Religion

Silent3

(15,909 posts)

16. While nothing is ever 100% positively proved...

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 03:36 PM

Mar 2012

...scientific ideas do have to demonstrate some degree of scientific merit first before they become established, before they enjoy the privilege of being considered valid until disproved. A debatable degree of plausibility is at most motivation for allocating some time and funding to researching new ideas, and the burden of that costs belongs on the champions of the new ideas.

Since the idea of an "objective past" is not needed by QM, it is superfluous to QM. The fact that an objective past can be constructed in other areas of science (say, paleontology and geology and astrophysics) doesn't mean there has to be such a construct for "uncollapsed" wave equations.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

53 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Quantum soul [View all] tama Mar 2012 OP

The Swami has new clothes! immoderate Mar 2012 #1

Well tama Mar 2012 #2

So I find this interesting in your OP and in this post Goblinmonger Mar 2012 #3

No, tama Mar 2012 #7

Certainly science and spirituality can co-exist, and do so beautifully cbayer Mar 2012 #9

Spirits do not submit themselves to scientific study. immoderate Mar 2012 #13

Wow, it must be amazing to know so much of everything that is known. cbayer Mar 2012 #15

Merely an illusion I create by sticking to the obvious. immoderate Mar 2012 #25

Spirituality is a Rohrschach word skepticscott Mar 2012 #4

I think everyone should remember this post whenever you tout science and the evidence it Leontius Mar 2012 #5

Not only is this post not directly relevant to that skepticscott Mar 2012 #6

Answers tama Mar 2012 #8

A quantum computer does not continue to compute after the physical system is destroyed. FarCenter Mar 2012 #10

Quantum computers tama Mar 2012 #23

That would be David Deutsche FarCenter Mar 2012 #24

Some info on Stuart Hameroff LongTomH Mar 2012 #11

Good stuff, thanks for the links. bananas Mar 2012 #17

"I am not offering or suggesting any proof, just a plausibility argument." Silent3 Mar 2012 #12

I've been taught tama Mar 2012 #14

While nothing is ever 100% positively proved... Silent3 Mar 2012 #16

Yeah tama Mar 2012 #18

Suppose an average of 5.7 angels can dance on the head of a pin... Silent3 Mar 2012 #19

So in other words tama Mar 2012 #20

Show me results Silent3 Mar 2012 #21

What is "unfair" about your prejudice tama Mar 2012 #22

The practical results show that the intellectual part... Silent3 Mar 2012 #26

"Science" is abstract noun tama Mar 2012 #29

What a silly diversion Silent3 Mar 2012 #30

Well tama Mar 2012 #31

All you're proving... Silent3 Mar 2012 #32

I'd like to suggest that you may have posted this in the wrong group laconicsax Mar 2012 #27

I'd like to suggest tama Mar 2012 #28

Confessed bias? LOL, that's rich. laconicsax Mar 2012 #35

I have no problems with atheists tama Mar 2012 #38

That's a wholly reasonable position. laconicsax Mar 2012 #41

E.g. tama Mar 2012 #43

Someone else's thread being locked as off-topic is censoring you? laconicsax Mar 2012 #51

I think it's fine here. cbayer Mar 2012 #33

I was only suggesting that the OP may get more of the discussion he wants elsewhere. laconicsax Mar 2012 #36

Quantum consciousness... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #34

Perhaps tama Mar 2012 #37

Nope... not referring to that... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #39

So tama Mar 2012 #40

Theoretical examination of quantum coherence in a photosynthetic system at physiological temperature FarCenter Mar 2012 #42

Yup tama Mar 2012 #44

Uh. oh. Got us a ... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #45

I'm sorry tama Mar 2012 #46

Anton Zeilinger would qualify as a top scientist. Davies not so much. FarCenter Mar 2012 #50

I'll have to read more, but at first glance it is not persuasive. FarCenter Mar 2012 #49

No... anomalies don't falsify... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #53

Well that's interesting. westerebus Mar 2012 #47

Sensing and consciousness tama Mar 2012 #48

Communication is 80% non verbal, so I understand. westerebus Mar 2012 #52