Did we mention a Templeton-funded Big Questions Online, relaunched?

6 Replies to “Did we mention a Templeton-funded Big Questions Online, relaunched?”

1. 1
   bornagain77 says:

   July 2, 2012 at 5:03 pm

   Of a serendipitous note. Fazale Rana just posted this on FB:

   Biochemical Turing Machines “Reboot” the Watchmaker Argument – Fazale Rana – July 2012
   Excerpt: Researchers recognize several advantages to DNA computers.7 One is the ability to perform a massive number of operations at the same time (in parallel) as opposed to one at a time (serially) as demanded by silicon-based computers. Secondly, DNA has the capacity to store an enormous quantity of information. One gram of DNA can house as much information as nearly 1 trillion CDs. And a third benefit is that DNA computing operates near the theoretical capacity with regard to energy efficiency.
   http://stevebrownetc.com/2012/.....-argument/

   A few notes Godel’s incompleteness:

   Kurt Gödel – Incompleteness Theorem – video
   http://www.metacafe.com/w/8462821

   THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS – DAVID P. GOLDMAN – August 2010
   Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel’s critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes.
   http://www.firstthings.com/art.....ematicians

   And Alan Turing’s part here:

   Alan Turing & Kurt Godel – Incompleteness Theorem and Human Intuition – video (notes in video description)
   http://www.metacafe.com/watch/8516356/

   What is very ironic in materialists trying to use logic to try to prove that the mind of man is not transcendent, but is merely a ‘by-product’ of the brain, a ‘machine’, is that logic itself is transcendent of any material basis and cannot be reduced to a material basis in the first place.

   notes:

   The argument for God from consciousness can be framed like this:

   1. Consciousness either preceded 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.

   Three intersecting lines of experimental evidence from quantum mechanics that shows that consciousness precedes material reality
   https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G_Fi50ljF5w_XyJHfmSIZsOcPFhgoAZ3PRc_ktY8cFo/edit

   Non-Local Quantum Coherence In Photosynthesis – video
   https://vimeo.com/30235178
   Excerpt from video description: Now, I find the preceding to be absolutely fascinating! A photon, in its quantum wave state, is found to be mathematically defined as a ‘infinite-dimensional’ state, which ‘requires an infinite amount of information’ to describe it properly in mathematics, can be encoded with information in its ‘infinite dimensional’ state, and this ‘infinite dimensional’ photon is found to collapse, instantaneously, and thus ‘non-locally’, to just a ’1 or 0? state, out of a infinite number of possibilities that the photon could have collapsed to instead! Moreover, consciousness is found to precede the collapse of the wavefunction of the photon to its particle state. Moreover, a non-local, beyond space and time, cause is needed to explain the ‘harvesting of energy’ in photosynthesis,,, Energy that all other complex biological life on earth is ultimately dependent on. Now my question to the materialistic atheist is this, “Exactly what ’cause’ has been postulated throughout history to be completely independent of any space-time constraints, as well as possessing infinite knowledge, so as to be the ‘sufficient cause’ to explain what we see in the quantum wave collapse of a photon to its particle state and in the ‘non-local’ quantum coherence of photosynthesis???

   Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – Stuart Hameroff – video (notes in description)
   http://vimeo.com/29895068

   Quantum Entangled Consciousness (Permanence of Quantum Information)- Life After Death – Stuart Hameroff – video
   https://vimeo.com/39982578

   Falsification Of Neo-Darwinism by Quantum Entanglement/Information
   https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p8AQgqFqiRQwyaF8t1_CKTPQ9duN8FHU9-pV4oBDOVs/edit?hl=en_US
2. 2
   bornagain77 says:

   July 2, 2012 at 5:09 pm

   Further note: In fact logic, though not reducible to a material basis, can be argued, very compellingly, to govern the material realm:

   Finely Tuned Big Bang, Elvis In The Multiverse, and the Schroedinger Equation – Granville Sewell – audio
   http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4233012

   At the 4:00 minute mark of the preceding audio, Dr. Sewell comments on the ‘transcendent’ and ‘constant’ Schroedinger’s Equation;

   ‘In chapter 2, I talk at some length on the Schroedinger Equation which is called the fundamental equation of chemistry. It’s the equation that governs the behavior of the basic atomic particles subject to the basic forces of physics. This equation is a partial differential equation with a complex valued solution. By complex valued I don’t mean complicated, I mean involving solutions that are complex numbers, a+bi, which is extraordinary that the governing equation, basic equation, of physics, of chemistry, is a partial differential equation with complex valued solutions. There is absolutely no reason why the basic particles should obey such a equation that I can think of except that it results in elements and chemical compounds with extremely rich and useful chemical properties. In fact I don’t think anyone familiar with quantum mechanics would believe that we’re ever going to find a reason why it should obey such an equation, they just do! So we have this basic, really elegant mathematical equation, partial differential equation, which is my field of expertise, that governs the most basic particles of nature and there is absolutely no reason why, anyone knows of, why it does, it just does. British physicist Sir James Jeans said “From the intrinsic evidence of His creation, the great architect of the universe begins to appear as a pure mathematician”, so God is a mathematician to’.

   i.e. the Materialist is at a complete loss to explain why this should be so, whereas the Christian Theist presupposes such ‘transcendent’ control of our temporal, material, reality,,,

   John 1:1
   In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

   of note; ‘the Word’ is translated from the Greek word ‘Logos’. Logos happens to be the word from which we derive our modern word ‘Logic’.

   music:

   Hillsong Live – Hope of the World (Official Music Video)
   http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=WLG77WNX
3. 3
   Axel says:

   July 3, 2012 at 3:31 am

   And a third benefit is that DNA computing operates near the theoretical capacity with regard to energy efficiency.

   … just random chance ‘n’ stuff.
4. 4
   Axel says:

   July 3, 2012 at 3:44 am

   I really, I mean, genuinely, think that the addendum, “‘n’ stuff'” needs to be added to “pronunciamentos” by atheists, reflecting the “preferential option” for ignoring atheistically inconvenient logic.

   After all, attribution of the wanton nescience of so many atheist “scientismificists”, as often adverted to on here ( ..a universe created by laws! abstract human constructs) would almost, but not quite, represent an insult even to disaffected teenagers, never mind young children, who are probably the truest, most disinterested intellectuals, in the sense of disinterested “pursuers of truth”.
5. 5
   Axel says:

   July 3, 2012 at 3:55 am

   “Billy Bean….”

   Don’t get me started…
6. 6
   Jon Garvey says:

   July 3, 2012 at 4:37 am

   Axel – Only you and I remember Billy Bean and his funny machine. And a woman in Essex I know! Fot those thoroughly mystified, try this primer.