Inspiring Philosophy on quantum mechanics and the death of materialism

Well, I see a certain harmony to it. You don't. So be it. Such as it usually is with philosophical discussions. But anyways back to the empirical evidence and science,,, the following video is good for this subject.

Albert Einstein vs. Quantum Mechanics and His Own Mind https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxFFtZ301j4

In the preceding video, a disagreement between Einstein and leading philosophers over the proper definition of time is highlighted. Einstein held that only physical time was real, whereas the philosophers held the mental time of what is termed 'the now' was real, even primary. The disagreement between Einstein and the leading philosophers is one of the main reasons Einstein never received a Nobel for Relativity. In the disagreement about time Einstein stated:

"The experience of the now cannot be turned into an object of physical measurement. It can never be part of physics." - Einstein

Yet 'the experience of the now' is practically a key and defining experimental attribute of much of the quantum weirdness we find in quantum mechanics. As Scott Aaronson of MIT stated "if we accept the usual picture of quantum mechanics,,,, the world (as you experience it) might as well not have existed 10^-43 seconds ago!”

“Look, we all have fun ridiculing the creationists who think the world sprang into existence on October 23, 4004 BC at 9AM (presumably Babylonian time), with the fossils already in the ground, light from distant stars heading toward us, etc. But if we accept the usual picture of quantum mechanics, then in a certain sense the situation is far worse: the world (as you experience it) might as well not have existed 10^-43 seconds ago!” – Scott Aaronson – MIT associate Professor quantum computation - Lecture 11: Decoherence and Hidden Variables http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec11.html

Moreover, not only, as was highlighted in the video, has Einstein now been shown to have been wrong, by several lines of empirical evidence, in his claim that "The experience of the now cannot be turned into an object of physical measurement. It can never be part of physics", Einstein was also, as was also highlighted in the video, shown to have been wrong in his claim that free will does not exist. As Steven Weinberg states in the following article, (in quantum mechanics) humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level.,,, the instrumentalist approach (in quantum mechanics) turns its back on a vision that became possible after Darwin, of a world governed by impersonal physical laws that control human behavior along with everything else.,,, In quantum mechanics these probabilities do not exist until people choose what to measure,,, Unlike the case of classical physics, a choice must be made,,,

The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics – Steven Weinberg – January 19, 2017 Excerpt: The instrumentalist approach,, (the) wave function,, is merely an instrument that provides predictions of the probabilities of various outcomes when measurements are made.,, In the instrumentalist approach,,, humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level. According to Eugene Wigner, a pioneer of quantum mechanics, “it was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness.”11 Thus the instrumentalist approach turns its back on a vision that became possible after Darwin, of a world governed by impersonal physical laws that control human behavior along with everything else. It is not that we object to thinking about humans. Rather, we want to understand the relation of humans to nature, not just assuming the character of this relation by incorporating it in what we suppose are nature’s fundamental laws, but rather by deduction from laws that make no explicit reference to humans. We may in the end have to give up this goal,,, Some physicists who adopt an instrumentalist approach argue that the probabilities we infer from the wave function are objective probabilities, independent of whether humans are making a measurement. I don’t find this tenable. In quantum mechanics these probabilities do not exist until people choose what to measure, such as the spin in one or another direction. Unlike the case of classical physics, a choice must be made,,, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2017/01/19/trouble-with-quantum-mechanics/

And as leading experimental physicist Anton Zeilinger states in the following video, what we perceive as reality now depends on our earlier decision what to measure. Which is a very, very, deep message about the nature of reality and our part in the whole universe. We are not just passive observers.”

“The Kochen-Speckter Theorem talks about properties of one system only. So we know that we cannot assume – to put it precisely, we know that it is wrong to assume that the features of a system, which we observe in a measurement exist prior to measurement. Not always. I mean in a certain cases. So in a sense, what we perceive as reality now depends on our earlier decision what to measure. Which is a very, very, deep message about the nature of reality and our part in the whole universe. We are not just passive observers.” Anton Zeilinger – Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism – video (7:17 minute mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4C5pq7W5yRM#t=437

