RE: The Best Logique Evidence of God Existence
July 22, 2019 at 9:10 am
(This post was last modified: July 22, 2019 at 9:16 am by polymath257.)
(July 20, 2019 at 5:28 am)Bucky Ball Wrote: polymath257 Wrote:
Quote:No, energy isn't all that exists.
Quantum particles.
So then, in a exothermic chemical reaction, the heat energy that is released is made of "quantum particles" (?)
The heat is the random motion of the molecules, which are all made of quantum particles.
(July 20, 2019 at 12:33 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote:(July 20, 2019 at 10:52 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: If going deeper than the immediate macroscopic world you can perceive is going into rabbit hole, then not going down rabbit holes means stop using most microelectronic devices that relies on quantum effects. Why the net energy of the universe may be zero while perturbation from zero can temporarily support existence of things like you is but quantum effects writ large.
How does that follow from existent quantum particles not being directly energy?
Not sure if you're asking me.
Heat energy is the movement of particles, not the particles themselves.
So the idea that "everything there is" is quantum particles cannot be true.
Everything there is is a property of such particles. The motion is a property.
(July 21, 2019 at 7:23 am)comet Wrote:What do you even mean when asking what something 'is'? Isn't knowing 'how to use it', meaning when and where to find it, when it shows up, and how it acts, aren't these *precisely* what it means to know 'what something is'?(July 20, 2019 at 12:33 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: Not sure if you're asking me.
Heat energy is the movement of particles, not the particles themselves.
So the idea that "everything there is" is quantum particles cannot be true.
They don't know what energy is. They know how to use the notion but not what it is. Just Like they don't know what gravity is but can use it. I I think its better stated the movement of particles is the indication of "heat energy". Its Like seeing if its windy outside by looking out the window. The movement isn't the wind.
Maybe change that to "everything we know is based on quantum particles."? If space/time itself is quantized then everything being based on quantized is correct.
You can equally well say we don't know what momentum is, or what spin is, or what charge is. Well, we seem to know enough to use these and describe in exquisite detail how these things operate.
I think asking anything past that is metaphysical BS.