|
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 7, 2022, 04:28 PM
|
|
The Double-Slit Experiment
What is the conclusion of the double-slit experiment?
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 9, 2022, 11:29 AM
|
|
Please, IN SIMPLE LANGUAGE, explain what this is.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 9, 2022, 12:27 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Please, IN SIMPLE LANGUAGE, explain what this is.
Too complex to explain in simple language. Quantum physicists will know. I am trying to understand it myself.
Here's an easy one. How could the "inflation" that expanded the Universe in milliseconds after the Big Bang have traveled so much faster than the speed of light which is the speed limit in the universe?
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 9, 2022, 01:21 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Athos
How could the "inflation" that expanded the Universe in milliseconds after the Big Bang have traveled so much faster than the speed of light which is the speed limit in the universe?
There was no "big bang". What was present before that? If there WAS a "big bang", did God initiate it (Genesis 1:1)?
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 9, 2022, 04:44 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
There was no "big bang". What was present before that? If there WAS a "big bang", did God initiate it (Genesis 1:1)?
Of course there was a "Big Bang". It's established science. Follow the thought process:
-The universe is expanding - galaxies rushing away from us and from each other, observable fact.
-Work backwards - the galaxies therefore were closer in the past.
-Keep going all the way back to what is called a "singularity" - a universe infinitely dense and hot.
-This singularity expanded at an enormous rate into what we observe today.
-Some scientists of the day discounted this and called it, derisively, the Big Bang.
-In truth, it's actually not a "bang" like an explosion.
-It's an expansion at a very fast (VERY FAST!) velocity, still expanding.
-The Big Bang term stuck.
The universe included both space and time. So there is no "before that". Time and space did not exist.
The question of God is not addressed by science. Science is about theories that are observable and repeatable.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 10, 2022, 09:58 PM
|
|
To answer the question of "inflation" traveling faster than the speed of light is to understand Einstein's theory of special relativity.
The speed of light refers to matter being the limit of speed. Inflation refers to space expanding faster then the speed of light. Space, not being matter, is not subject to the speed limit.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 11, 2022, 09:47 AM
|
|
Originally Posted by Athos
The question of God is not addressed by science. Science is about theories that are observable and repeatable.
How does a Christian fit the Big Bang theory and science into his belief that God created the universe.?
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 11, 2022, 02:31 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
How does a Christian fit the Big Bang theory and science into his belief that God created the universe.?
Simple. God is the First Cause (Causa Prima) from Aristotle through Aquinas. God is not contingent. God is necessary, hence First Cause.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 07:06 AM
|
|
A little further explanation :
God exists both outside spacetime (transcendent) and inside spacetime (immanent). As First Cause God is the cause of everything in the Universe. That creates a problem for the existence of evil which I cannot answer.
Wikipedia describes the problem thus:
The absence of good (Latin: privatio boni), also known as the privation theory of evil,[1] is a theological and philosophical doctrine that evil, unlike good, is insubstantial, so that thinking of it as an entity is misleading. Instead, evil is rather the absence, or lack (“privation”), of good.[2][3][4] This also means that everything that exists is good, insofar as it exists;[5][6] and is also sometimes stated as that evil ought to be regarded as nothing,[7] or as something non-existent.[8][9]
It is often associated with a version of the problem of evil: if some things in the world were to be admitted to be evil, this could be taken to reflect badly on the creator of the world, who would then be difficult to admit to be completely good.[1][6]
The merit of the doctrine in serving as a response to this version of the problem of evil is disputed (my emphasis).
As to a Christian fitting science into his belief that God created the universe - he doesn't. Religious belief and science are two different ways of seeing things.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 10:12 AM
|
|
Therefore, we humans concoct stories to try to explain to each other God (good) and evil. The actuality is so beyond our ken, so we have to use words and ideas that we can understand (i.e., Adam and Eve, the Flood, Jonah and the great fish). Make sense?
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 12:39 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Make sense?
Not really. Adam and Eve stories and the like are created to show a moral or to make a point. I don't think they are made up because "actuality is so beyond our ken". The moral or point is easily understandable, not beyond our ken.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 12:48 PM
|
|
Thus, we concoct allegories, parables, fables -- all of which tell a truth within an understandable story.
Originally Posted by Athos
I don't think they are made up because "actuality is so beyond our ken". The moral or point is easily understandable, not beyond our ken.
