Deterministic Universe? - Page 2

goddess32585 · 05-15-2005, 12:11 PM

it comes down to, of course, if the universe is deterministic, but we can't even compute/comprehend all the possibilities, does it really matter one way or another?

i'll refrain from muttering about "free will".

amrik · 05-15-2005, 12:32 PM

A wise cookie monster once said "Me love to look out the window at night. See all the pretty stars - twinkle, twinkle. You know what moon remind me of? It remind me of great, big , delicious cookie!"

sagar_indurkhya · 05-15-2005, 01:48 PM

So you all agree that the Universe is deterministic. Than where do people get all this crappy support for Intelligent Design. Most people I showed this too simply say, "You can't mix god and math."

mercurysquad · 05-15-2005, 02:18 PM

Philosophy/spirituality is a superset of science. I would still go with the existence of God and, the fact that free will exists, and that miracles happen, that laws of physics can bend.

But in a purely scientific context, it's not possible, and as a scientist, I would deny this myself.

The difference lies in the fact that science is not the know-all be-all. It's a tool. And this is coming from someone who strongly believes in following a scientific approach.

I say : Go ahead and mix God and math, you'll find the ultimate solution. It's not impossible.

sagar_indurkhya · 05-15-2005, 03:55 PM

Heres the conflict. Part of my head says that as a scientist, I should believe that the Universe is deterministic, and there is no god, etc. The other part as a human says that there is god watchin out for me. Any of you get that same feeling?

azephyr · 05-15-2005, 04:07 PM

There is a god watching out for you. Whether you believe it or not. Who can say for sure this is not so? I think that any reasonable and intelligent person will not too hastily rule out the possibility, anyway.

I know some brilliant scientists who are devout believers in God.

sagar_indurkhya · 05-15-2005, 04:15 PM

There is no proof there is or isn't. So it is more a thing to keep you psychology healthy.

goddess32585 · 05-15-2005, 05:34 PM

personally (really, only on my own behalf) i'd find it more psychologically distressing to think that a more powerful being *is* looking out for the world, given the amount of tragic and ridiculous suffering there is. i'd much rather chalk it up to the random outcome of unfortunate happenings.

on my good days, when i'm feeling more agnostic, i'll concede that sure, perhaps there is a higher power that might've had something to do with the creation of the universe. but i find it intensely conceited to think that said higher power then had nothing more interesting to do than sit around and watch and meddle in our minute affairs. even given infinite lifespan, omniscience and omnipotence...i just don't buy it.

i know some brilliant scientists who are quite disinclined to believe in any God with a capital letter, and some who really don't know what to think, but seem to be doing fine anyway. *shrug* so long as you can match it up for your own self and find a way that works for you, i don't know that your beliefs have much to do with the science you're capable of discovering. and i think that's enough posting of my personal beliefs around here.

azephyr · 05-15-2005, 07:16 PM

I respect your views, goddess. The point I was trying to make was that keeping an intellectually open mind on these matters is a good thing. It's made all the difference in my life.
I wish you well.

amrik · 05-15-2005, 08:12 PM

Pascal's wager! Godel's incompleteness theorem! This debate can go on forever.

vecter · 05-15-2005, 09:22 PM

sagar, I don't think being a scientist means accepting a deterministic universe...

sagar_indurkhya · 05-15-2005, 10:15 PM

well it isn't the deterministic universe, rather the whole god doesn't exist notion.

MInT · 05-15-2005, 11:24 PM

I've been wanting to start a scientific blog... I was looking at blogger.com but what's a better place for a scientific blog than the MIT server?

The site says this is limited to the MIT community - does it mean visitors to the site (I'm still a sophomore) also? And also, are blogs created instantly?

ClaudeDebussy · 05-15-2005, 11:57 PM

Nietzsche-God is dead
God-Nietzsche is dead

kinda stupid, i know, but i thought it bore repeating given the context...

shash_rao · 05-16-2005, 11:05 AM

Quote:

In fact, Grand Unified Theory (GUT) has been extremely successful in defining the strong nuclear force as well as incorporating three of the four forces into a single theory.

I have great respect for what Abdus Salam did. No question about that. But i was not speaking much about what causes the grav and nuc forces, but more of their mode of action. The grav forces are central and their magnitudes are calculatable. We know that with good enough confidence. Not so about the nuclear force.

Quote:

Originally Posted by merc

If MIT made registering/updating a blog on their servers publicly accessible, I don't think they can complain if you have a blog on their servers.

Tell me if you find the link

Quote:

Originally Posted by sagar

am saying is that although nothing can measure the state of the universe, everyparticle knows its own state, and thus acts accordingly.

Schroedinger didnt think so. As far as he was concerned, even the cat didnt know if it was dead or alive.

But still, this isnt the game theory. Every particle does not behave exactly as its state dictates. It is influenced by its surroundings to an extent which i donot know of. The interaction must be there. The independent activity of trillions of particles cannot explain things like cognition.

Quote:

"You can't mix god and math."

Tell them that god is the creation of man to explain the math he couldnt do.

Quote:

There was a young man from trinity,
who tried to count to root infinity,
but the number of digits
gave him the fidgets
so he dropped math and took up divinity