[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] A problem at the bottom of reason

[fatherjimparker]

I was talking about reality changing when observed. I didn't think quantum mechanics got into Jesus much.

Experiments were done sending single photons toward an opaque target having two parallel slits in it. Beyond the target a screen was placed. Since only one photon was fired at a time, there should have been no interference and only two slits should have appeared on the screen. But what appeared wan a standard diffusion pattern.

There was a sensor placed between to photon gun and the target. When that sensor was moved to a position between the target and the screen, the diffusion pattern changed to two slits.

The position of the observer (the sensor) changed reality. (The pattern on the screen.)

 

[Ana the Ist]

Experiments were done sending single photons toward an opaque target having two parallel slits in it. Beyond the target a screen was placed. Since only one photon was fired at a time, there should have been no interference and only two slits should have appeared on the screen. But what appeared wan a standard diffusion pattern.

There was a sensor placed between to photon gun and the target. When that sensor was moved to a position between the target and the screen, the diffusion pattern changed to two slits.

The position of the observer (the sensor) changed reality. (The pattern on the screen.)

Ahhh...ok.

Your post said that "reality changes when you observe it"...not "photons change direction/position when you place something in their path." The way you said it the first time made it sound like you thought reality changes just by looking at it.

Glad you cleared that up.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Ahhh...ok.

Your post said that "reality changes when you observe it"...not "photons change direction/position when you place something in their path." The way you said it the first time made it sound like you thought reality changes just by looking at it.

Glad you cleared that up.

Right. A whale will never change into a pomegranate because I'm looking at it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Right. A whale will never change into a pomegranate because I'm looking at it.

So when you said...

"Observation" can be by the eye or by an instrument."

What exactly were you referring to? Since it wasn't a reference to changing reality...

 

[fatherjimparker]

So when you said...

"Observation" can be by the eye or by an instrument."

What exactly were you referring to? Since it wasn't a reference to changing reality...

Are we limited to our personal five senses when we make observations or do we make use of "instruments", the technology available to us?

We just got pictures of Pluto. Did some one drive out there with their I-phone and take pictures or did we use some for of instruments instruments?

Did anyone actually see (or perhaps capture in a jar like a firefly) a Higgs Boson at CERN or was it detected by some kind of instrument?

Obviously we created instruments to do the "observation."

 

[Ana the Ist]

Are we limited to our personal five senses when we make observations or do we make use of "instruments", the technology available to us?

We just got pictures of Pluto. Did some one drive out there with their I-phone and take pictures or did we use some for of instruments instruments?

Did anyone actually see (or perhaps capture in a jar like a firefly) a Higgs Boson at CERN or was it detected by some kind of instrument?

Obviously we created instruments to do the "observation."

You're absolutely right...maybe I'm just too late in the conversation to see where you were going with that point.

In regards to your first reply to me...can you demonstrate Jesus is truth? That would be interesting too...

 

[fatherjimparker]

You're absolutely right...maybe I'm just too late in the conversation to see where you were going with that point.

In regards to your first reply to me...can you demonstrate Jesus is truth? That would be interesting too...

Jesus said He is the truth. Either He is deluded and insane or a liar and a fraud or He is the Truth.

Pick one.

 

[madera23]

Si

I was talking about reality changing when observed. I didn't think quantum mechanics got into Jesus much.

example.
You may see yourself one way, such as a nice person, that is your reality.truth is you may anger easily. Now which is the reality?
Jesus changes our natures according to truth. quantum mechanics is much a part of Jesus.
Madera

 

[Ana the Ist]

Jesus said He is the truth. Either He is deluded and insane or a liar and a fraud or He is the Truth.

Pick one.

Well there's other options...

1. Jesus didn't exist.
2. Jesus didn't say those things...other people simply claimed he did.

But if we're going to assume that he did exist, and he did say that about himself (and I'm not sure why we'd assume those things)....I'd go with liar and fraud.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Si

example.
You may see yourself one way, such as a nice person, that is your reality.truth is you may anger easily. Now which is the reality?
Jesus changes our natures according to truth. quantum mechanics is much a part of Jesus.
Madera

Quantum mechanics deals with the interaction of sub-atomic particles.

Jesus changes our world-view. That is not quantum mechanics.

(Learn to be a Quantum Mechanic only $20,000 tools included!) Just kidding!

 

[Ana the Ist]

Si

example.
You may see yourself one way, such as a nice person, that is your reality.truth is you may anger easily. Now which is the reality?
Jesus changes our natures according to truth. quantum mechanics is much a part of Jesus.
Madera

You're talking about opinions...not facts. "Nice" in your example is a relative term...it means different things to different people...so it's not necessarily a reflection of reality, but a perception of it. It's an opinion, not a fact.

You do understand the difference between opinion and fact, right?

 

[fatherjimparker]

Well there's other options...

1. Jesus didn't exist.
2. Jesus didn't say those things...other people simply claimed he did.

But if we're going to assume that he did exist, and he did say that about himself (and I'm not sure why we'd assume those things)....I'd go with liar and fraud.

