(March 18, 2015 at 4:09 pm)Chuck Wrote: I can profitably exercise my brain and interest using scenarios which contains implausibilities. I don't give a rat's ass such implausibilities might offend you. In fact I would dismiss you particularly completely because your mind is so brittlely shaped around ideological orthodoxy that other's enjoyments of implausibilities offends your narrow minded preachy ass.
No, same stupid accusation of "you are so closed minded" when all I am saying is "don't gap fill". Yes improbabilities are allowed by QM, but just like the rest of science, it also has rules even at that level.
Stephen Hawking, "A god is not required". Now if that kind of concept of a cognition to him is not required to explain all this, then tell me why any type of cognition would explain all this? A bigger si fi cognition instead of a god is just as unlikely.
Waves by themselves cannot think like an in tact human. Even computers have to have a macro level when in tact even if the algorithms are allowed as simulations as part of the program. There is still a bigger structure that has to be certain arrangement.
So if you want to go there, this "programmer" would have to be even bigger than humans and the universe and more complex, then that program would have to be even bigger and more complex and that programmer would have to have an even bigger more complex programmer and so on and so on and so on. It would be the same fatal problem standard god claims suffer from. "Infinite regress".
When science as far as time being a matter of perspective and claims that we are more like a Nickelodeon and our perception of the "arrow" is only one aspect of time. That is freaky enough by itself without planting a bigger human like figure into it. "Programmer" or "god" it is still falsely projecting human qualities on non human events.
