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: May 13, 2024, 9:45 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid.
#35
RE: Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid.
(May 9, 2014 at 11:48 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I'm saying quantum entanglement rules out the possibility that natural physical properties are too complex to have natural causes.

Of course, I could be wrong, if something were currently observable in nature too complex to have natural origins.

Quantum mechanics does not rule out that natural properties may be too complex to have a statistically reasonable chance of arising within a finite amount of time in a system of limited scope.

The chances that you can drop the shards of a shattered glass on the floor, and have them hit and bounce in such a way that they reassemble into the configuration of the original glass is not impossible. No law of physics, classical or quantum mechanical, precludes it. But it is overwhelmingly unlikely to occur such that if it is observed to occur, especially multiple times, then some better explanation than exclaimation of "freaky!" would be demanded.

(May 9, 2014 at 11:58 am)Heywood Wrote:
(May 9, 2014 at 11:48 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I'm saying quantum entanglement rules out the possibility that natural physical properties are to complex to have natural causes.

Of course, I could be wrong, if something were currently observable in nature too complex to have natural origins.

You're hung up on "natural". What difference would it make if God created the system of water marks in Mycoplasm_Labaritorium or if it is the creation of man? The system is still irreducibly complex.

No, it't not "irreducibly" complex. Paths of natural reduction is easy to conceive. It's just a matter of calculating the odds of such natural reduction correctly, and comparing that against the odds of either evidenced, or otherwise unevidenced, intelligent design.

You god is an unevidenced presumptibe designer. The odds of such a designer existing is vastly more infinitesimal than any seeming improbably, but physically possible natural event nontheless occuring naturally.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Theoretical physics shows "irreducible complexity" arguments invalid. - by Anomalocaris - May 9, 2014 at 12:00 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Foucault pendulum in the Kirchhoff Institute for Physics. Jehanne 1 545 January 30, 2022 at 12:06 am
Last Post: Fireball
  Real Life Physics Puzzles onlinebiker 23 2041 July 15, 2019 at 9:49 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Physics and life Brian37 3 982 December 4, 2017 at 2:31 pm
Last Post: Astreja
  Questions about Physics, Biology and perspective bennyboy 14 2725 June 23, 2016 at 5:34 am
Last Post: Alex K
  Scientific arguments for eating Organic/non-GMO food? CapnAwesome 15 4183 June 10, 2015 at 6:49 pm
Last Post: Pyrrho
  physics / maths twocompulsive 6 2485 March 13, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)