Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?
Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)


regards half_pint

Dear half_pint:

"half_pint" wrote in message
...
Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?

Does prophecy leave room for free will?

Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?

The fact that scientists are not all knowing when making measurements, is
what the uncertainty principle is about.

If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)

Then it isn't really a *gamble*, now is it?

David A. Smith

"half_pint" wrote in news:bocc8h$1cmba9$1@ID-
204080.news.uni-berlin.de:

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?
Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)

In that case, why is he always looking for handouts on Sunday mornings?

Lanzlan.





regards half_pint

In article ,
half_pint wrote:
Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?
Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)

How can you say your will is free if your actions are random, and not
exactly what you want them to be? Are random actions that you can't
control any more free than predetermined actions that you can't control?

--
"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, then perhaps we shall find the
truth... But let us beware of publishing our dreams before they have been
put to the proof by the waking understanding." -- Friedrich August Kekulé

half_pint wrote:

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?

Uncertainty Principle
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...Principle.html
Nothing about "divine intervention" in those equation half_pint!

Physics has nothing to do with religion.

half_pint wrote in article
...
Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?
Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)


regards half_pint

I say that, since nothing can exist without an observer, it is impossible
for uncertainty to exist in an absolute sense, in so far as it suggests
the existence of anything that is not being observed.

If God is the ultimate observer, uncertainty means that we only partially
know what he is doing.

Alen

"half_pint" wrote in message
...
| Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
| intervention and free will?
| Einstein say "God does not play dice".
| However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
| not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
| If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
| rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
| I suspect he has better luck than me :O)

Hehe. Is that like modifiable pre-destiny?

FrediFizzx

"half_pint" wrote in message ...


Hi, half_pint!

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for divine
intervention and free will?
Einstein say "God does not play dice".
However if we allow for "free will" and "devine intervention" would
not a "certain amount of uncertainty" be appropiate?
If modern physics is correct, God is quite a gambler and plays dice
rather a lot, I have no doubt he likes a gamble on the horses too,
I suspect he has better luck than me :O)

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is not a particularly good
illustration of the randomness inherent in quantum mechanics. It is
possible to consider the HUP to be a statement of the properties of
Fourier transforms.

We know that matter shows wave behavior, but under some circumstances
waves move a lot like particles. This is nothing new. When he was
pondering his theory of light, Newton considered both possibilities.
The correspondence between the particle and the wave properties of a
wave packet is expressed by the Planck-de Broglie equations:

p_x = hk
p_y = hl
p_z = hm
E = hf

where (k, l, m) is the average wavevector of the packet and f is its
average frequency. Locally, the wave has the form:

A*exp[2*i*pi*(k*x+l*y+m*z+f*t)]

For a small wavepacket of limited duration these particle properties
of a wave packet are not totally well defined. The packet can be
Fourier transformed, and the Fourier transform will have
non-negligible amplitude over a range of values of energy and
momentum. The ranges in energy and momentum are related to the ranges
in space and time by the HUP.

Wave mechanics is, in itself, perfectly deterministic. In fact the
equations of quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, quantum
chromodynamics, etc., are all perfectly deterministic. Where
indeterminacy comes in is the relationship between the wave function
and/or state vector, and the results of a specific experiment. The
wave function of a photon may spread uniformly over the whole of a
piece of film, but when you develop the film you will find a
collection of black dots, each one corresponding to the absorption of
a single photon. The theory does not at all restrict the result of any
individual experiment. It is possible to get a black dot on the film
at any location. It is only when you repeat the experiment a large
number of times under precisely identical conditions that the form of
the wave function starts to appear out of the distribution of the
black dots.

If I were you, I would be wary of anybody who pontificates about what
God does or does not think or do. I would also be wary about putting
your money on a horse.

Cheers,

Zigoteau.

half_pint wrote:

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?

Religion and science are orthogonal. If you try to apply one to the
other you get nothing.

Quantum mechanics is purely probabilistic. Absolute free will and no
divine control possible even in principle. Classical gravitation is
purely deterministic. An initial set of parameters invariably gives a
discrete answer. However... Multiple body systems are chaotic.
Specifying that initial set of parameters and keeping things
infinitely precise does not obtain in the real world, not by a
longshot. Dust exists, so does noise.

Bottom line: Even if your god set things in motion, all bets are off
thereafter. Physics rules the real world, not some god who can only
get pi correct to one significant figure.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!

Uncle Al wrote:

half_pint wrote:

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle leave room for devine
intervention and free will?


Religion and science are orthogonal. If you try to apply one to the
other you get nothing.

Dot product or cross product? Newton was inspired in his theorizing by
his belief in the bland orderly God of the Deists.




Quantum mechanics is purely probabilistic. Absolute free will and no
divine control possible even in principle. Classical gravitation is
purely deterministic. An initial set of parameters invariably gives a
discrete answer. However... Multiple body systems are chaotic.
Specifying that initial set of parameters and keeping things
infinitely precise does not obtain in the real world, not by a
longshot. Dust exists, so does noise.

Bottom line: Even if your god set things in motion, all bets are off
thereafter. Physics rules the real world, not some god who can only
get pi correct to one significant figure.

Don't confuse biblical bubbah meises with theology. The Hebrews did not
have decimal notation and they were not (at that time) good
mathematicians. The Egyptians were. Jews pitched tents, Egyptians built
pyramids and the Babylonians built 400 foot tall Zaggaruts and the
Hanging Gardens.

The Egyptians were inspired to build the world tallest structures (at
least until the Eifel Tower) by belief in their gods and the afterlife.
The Babylonians built Zaggaruts because they wanted to touch the heavens
where there stellar-gods lived. The Babylonians invented astronomy and a
positional number system, inspired by their religion.

Meanwhile, in the New World, the Mayans were doing base 20 positional
bookkeeping complete with a zero inspired by the desire to figure when
the end of the world would come. Both they and the Aztecs predicted the
date. It was the date the Hernan Cortez landed. So don't knock the gods
too too much.

Bob Kolker


Bob Kolker