Thus, despite Einstein's denial of his own free will, the fact of the matter is that quantum mechanics, once again, refutes Einstein's claim. To sum it up, Einstein's claim that “The experience of ‘the now’ cannot be turned into an object of physical measurement, it can never be a part of physics.” and his claim that free will is an illusion and does not exist, are both now refuted by advances in quantum mechanics. Moreover, the fact that both 'the experience of ‘the now’ and free will', which are unique, and even defining, properties of the immaterial mind,,,

The Mind and Materialist Superstition – Michael Egnor - 2008 Six “properties of mind” that are irreconcilable with materialism: - Excerpt: Intentionality,,, Qualia,,, Persistence of Self-Identity,,, Restricted Access,,, Incorrigibility,,, Free Will,,, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2008/11/the_mind_and_materialist_super013961.html

,,, figure so prominently in quantum mechanics tells us, fairly clearly, that human mind is irreducible to material explanations and also that the immaterial Mind of God must be primary in quantum mechanics. Moreover, not only does quantum mechanics provide us with experimental evidence for the irreducible nature of the human mind and for the Theistic claim that the Mind of God must be primary, quantum mechanics also, via the quantum attribute of Quantum Entanglement, which Einstein derogatorily termed "spooky action at a distance", also provides the Christian Theist experimental support for his claim that he has a transcendent soul that is capable of living beyond the death of his material body. Namely, 'non-local', beyond space and time, quantum entanglement/information, which cannot be reduced to any possible materialistic explanation, is now found in every biological molecule of our material bodies. Moreover, this evidence from what is termed 'quantum biology' falsifies the entire reductive materialistic framework that Darwinian evolution is based upon:

Darwinian Materialism vs. Quantum Biology - video https://youtu.be/LHdD2Am1g5Y

Thus, as far as the empirical evidence itself is concerned from quantum mechanics, the Christian is sitting in a VERY comfortable position. Whereas, on the other hand, due to these advances in quantum mechanics, I seriously don't see how atheistic materialists can sleep well at night. Their entire worldview is simply completely demolished by quantum mechanics.

Mark 8:36-37 What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? Jewel - Who will save your soul https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LukEq643Mk

bornagain77

re 4: I don't think that the idea that "the creator actually became the universe" is "perilously close" to the story of Jesus. This is pandeism we're talking about, you know. jdk

' To what can science appeal, if not evidence?' The short answer is... well, it's really a question, I suppose.....: 'my Aunt Fanny'? It's really a tentative suggestion. Axel

Hmmm as to, "Haisch provides as proof of his views a combination of fine tuning and mystical experiences arguments." No mention of quantum mechanics from your referenced Haisch quote to support his thoroughly 'non-materialistic' philosophical position of 'Pandeism'. As to: "Pandeism,,, holds that the creator of the universe actually became the universe, and so ceased to exist as a separate and conscious entity." That philosophical position is dangerously close to the primary claim of Christianity which holds that God became a man, lived a sinless life, was resurrected from the dead, and subsequently had all power in heaven and earth bestowed upon Him. i.e. Became Lord of the entire universe!

Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Moreover, Jesus's resurrection from the dead actually provides a empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between quantum mechanics and general relativity into the much sought after theory of everything.

Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, General Relativity and Christianity (USA) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4QDy1Soolo Copernican Principle, Agent Causality, and Jesus Christ as the “Theory of Everything” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NziDraiPiOw “When you look at the image of the shroud, the two bodies next to each other, you feel that it is a flat image. But if you create, for instance, a three dimensional object, as I did, the real body, then you realize that there is a strange dividing element. An interface from which the image is projected up and the image is projected down. The muscles of the body are absolutely not crushed against the stone of the tomb. They are perfect. It means the body is hovering between the two sides of the shroud. What does that mean? It means there is absolutely no gravity. Other strange you discover is that the image is abslutely undistorted. Now if you imagine the clothe was wrinkled, tied, wrapped around the body, and all of the sudden you see a perfect image, which is impossible unless the shroud was made absolutely taut, rigidly taut.” Isabel Piczek - 2:20 mark Turin shroud – (Particle Physicist explains event horizon) – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHVUGK6UFK8 Turin Shroud Hologram Reveals The Words "The Lamb" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tmka1l8GAQ

Moreover, diving deeper into quantum mechanics we find that the traditional Christian/Theistic belief that the Mind of God precedes and sustains the universe in its continual existence is supported by numerous lines of intersecting evidence. In fact, due to advances in quantum mechanics, the argument for God from consciousness can now be framed like this:

