion which is being disputed.

What you are failing to understand is that to Sally, the moment she chooses a Red sweater, the probability is not 1. To GOD (the one you describe as omniscient), the probability is indeed ONE.

That's the point, retard. It can only appear to be a free choice to Sally, but in actuality she cannot choose differently than what is already known by God lest God's knowledge be wrong.

In order to justify your claims, you need to explain how it makes sense to say that Sally's actions can render God's knowledge false if he is supposed to be inerrantly omniscient. You have failed to do that.

Here, I'll post it again:

It's as irrelevant now as it was before.

{snip}

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Okay, I'll repeat it then, randomness and free will is completely compatible with an omniscient and infalliable God. Why you can't see it is a mystery.

I can't see it because it is incoherent, as already demonstrated.

 

[sao123]

Let me pose a problem:

You are given a coin with two sides. The coin is not weighted. You flip the coin two times and they both come up heads. You ask yourself, "What is the probability that it came up heads two times in a row?" Is it 25% (since it could have come up heads-tails, tails-heads, or tails-tails) or is it 100% because it happened the way it happened and didn't happen any other way?

none of the above.

The double slit experiment confirms that the coins come up all 4 possibilities until you make a determininstic observation.
HH
HT
TH
TT

 

[02ranger]

The quantum double slit experiment would disagree with your assertion.

All possible choices have, are, and will be made, until the choice is actually observed.

Free choice and omnipotance are not mutually exclusive, because all possible choices are taken, and every possible outcome is known.

I just read the Wikipedia article (great scientific source, lol) on the double-slit experiment. It looked like, as far as philosophy goes, it's only concerned with the ability of an omniscient deity to know the outcome of events. That doesn't "seem" to be related to our discussion. Of course, as I've stated before, I'm not anything approaching an expert on things like this. If I'm not understanding the point of the experiment or what you're saying, please explain to me or point me to something that does. Thanks,

 

[sao123]

I just read the Wikipedia article (great scientific source, lol) on the double-slit experiment. It looked like, as far as philosophy goes, it's only concerned with the ability of an omniscient deity to know the outcome of events. That doesn't "seem" to be related to our discussion. Of course, as I've stated before, I'm not anything approaching an expert on things like this. If I'm not understanding the point of the experiment or what you're saying, please explain to me or point me to something that does. Thanks,

well there was the original double slit experiment, then there was the quantum double slit experiment done in the late 80s.

The summary of the results of the experiment was this:

A single quantum particle when passing through the double slit simultaniously takes both routes... a seemingly impossibility... until a detector is actually placed at the other side of the slot. Which at that point the probability collapses into a distinct choice. Removing the detector, the particle asserts again that it takes both routes.

In application to our theory, every possible choice is taken simultaniously by our indivual with free choice until an actual measurement is made by the omnipotent being.

Another way of thinking about it is similar to a completely solved game, like tic tac toe. We know the entire move tree, 9 deep and 255K legal moves. The omnipotent being knows every possible outcome of every possible decision. When he directly observes you, the probabilities collapse into the decisions you have, are, and will make. But, you still have free choice.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

well there was the original double slit experiment, then there was the quantum double slit experiment done in the late 80s.

The summary of the results of the experiment was this:

A single quantum particle when passing through the double slit simultaniously takes both routes... a seemingly impossibility... until a detector is actually placed at the other side of the slot. Which at that point the probability collapses into a distinct choice. Removing the detector, the particle asserts again that it takes both routes.

That's not exactly right.

The detector on the other side of the slits is always there. It exhibits a wave interference pattern when nobody is watching which slit the particle goes thru. When they put detectors on the slits themselves, the particle was observed to go thru one slit or the other, and the interference pattern on the screen goes away, changing to a classical diffraction pattern.

Also, whether or not the particle "goes thru both slits at the same time" is the subject of some debate and interpretation. A more accurate description would describe the probabilities of the particle going thru both slits, but those probabilities are less than one in a coherent quantum state. So it isn't completely true that the particle goes thru both slits. Rather, it's approximately 50% true. This is where we got fuzzy logic, incidentally, because it was more useful to describe the behavior of reality where things aren't 100% true nor 100% false.

In application to our theory, every possible choice is taken simultaniously by our indivual with free choice until an actual measurement is made by the omnipotent being.

As pointed out previously, with ordinary definitions of omniscience, there would be no "unobserved" quantum state.

Another way of thinking about it is similar to a completely solved game, like tic tac toe. We know the entire move tree, 9 deep and 255K legal moves. The omnipotent being knows every possible outcome of every possible decision. When he directly observes you, the probabilities collapse into the decisions you have, are, and will make. But, you still have free choice.

