I will explain then first of all you have to take into account
Improbable versus impossible events
William Dembski formulated the universal probability bound, a reformulation of the creationist argument from improbability,[120] which he argues is the smallest probability of anything occurring in the universe over all time at the maximum possible rate. This value, 1 in 10120, represents a revision of his original formula, which set the value of the universal probability bound at 1 in 10150.[121] In 2005 Dembski again revised his definition to be the inverse of the product of two different quantities, 10120 and the variable rank complexity of the event under consideration.[122]
In "Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and Its Consequences," John Allen Paulos states that the apparent improbability of a given scenario cannot necessarily be taken as an indication that this scenario is more unlikely than any other potential one: "Rarity by itself shouldn't necessarily be evidence of anything. When one is dealt a bridge hand of thirteen cards, the probability of being dealt that particular hand is less than one in 600 billion [1 in 6 x 1011]. Still, it would be absurd for someone to be dealt a hand, examine it carefully, calculate that the probability of getting it is less than one in 600 billion, and then conclude that he must not have been [randomly] dealt that very hand because it is so very improbable."[/b]
See things happen and their random.
Now then double slit exprient shows two things one that measurement change things from quantum to classical. Secondly that everything is connected to everything else like a big ball of superpostion and that the act of observing stops this effect which is the EPR effect.
Well then just ask yourself who observed the observer? Now this would seem like god because you would need a higher being to observe you. However that a assumption see your assuming that a device cannot collaspe a wavefunction but it can. Now the universe starting with big bang just kept on expanding the wave function intill by probabillity their is life to collaspe them. But like relativity their is one reality to a observer or everything is relative even reality itself. See this universe is formed by observation and chance or constant flux, all our universe is is schodingers equation or heisberg equation. I would go into them if you wamt keeper.
So you're saying that you can fly into space, go around Earth twice while doing a magic trick, for example? I think that saying that all is random is a weak concept, I know that it can be true and it probably is. But why do you bother to live, I mean you arnen't actually in controll of your body, you are just a group of particles that happen to be at that place at the same time, is there anything else to discover? I think that randomness sucks, if it is the "answer" than I'd be much happier with 42 .[/b]
I see you been watching too much movies 42 funny. One word Nietzsche.
Well say that to people who study choas theory
Chaos has already had a lasting effect on science, yet there is much still left to be discovered. Many scientists believe that twentieth century science will be known for only three theories: relativity, quantum mechanics, and chaos. Aspects of chaos show up everywhere around the world, from the currents of the ocean and the flow of blood through fractal blood vessels to the branches of trees and the effects of turbulence. Chaos has inescapably become part of modern science. As chaos changed from a little-known theory to a full science of its own, it has received widespread publicity. Chaos theory has changed the direction of science: in the eyes of the general public, physics is no longer simply the study of subatomic particles in a billion-dollar particle accelerator, but the study of chaotic systems and how they work. [/b]
http://www.imho.com/grae/chaos/chaos.html
I suggest you read more on Heraclitus, not that meant to be a insult it just he explained the universe pretty well.
|
|
Bookmarks