|
From: "Tom Bearden"
To: "A.J. Craddock" <craddock@west.net> Subject: RE: James Watt speaks Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:22:41 -0600
Yes,
could open it okay.
Interesting,
since the whole notion of materialism, and the notion of the
"accident of the universe" depends precisely upon the
assumed random variable statistics in quantum mechanics.
However, there is a little problem with that. There is
absolutely no way in which the observed ordered universe can be
obtained from quantum mechanics, with that assumption! Unless
there is some "hidden order" down inside the statistics,
then integration of little things that are totally random just leads
to bigger things that are totally random. You never get any
persistent order. If you integrate noise, you just get more
noise. You don't get a Beethoven symphony!
In
physics this is called the problem of the missing chaos (missing
hidden order), in quantum mechanics. In other words, quantum
mechanics is known to be wrong unless there is some hidden order down
in there, because it predicts there is no ordered macro universe at
all. So you falsify the prevailing interpretation of
quantum mechanics, every time you look at a tree, the sky, your
automobile, a beautiful landscape, the sun and moon, etc. In
short, the physicist advancing the conventional quantum mechanics and
its random variable statistics assumption as perfect, is spouting a
model that forbids that he himself even exists.
I
once told a physicist (who was also a dogmatist) that, if he believed
he was just a meat computer and therefore a robot, I had nothing
further to say to him because I did not hold discussions with robots.
Understandably, he did not really appreciate the comment. One
can be just as dogmatic and opinionated in science as one can be in
religion.
Once
two quantum physicists (each of whom fortunately had a good sense of
humor) took me to task publicly while I was making a presentation on paranormal
phenomena. They advanced the requirement for rigorous
experiment, keeping only what could be scientifically observed, and
all that. Whereupon I replied that, hey, that would also be a
good criterion for science itself. I noted that time is not an
observable in quantum mechanics, but only a parameter. Thus
since it really cannot be measured or observed, by that criterion they
should ruthlessly purge that metaphysical old time from physics.
But then, they would have no physics left, would they? They got
the point, laughed, and agreed with that. And they did stay for
the rest of the presentation!
This
prevailing materialism in science would appear to be the ultimate
irony. If it was all an accident (scientific materialism's
creed), then it couldn't exist macroscopically anyway, because quantum
mechanics says so. But since it macroscopically exists, it is
not an accident and therefore the hidden order exists.
But
then if there is hidden order, it could not be there by random
accident!!! In short, it had to be deterministic -- and that
means a creator. There is simply no way to escape it.
Anyhow,
I regard science as a model. It's a very useful model, and one
we really need to keep improving. But even mathematics contains
no ultimate truth, and is just a game. Again, a useful game, but
a game nonetheless.
And
there is no such thing as a perfect model; Godel laid that notion to
rest long ago.
So
any way one approaches it, there really is no escaping an evident
intelligent principle that started the universe. Call it what
one will, the determinism and the intelligent principle are there,
inescapably, unless we wish to destroy QM, in which case the
scientific objection goes away anyhow, because the science itself goes
away.
Cheers,
Tom
|