Is it your suggestion that there are legitimate parallel universes for every unactualized probability in our universe? If you do not believe that these parallel universes actually exist, then there would be no accumulation of probable realities for God to know.

For what it's worth, I do think that the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is the most accurate description of reality, so I wouldn't think you're crazy if that is also what you believe. I think it presents some other interesting problems for classical Christian dogma, but that isn't really my problem.

 

[sao123]

That's not exactly right.

Also, whether or not the particle "goes thru both slits at the same time" is the subject of some debate and interpretation. A more accurate description would describe the probabilities of the particle going thru both slits, but those probabilities are less than one in a coherent quantum state. So it isn't completely true that the particle goes thru both slits. Rather, it's approximately 50% true. This is where we got fuzzy logic, incidentally, because it was more useful to describe the behavior of reality where things aren't 100% true nor 100% false.

Actually, 1 particle at a time through the double slit interferes with itself. AKA, it must travel through both slits simultaneously.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Actually, 1 particle at a time through the double slit interferes with itself. AKA, it must travel through both slits simultaneously.

Yes, it is interfering with itself, but you only have 1 particle. So it isn't that 100% of the particle goes thru both slits -- that would be two particles -- but that the particle "sorta" goes thru each one. It probably goes through each slit, with roughly a 50% probability for each.

 

[02ranger]

well there was the original double slit experiment, then there was the quantum double slit experiment done in the late 80s.

The summary of the results of the experiment was this:

A single quantum particle when passing through the double slit simultaniously takes both routes... a seemingly impossibility... until a detector is actually placed at the other side of the slot. Which at that point the probability collapses into a distinct choice. Removing the detector, the particle asserts again that it takes both routes.

In application to our theory, every possible choice is taken simultaniously by our indivual with free choice until an actual measurement is made by the omnipotent being.

Another way of thinking about it is similar to a completely solved game, like tic tac toe. We know the entire move tree, 9 deep and 255K legal moves. The omnipotent being knows every possible outcome of every possible decision. When he directly observes you, the probabilities collapse into the decisions you have, are, and will make. But, you still have free choice.

OK, I think I read the original one. At least I don't remember it saying quantum. Oh, and you guys are talking just a little, ok a LOT, above my head. lol But I'm trying to keep up.

 

[sourceninja]

Another way of thinking about it is similar to a completely solved game, like tic tac toe. We know the entire move tree, 9 deep and 255K legal moves. The omnipotent being knows every possible outcome of every possible decision. When he directly observes you, the probabilities collapse into the decisions you have, are, and will make. But, you still have free choice.

I don't consider that omniscience. To me, omniscience would be knowing that bill would win the game of tic tac toe against frank before frank even asked him to play. To know after they start that bill is going to win based on the movies is not all knowing in the least bit.

And don't even get me started with omnipotence!

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

 

[DrPizza]

A single quantum particle when passing through the double slit simultaniously takes both routes... a seemingly impossibility... until a detector is actually placed at the other side of the slot. Which at that point the probability collapses into a distinct choice. Removing the detector, the particle asserts again that it takes both routes.

If you're going to apply quantum theory to this problem, then it helps to not neglect some of the other implications.
1. The act of observing disturbs the observed. You treat God's observation as if it has no effect. Observing is an interaction.
2. In the double slit experiment, a single electron fired at a double slit can strike a plate beyond the double slit in many different bands. The act of observing LIMITS where the electron can strike the plate to just two bands. Thus, unobserved, the electron can end up "anywhere." Observed, the electron cannot end up anywhere, its "choices" are very limited.

Relating quantum mechanics and free choice in the way that you have only appeals to those with only a rudimentary understanding of quantum mechanics. It's like grasping at tiny straws and saying "ah ha! That proves it" without looking at the bigger picture. In the case of the electron, the only thing that has really changed is our understanding of what an electron is. Is it a little tiny ball of matter? Or is it a wave of potentials. Likewise, what's light? Is light a particle? Or is light a wave? It's neither. It's light.

Our minds use the analogies of waves and particles to understand the nature of matter at the quantum level. Quantum mechanics is an incredibly accurate description of how nature behaves at such small sizes.

----

Now, to add to the discussion, does GOD know where a particle is and its momentum at the same time?

 

[IronWing]

I think the discussion above could be used to argue either:
1) There is no omniscient god that acts in the real world as any such observer would collapse all wave functions and we would never see them.
or 2) An omniscient god's omniscience acts outside of the real world and quantum effects are not a useful method of detection of such a god.