Does the locality of physical uniqueness allow death and decay?

[SelfSim]

Original Sin injected us into this fallen reality of disorder ..decoherence ..entropy ..decay ..death ...sin

But I'm exempt from original sin (by free-will choice).

 

[pittsburghjoe]

You are born into this fallen condition. Your choice is between Jesus or continuing to use the sins that are possible here.

 

[ViaCrucis]

You are born into this fallen condition. Your choice is between Jesus or continuing to use the sins that are possible here.

Please stop mixing together quantum woo and pseudo-Christian theology.

It was, at the very least, amusing at first. But your refusal to learn anything about either subject isn't doing anything except demonstrate that you really don't have any idea what you are talking about.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[SelfSim]

You are born into this fallen condition.

No. I was not.
There is nothing more sinister, manipulative, mentally damaging and disgraceful than projecting this tripe onto a newborn child.

Your choice is between Jesus or continuing to use the sins that are possible here.

Jesus is dead ... end of story.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Vectors in a field are not physical. Non-local and coherence are both unobservable. I already told you it is impossible for something in superposition to be real.

The vectors in a field are numerical descriptors of its physical properties.

Unobservable doesn't mean unreal or non-physical.

You can assert that something in superposition is not real, but the assertion doesn't make it true; I'm asking for some justification of that assertion.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

No. I was not.
There is nothing more sinister, manipulative, mentally damaging and disgraceful than projecting this tripe onto a newborn child.
Jesus is dead ... end of story.

Are you physical? Are you able to sin if you want to? Then Original Sin happened. The double slit experiment is about decoherence ..so is this fallen condition.

Jesus did die and then came back. What do you think the Shroud of Turin is?

 

[pittsburghjoe]

The vectors in a field are numerical descriptors of its physical properties.

Unobservable doesn't mean unreal or non-physical.

You can assert that something in superposition is not real, but the assertion doesn't make it true; I'm asking for some justification of that assertion.

Last I checked, numbers are not physical. Yes, things can have physical properties after they are observed.

Show me something that is unobservable and real at the same time. We detect coherent waves as interference patterns AFTER they completed their flight/propagation.

Something in superposition is in all possible paths ..something real can't be in more than one place at a time.

 

[Hans Blaster]

What do you think the Shroud of Turin is?

A 14th century forgery.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

Here is a video you will not watch because it explains how it can't be a forgery. I set it to a time where it gets interesting.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Are you physical? Are you able to sin if you want to? Then Original Sin happened. The double slit experiment is about decoherence ..so is this fallen condition.

Which translates to "I don't understand the double slit experiment, and I don't know what the doctrine of original sin is".

What do you think the Shroud of Turin is?

A medieval relic that is almost certainly not the actual burial cloth of Jesus Christ.

As a Lutheran I don't put much stock in relics, as Luther himself once famously quipped that Rome had enough nails of the Holy Cross to shoe every horse in Saxony, and that 18 of the 12 Apostles were buried in Spain alone.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hans Blaster]

Here is a video you will not watch because it explains how it can't be a forgery.

No, it's a video I won't watch because it's 90 minutes long and you didn't even summarize it. (Don't bother.)

It's been recognized as a forgery from nearly the begining. From the Wikipedia page on the shroud.

The first possible historical record dates from 1353 or 1357, and the first certain record (in Lirey, France) in 1390 when Bishop Pierre d'Arcis wrote a memorandum to Pope Clement VII (Avignon Obedience), stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed.

The image does not match a projection (as if made by a "Holy Glow") or the contacts expected if wrapped around a body.

The fabric is not contemporary to Roman Palestine and carbon dates consistent with the discovery period, not the time of Jesus.

My youtube video is *much* shorter:

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Show me something that is unobservable and real at the same time. We detect coherent waves as interference patterns AFTER they completed their flight/propagation.

So you're suggesting my wifi signal isn't real between router and computer?

Something in superposition is in all possible paths ..something real can't be in more than one place at a time.

OK, if that's your personal definition of 'real', then it's true by personal definition.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Here is a video ... I set it to a time where it gets interesting.

The media embedded ignores 'start play from' times. You need to post the relevant time to skip to.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

Oh, 25 minutes in.

 

[sjastro]

Last I checked, numbers are not physical. Yes, things can have physical properties after they are observed.

Show me something that is unobservable and real at the same time. We detect coherent waves as interference patterns AFTER they completed their flight/propagation.

Something in superposition is in all possible paths ..something real can't be in more than one place at a time.

More incoherence.....

Explain why quantum bits or qbits which can be either a single electron or photon in a superimposed state for spin or polarization respectively are not "real" given their quantum coherence lifespan is a function of a very real property temperature.

And while you are it explain why nature does a far better job on quantum coherence than we dumb humans trying to develop quantum computers given that photosynthesis is an example of quantum coherence at terrestrial temperatures.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

Is it real only because you say they are? If you can't measure something ..it isn't real.

Weird how life can have quantum effects going on inside when they shouldn't be allowed to.

 

[SelfSim]

Explain why quantum bits or qbits which can be either a single electron or photon in a superimposed state for spin or polarization respectively are not "real" given their quantum coherence lifespan is a function of a very real property temperature.

Is it real only because you say they are? If you can't measure something ..it isn't real.

Once objectively, (consistently, and independently) observed, something can be objectively real .. I agree with that part of this discussion.

 

[sjastro]

Is it real only because you say they are? If you can't measure something ..it isn't real.

The argument by repetition fallacy.
Quantum computing only works when the qubits are in a superimposed state.
Qubits in the form of quantum logic gates have already been produced to operate at temperatures of around -272°C.
They are in a superimposed state and very very real.

Weird how life can have quantum effects going on inside when they shouldn't be allowed to.

Life shouldn't be allowed to use quantum mechanics?
Is that because reading in between the lines you see the ridiculousness of mixing "theology" with quantum mechanics?
According to your twisted logic since plants use quantum mechanics in photosynthesis they carry original sin.
Does this mean a cactus is as inherently evil as a human?

It gives meaning to this image.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

Do you think we are going to be physical in heaven? When someone has a near-death experience, are they physical when their body is back on Earth?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Do you think we are going to be physical in heaven? When someone has a near-death experience, are they physical when their body is back on Earth?

Let me help you here: When someone has a near-death experience they are always on Earth the whole time. (At least until one happens in orbit.)