RE: Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic
March 25, 2018 at 9:31 am
(March 25, 2018 at 9:21 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(March 25, 2018 at 8:59 am)polymath257 Wrote: And I agree. When there is a vacuum, there is NO THING in that vacuum. And yet, that vacuum can 'decay' and produce THINGS. So, yes, Some *thing* can come from no *thing*.
Yes, it does. It is the correlation between identical situations that shows a violation of causality. A good read for this is a little article by Mermin 'Is the Moon There When Nobody Looks?'
http://web.pdx.edu/~pmoeck/lectures/Mermin%20longer.pdf
Mermin is, by the way, a very respected physicist with a long publication record and a very frequently used book on Solid State Physics.
Thanks, I'll look it over. My experience has been that the nondeterminism of QM is sometimes confounded for being non-caused.
The following I think reflects my view from what I have seen.
https://theosophical.wordpress.com/2012/...principle/
Quote:Quntum mechanics merely describe what takes place at the quantum level. It makes no reference to causes, but that does not imply that there are no causal entities involved.
Feser hypothesizes that perhaps Oerter understands the law of causality to refer to some sort of deterministic cause, and since quantum mechanics are supposedly indeterministic (a disputed interpretation), the law of causality could not apply. Feser notes that “[t]he principle of causality doesn’t require that. It requires only that a potency be actualized by something already actual; whether that something, whatever it is, actualizes potencies according some sort of pattern –deterministic or otherwise — is another matter altogether.”
The fact of the matter is that quantum mechanics has not identified causeless effects or invalidated the causal principle. For any event to occur it must first have the potential to occur, and then have that potential actualized. If that potential is actualized, it “must be actualized by something already actual,”[2] and that something is what we identify as the cause.
If there is true randomness involved (which is what most, if not all, indeterministic interpretations involve), then some aspect of causality is being violated. Probabilistic outcomes imply that there is a lack of cause regarding the exact state of the outcome. The outcome just happens to be the way it is randomly (code word for "no reason").