Jump to content

Quantum Mechanics


Recommended Posts

No, they are uninteresting because they are irrelevant to explaining quantum events and they are irrelevant to explaining the events that result in objects that contain markers of design. They are not the same kinds of objects and are thus straw man examples.


That's what I said you were saying -- that they are irrelevant to things that have no explanation and things that are explained by invoking intelligent agents.


Functional is well defined. You offer no evidence that I ignore functional aspects.


Sure, in this thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/51133-what-is-information/page__pid__567241__st__60#entry567241

First you claim functionality as a necessary component of information, then when I give an example of something nonfunctional that evolution can turn functional in a very short period of time, you claim the information was already there. So it seems functionality is only necessary when it is convenient for your argument.


Thus demonstrating that this is an open area of inquiry and it is improper to suggest that since simple physical phenomena has been explained by material cause, therefore we should believe that all will be explained. One of the most interesting aspects of quantum mechanics is that while the mathematics provides accurate and reliable descriptions of what happens, QM does not provide explanations for causation. QM is not able to explain why these events occur the way they do. It is a science that does not provide for comprehension of cause. the two additional examples have the same issue.


Certainly, but I'm not saying it is absolute proof that there is a materialistic explanation for the currently unexplained. Just noting that the consistent thing to do is expect a materialistic explanation given all explained examples have a materialistic explanation, and also given that the supernatural explanation is not really an explanation, not in the same sense as the first. Certainly we could make up materialistic stories to "explain" things in the same way as supernatural stories "explain" them, but that wouldn't help with predicting the things in question like a real scientific explanation would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.