That Jesus "existed" is not debatable among rational people.

There is no reason to believe that He did not say those things.

That you would go with liar and fraud brings up the question of what are you doing in a Christian forum?

 

[Ana the Ist]

That Jesus "existed" is not debatable among rational people.

There is no reason to believe that He did not say those things.

That you would go with liar and fraud brings up the question of what are you doing in a Christian forum?

Well I'm not here to spread christianity...but that's a bit besides the point...

If you'd like to talk about it...I'm certain I could come up with multiple reasons not to believe Jesus said those things...by "multiple" I mean "lots".

As for Jesus not existing...well, the group of scholars/historians who doubt (or at the very least "debate" it as you put it) is growing all the time. Unfortunately, there isn't much in the way of what historians call "evidence" of Jesus existing...and if he said/did even half of what the bible claims he did, there should be lots of evidence for it. See? I already came up with one reason not to believe Jesus said he was the truth...and I'm barely getting started.

 

[Chriliman]

In this context, primary means a precondition of. You can pray to a non-existent god all you want to, it won't change a thing in reality. know why?

Now honesty is it more likely for me to stop believing in God who describes himself as infinite and timeless and this description just so happens to explain every question I've ever had about life, do you honesty think I'll ever stop believing when my beliefs have been confirmed by life itself? Or is it more likely that you'll become a believer when God proves himself to you?

Which do you think is more likely, for me to stop believing or for you to become a believer?

Is it a bad thing to have unbreakable faith in truth? Because this is what I have and it's been given to me, I havnt earned it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Now honesty is it more likely for me to stop believing in God who describes himself as infinite and timeless and this description just so happens to explain every question I've ever had about life, do you honesty think I'll ever stop believing when my beliefs have been confirmed by life itself? Or is it more likely that you'll become a believer when God proves himself to you?

Which do you think is more likely, for me to stop believing or for you to become a believer?

Is it a bad thing to have unbreakable faith in truth? Because this is what I have and it's been given to me, I havnt earned it.

What exactly were you trying to say in that post?

It looks like you're trying to say that because you believe in christianity quite strongly...you must be correct.

Or did you mean something else?

 

[Chriliman]

What exactly were you trying to say in that post?

It looks like you're trying to say that because you believe in christianity quite strongly...you must be correct.

Or did you mean something else?

As a human being I can't help but believe strongly in something that is confirmed everyday. I imagine you think your non-belief in God is confirmed quite often otherwise why would you hold the non-belief? Question is what will happen when you find a reason to believe in God? If that reason is very convincing, will you believe? I'd hope you would because there is something there, at least you can't deny that.

 

[True Scotsman]

Now honesty is it more likely for me to stop believing in God who describes himself as infinite and timeless and this description just so happens to explain every question I've ever had about life, do you honesty think I'll ever stop believing when my beliefs have been confirmed by life itself? Or is it more likely that you'll become a believer when God proves himself to you?

Which do you think is more likely, for me to stop believing or for you to become a believer?

Is it a bad thing to have unbreakable faith in truth? Because this is what I have and it's been given to me, I havnt earned it.

I don't expect it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

As a human being I can't help but believe strongly in something that is confirmed everyday. I imagine you think your non-belief in God is confirmed quite often otherwise why would you hold the non-belief? Question is what will happen when you find a reason to believe in God? If that reason is very convincing, will you believe? I'd hope you would because there is something there, at least you can't deny that.

That's a bit of a non-question...if I found a reason to believe in god convincing, I would be convinced. Also, yes...I do find evidence that I'm correct about the truth constantly. The difficult part is trying to make sure the evidence is indeed evidence and not simply my personal bias.

If you found convincing evidence that you were wrong in your beliefs...would you change your mind?

 

[Chriliman]

That's a bit of a non-question...if I found a reason to believe in god convincing, I would be convinced. Also, yes...I do find evidence that I'm correct about the truth constantly. The difficult part is trying to make sure the evidence is indeed evidence and not simply my personal bias.

If you found convincing evidence that you were wrong in your beliefs...would you change your mind?

That's the problem. Science had gotten to a point where there is no physical evidence to prove why we're all here. It's all unprovable speculation about theories and ideas. My belief in God allows me to trust that God will prove himself to those willing to believe in him. Believe in God because his existence makes more sense than imaginary time or a singularity. I've already went over how those concepts don't make sense when you really think about them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

That's the problem. Science had gotten to a point where there is no physical evidence to prove why we're all here. It's all unprovable speculation about theories and ideas. My belief in God allows me to trust that God will prove himself to those willing to believe in him. Believe in God because his existence makes more sense than imaginary time or a singularity. I've already went over how those concepts don't make sense when you really think about them.

No offense...but surely you know that your beliefs about god are just as "unprovable" as whatever theories you're referring to? I had absolutely no understanding of evolution or the big bang when I decided that the concept of god made no sense...so those things have nothing to do with my disbelief.

The question was, if you found convincing evidence...would you change your mind?