Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 3, 2025, 10:41 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Debunking of Modern Evolutionary and Cosmological Theories
#98
RE: Debunking of Modern Evolutionary and Cosmological Theories
(April 26, 2015 at 3:15 am)Alex K Wrote: @JuliaL

I'm pretty sure the p in the example specifies a range of momenta and q,r ranges in space. Then, the Heisenberg uncertainty is supposed to tell you that p and q can't be true at the same time because q is too small a spatial interval to allow that small a momentum uncertainty as given by p. The same for p and r. However, (q or r) together specifies a larger spatial range which is compatible with a momentum uncertainty small enough that it can be contained in p, and hence p and (q or r) can be true, while (p and q) as well as (p and r) must be false by Heisenberg.

That being said, the example seems to fail on a subtle technicality: as soon as you restrict the wave function to *any* finite space interval, its extent in momentum space is infinite by the laws of fourier analysis. So saying that the particle is absolutely certainly inside any finite space interval would not allow you to have any absolute restrictions on the momentum. Very large momenta are merely.very unlikely, not absolutely excluded. So one can't really do the example with intervals.

Thanks for the further clarification.
You've improved my understanding from mud (totally opaque) to sort of dark, dark translucent. Rolleyes
Your 'technicality' though (I think, maybe?), depends on the validity of the 'law' of uncertainty which, though fully verified empirically so far, is still a knowingly tentative statement as it pertains only to the consistency our observations have shown in the universe to date and our expectations going forward.

My brain hurts when I try to think too hard.  Life was simpler when I just took 'natural law' as absolute.

But...but...
Isn't the writer of the example going back and forth between the values of r,q & (r or q) being true/false values and their being intervals in space which can be added to reformulate the truth values of the expression?  Like, r is false and q is false (can't squeeze the particle into those boxes) but (r or q) is true (the box got bigger and now the particle fits?)  One case is logical rule following and the other is adding space.
I'm back to mud.
So how, exactly, does God know that She's NOT a brain in a vat? Huh
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Debunking of Modern Evolutionary and Cosmological Theories - by JuliaL - April 26, 2015 at 8:28 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Will modern society slow the progress of change? Heat 11 3582 May 10, 2016 at 1:52 am
Last Post: Excited Penguin
  A new atheist's theories on meta-like physical existence freedeepthink 14 5124 October 1, 2014 at 1:35 am
Last Post: freedeepthink
  Do the multiverse theories prove the existence of... Mudhammam 3 2704 January 12, 2014 at 12:03 pm
Last Post: Esquilax
  Study suggests that Neandertals shared speech and language with modern humans Minimalist 13 7351 July 10, 2013 at 9:50 pm
Last Post: Full Circle
  Debunking YEC claims: Empirical evidence for the age of the Earth Jackalope 5 4603 January 7, 2012 at 2:33 am
Last Post: twocompulsive
  Modern Humans in Britain 40,000+ years ago Minimalist 10 3496 November 3, 2011 at 4:40 pm
Last Post: 5thHorseman
  Debunking the Paranormal Tabby 2 2423 June 24, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Last Post: Tabby



Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)