1. Consciousness either precedes all of material reality or is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality. 2. If consciousness is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality then consciousness will be found to have no special position within material reality. Whereas conversely, if consciousness precedes material reality then consciousness will be found to have a special position within material reality. 3. Consciousness is found to have a special, even central, position within material reality. 4. Therefore, consciousness is found to precede material reality. Five intersecting lines of experimental evidence from quantum mechanics that shows that consciousness precedes material reality (Double Slit, Wigner’s Quantum Symmetries, Wheeler’s Delayed Choice, Leggett’s Inequalities, Quantum Zeno effect): - Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness: 5 Experiments – video https://youtu.be/t5qphmi8gYE Double Slit, Quantum-Electrodynamics, and Christian Theism - paper https://docs.google.com/document/d/19lfxxHkkKOTSdfDKvhlKvBC5Fjl_x8dEUwzFqW8SeC0/edit

Thus Haisch's philosophical position does not directly contradict Christianity, (in fact his position finds a certain harmony with Christianity), but his position does directly contradict Atheistic materialism. Moreover, when diving deeper into the details from both quantum mechanics and general relativity, we find that Christianity finds a much better, empirically backed, fit with the scientific evidence, and indeed, even provides a solution to the number one problem in physics today,,, namely the reconciliation of quantum mechanics and general relativity into the much sought after theory of everything. Verse and music:

Colossians 1:15-20 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. Evanescence - My Heart Is Broken https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1QGnq9jUU0

bornagain77

About Haisch from Wikipedia:

Both [of his] books reject both atheism and traditional theistic viewpoints, favoring instead a model of Pandeism wherein our Creator has become our Universe, to share in the actualized experiences therein manifested. Haisch provides as proof of his views a combination of fine tuning and mystical experiences arguments.

And what is pandeism, one might ask (since I've never heard of it before)

Pandeism (or Pan-Deism) is a theological doctrine which combines aspects of pantheism and deism. It holds that the creator of the universe actually became the universe, and so ceased to exist as a separate and conscious entity./

So many metaphysical possibilities!

jdk

as to:

"And, as far as I understand it, there is still considerable debate within the physics community about how to interpret quantum phenomena. It doesn’t confirm that reality cannot exist without consciousness."

And that is precisely the point of the video. Those who hold to the belief that reality can exist without consciousness have been repeatedly falsified by experimental evidence. Some scientist, and Seversky in particular, may not like the experimental results one bit, but that is anti-science. The experimental results are what they are. To quote Bernard Haisch after the Leggett inequality was violated. Experiments in Quantum Mechanics now rule "out any possible interpretation other than consciousness creates reality when the measurement is made.”

“I’m going to talk about the Bell inequality, and more importantly a new inequality that you might not have heard of called the Leggett inequality, that was recently measured. It was actually formulated almost 30 years ago by Professor Leggett, who is a Nobel Prize winner, but it wasn’t tested until about a year and a half ago (in 2007), when an article appeared in Nature, that the measurement was made by this prominent quantum group in Vienna led by Anton Zeilinger, which they measured the Leggett inequality, which actually goes a step deeper than the Bell inequality and rules out any possible interpretation other than consciousness creates reality when the measurement is made.” – Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., Calphysics Institute, is an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications. Preceding quote taken from this following video; Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness - A New Measurement - Bernard Haisch, Ph.D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nttB3Wze3Y8

As far as the experimental evidence itself is concerned, the debate is over. To refuse to accept the experimental results, as Seversky and other atheists are certain to do, is simply anti-science and is to assert that ones a-priori philosophical bias has precedence over experimental results. That is clearly not how science works and people prone to such unfair philosophical bias have, IMHO, no place in science and should take up selling Hot Dogs on a street corner instead of science. bornagain77

To paraphrase a misquote of Mark Twain, the reports of materialism's death are greatly exaggerated. Also, to be conscious is to be conscious of something. If mind preceded matter, what was it conscious of before? A delusion? And if it was nonetheless functionally conscious of itself and, presumably, necessary and self-sufficient, why bother creating material reality at all? And, as far as I understand it, there is still considerable debate within the physics community about how to interpret quantum phenomena. It doesn't confirm that reality cannot exist without consciousness. Seversky