Normal

The stochastic character is random, that's what stochastic means. The randomness involved in an electron to take one of those stocastic paths is uncaused, meaning there is no cause, meaning it's not a revision of causative theory, it's throwing it out. They can use probability to predict but that is all.

It is purely chaotic because at the base of every apparent cause is a random uncaused element.

What straw man?

How is no argument evident? If you agree that the base of every apparent cause is an uncaused random event, then the argument is over.

The stocastic elements of those other models were never thought to be completely random. It's a false analogy. A better model to use as an analogy would be probability theory. But even then the events underlying probability theory were not suspected to be completely random.

My principal attack was on the issue of parsimony.

And all this conjecture is based on the unparsimonious system of evidence.

Normal

You can believe in it all you want, it doesn't make it true. Same applies for god, by the way.

Quantum mechanical effects are indeed random, but they combine to a practically determined system of apparent cause and effect, I never argued this.

PJPSYCO

Actually experimentally it has been shown to not be random. It's not that we can't find the position of each and every electron. It's that we don't have the time to. We could quite easily model every element on the periodic table, and every compound that we could make with them, but again don't have that much time. The quantum that you want science to do is impractical.

In the end though, it still doesn't prove that your god exists. Your implication that there is an ordered system from a random system is complete rubish. Sub-atomic particles, elements, molecules, the whole way up to the entire universe has the same level of randomness.

Your argument is that what we know of quantum is wrong, and that it is actually random, I would like to know where you got this. I said spectroscopy, I would like to know what you used to find the randomness. Oh, wait, that would be spectroscopy. Please tell me where you got this randomness from. Spectroscopy? Are you an electron or did you use spectroscopy? Wait perhaps you utilized spectroscopy. Spectroscopy is the only way you would know, and it says not random.

ex-xian

Normal - I'm curious...have many physics classes have you actually had? You continue to make assertions that were settled in my first modern physics class.

Regarding the opening post, just because an individual cause cannot be found for every event at the quantum level doesn't prove your point. The underlying probabilities that govern quantum phenomena do exactly that--govern quantum phenomena. There are rules to this stuff; yes, there is an extremely small chance that an electron in my body is in China right now, but my overall position is fixed.

Also, what "aparent order" are you wanted reason for? In mathematics, order arises out of chaos frequently.

You're confusing randomness and probability. With dealing with macroscopic things, the energy levels are so high that the quantum effects vanish, so we can deterministically know where a baseball is going to fall when it's thrown in the air.

Incidentally, a correct interpretation of quantum mechanics is a very strong argument against your god (assuming that you believe in the god of traditional xianity). QM precludes the existence of an omniscient being; the precise position and momentum of these particles cannot be known. God has no knowledge of nature at the most fundamental level.

What experiments are you referring to? I find this doubtful, since one fundamental about quantum mechanics is that the electron doesn't have a position until measurements are taken. It's existence is "fuzzy."

PJPSYCO

I was refering to relative postion. Experiments like XRD crystal data, and various spectroscopic and thermal data give us what the objects look like. Then we model them with quantum, and the model looks like the data. So, we except our model.

Our big problem is still the heisenburg uncertainty principle(HUP). We can measure postition and measure the momentum, and visa versa. We can stop electons and measure where they are, or figure out how fast and in what direction they are moving, but not all of that at once. Phosphorous paper will give you postion and an object where the slits on discs spin around on a metal rod at different speeds and there is a detector at the end gives us momentum (I forget the name of the apparatus at this time). There was a paper recently hinting that a way has possibly be found to beat the HUP.

The question still stands how does normal know that these things are random? Unless he's beaten the HUP he can't say whether electrons move randomly or not. I suspect he is trying to exploit the uncertainty argument - that since we don't know which slit the photon will come out of, it must be god that it forms the lines on the phosphorescent paper when we shoot many photons at it.

Normal

Your somewhat frightening faith in spectroscopy notwithstanding, the uncertainty principle stands. I assume what we know about quantum mechanics is right.

And if the quantum level lacks a cause, the apparent physical "causes" are illusionary.

Not when there's true randomness within the probability.

Wrong. Electrons retain their unpredictibility even at high enegry levels.

How an apparently determinstic system can rise out of purely indeterministic components.

Against my god? What?

The uncertainty principle points to randomness. Uncertainty implies unpredictibility implies random. Current spectroscopy research only enforces the uncertainty principle.

ex-xian

But when we measure what they look like in position space, we lose the ability to know them in momentum space, right?


Don't you mean "position or momentum?"

Quote:

MORE We can stop electons and measure where they are, or figure out how fast and in what direction they are moving, but not all of that at once. Phosphorous paper will give you postion and an object where the slits on discs spin around on a metal rod at different speeds and there is a detector at the end gives us momentum (I forget the name of the apparatus at this time).

But it doesn't measure them both simultaneoulsy does it? I don't see how it can, b/c the energy added by the measurement of one will change the other.

Quote:

MORE The question still stands how does normal know that these things are random? Unless he's beaten the HUP he can't say whether electrons move randomly or not. I suspect he is trying to exploit the uncertainty argument - that since we don't know which slit the photon will come out of, it must be god that it forms the lines on the phosphorescent paper when we shoot many photons at it.

The QM answer is that the electrons don't have a definite position at all....it's a wave packet that passes thru the two slits, but still one electron.

I agree with you statement about Normal trying to exploit the UP, but he doesn't seem to understand what it really means.

Normal

It means we can know the position of an electron but not the momentum, or vice versa, meaning one of these is completely unpredictible, meaning the electrons behave in a random (causeless) fashion.

In regards to the OP, you could just say "I don't know" if you don't know. That doesn't make you a dirty theist.

Here is a site that explains one option science has of explaining the apparently random system. You don't have to attack me by claiming I don't know what I'm talking about.

ex-xian

You didn't answer my question about how much physics you've had. This is relevent as you will see below.

How you ever actually solved Schoedinger's equation for three-dimensional space? I have. QM is governed by probability. It's not utterly chaotic, there are rules, you know. We can have a general idea of the position and the momentum as long as the spread is less than a constant. That's not random, it probabalistic.

Quote:

MORE Wrong. Electrons retain their unpredictibility even at high enegry levels.

Really? Then how can you know where your arm is right now. It's true that all matter can be described as a wave, but our energy is so high that it's virtually nil. It's like time dilation. When you swing you arm, time slows in your arms frame of reference by an order of magnitude of about 10^-15 seconds. Theoretically measureable, practically nothing.

Quote:

MORE How an apparently determinstic system can rise out of purely indeterministic components.

I didn't say deterministic, I said ordered. Evolution is random to an extent, but still governed by natural laws.

The type of god you believe in. What's so difficult about that concept?


Wrong again. Uncertainty implies uncertainty not randomness. It means we can be uncertain to a certain extent, not that it's totally random.

Normal

I've taken a few, and I've read modern papers on the topic.

We can have a "general idea", but the fact remains the path an electron takes is causeless and cannot be predicted by us.

All electrons have the duality. All matter is made of electrons. The composition of matter is different then the components of matter.

The question remains on how an ordered system can exist with purely indeterminstic components.


You don't know anything about my believes. It's a tactful debate tactic to not assume anything about the other person that isn't relevent to the discussion.

All experimental information about uncertainty has pointed to randomness.