The moral or point is understandable but the concepts of God (good) and evil plus their origins and activities aren't.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 01:25 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Thus, we concoct allegories, parables, fables -- all of which tell a truth within an understandable story.
The moral or point is understandable but the concepts of God (good) and evil plus their origins and activities aren't.
Sorry, I missed your point.
The concept of God is understandable. Most religions have an understandable God. (A few don't seem to have a God - some aspects of Buddhism, maybe some others).
The origins of God are not understandable. Is that what you meant? If so, I agree. The difficulty with evil is well-explained in the Wikipedia quote above. I have the same difficulty that if God is the source of all things, then God is the source of evil.
Evil as an absence of good and not really a "thing in itself" is, to me, a philosophical play on words - a stretch.
5 or 6 years ago, I thought of evil as simply a weakness or a fault - not a concept like good. More or less the same as the absence of good idea. After years observing the internet and what people say on the internet, I'm not so sure anymore.
The Persians thought of evil as a force opposed to good and equal to good in the sense we are discussing here. The devil (Satan, Lucifer) shows up in writings to personify that idea.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 01:40 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Athos
I have the same difficulty that if God is the source of all things, then God is the source of evil.
The Bible explains that by saying God created all angels good but one rebelled, decided to have free will, and said he was equal to God (self-deification). Thus, Lucifer is the source of evil.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 04:46 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The Bible explains that by saying God created all angels good but one rebelled, decided to have free will, and said he was equal to God (self-deification). Thus, Lucifer is the source of evil.
The basic problem with that is that we run into the problem of free will again. Can a perfectly loving God knowingly (all- knowing) create a person who will "choose" hell and be eternally punished for that "choice". Knowing that would happen, why did God choose to create that person for a future of horrible eternal pain? A loving God would never have created that person in the first place to wind up in hell.
I don't see how free will can co-exist with an omnipotent, omniscient omnibenevolent God. God either is or isn't. He can't be both perfectly loving and then torturing his creation for all time.
A mythical Lucifer doesn't solve the problem. It's just a way of trying to explain evil. Person or Lucifer - same difficulty.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 05:06 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Athos
A mythical Lucifer doesn't solve the problem. It's just a way of trying to explain evil. Person or Lucifer - same difficulty.
Why do we get sick? Why do we emotionally and physically hurt each other? Is it possible someone can be good all the time? Or someone not be good at all? Where did evil come from??? (Rhetorical question....)
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 05:09 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Why do we get sick? Why do we emotionally and physically hurt each other? Is it possible someone can be good all the time? Or someone not be good at all? Where did evil come from??? (Rhetorical question....)
All good questions. I have no answers at the deep level you mean.
Why does all life depend on destroying (eating) other life in order for it to survive?
Seems to me God could have done it some other way.
|
|
|
Jobs & Parenting Expert
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 05:31 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Athos
Seems to me God could have done it some other way.
And if there's a heaven/paradise, how will that be different? Will I be able to enjoy a medium-rare steak or teriyaki chicken wings without killing an animal? Will mosquitos behave and stink bugs not stink? I've been told it will always be Now, no passage of time, but I can't wrap my mind around that. Maybe I should try to understand the double-slit experiment first.
|
|
|
Ultra Member
|
|
Mar 12, 2022, 05:47 PM
|
|
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Maybe I should try to understand the double-slit experiment first.
Hahalolol. What goes around comes around.
|
|
Question Tools |
Search this Question |
|
|
Add your answer here.
Check out some similar questions!
Quantum Physics, Double Slit Experiment Question?
[ 2 Answers ]
All right. So Basically I'll sum this up quick, someone told me that it's not the observer or the equipment that interpreters with the matter going through the slits, but the actual recording or comprehension.
In other words, he was claiming that you could leave a recording device to watch the...
Double slit Experiment
[ 2 Answers ]
Can the double slit experiment be scaled up. I read it could be performed with molecules.can it be scaled up towork with say smoke or machine gun bullets
Young's double-slit experiment
[ 1 Answers ]
In a Young’s double-slit experiment, a set of parallel slits with a separation
Of 0.100 mm is illuminated by light having a wavelength of 589 nm and the interference
Pattern observed on a screen 4.00 m from the slits. (a) What is the difference in path
Lengths from each of the slits to the...
View more questions
Search
|