RE: Atheism and the existence of peanut butter
December 22, 2021 at 2:42 pm
(This post was last modified: December 22, 2021 at 3:02 pm by R00tKiT.)
(December 22, 2021 at 2:22 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Classical notions of causality are apparently violated.
Why..? modern theories just add more layers of complexity to classical notions. In the context of QM, we know that our scope of observation will be limited forever due to the uncertainty principle. Therefore, if our observations are simply limited, our ability to observe causes to effects is also limited, a fortiori.
There is no apparent violation either, we don't detect an effect arising before a purported cause (and even if we do, it's still possible that we are chasing the wrong cause), we simply don't detect the cause
(December 22, 2021 at 2:22 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: You still believe it, and still assert it, but you don't actually have the cover or support of any evidentiary case for that assertion.
I am asserting this based on classical physics as a good approximation of reality. This is my support. Someone who claims causality isn't a good notion to describe reality, should provide decisive examples of causality violations.
There is another way to put it, although I am not completely sure: if there were truly violations of causality happening casually at the quantum level, then we would expect causal events and retrocausal events to somehow cancel out when we observe things from afar as in classical physics, which means we wouldn't observe causality in classical physics.
(December 20, 2021 at 9:20 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Why would an omnipotent being be better positioned to tell us whether nuclear decay is strictly classical? I think you mean omniscient. An omnipotent being can do all the things, but there's no implication or requirement that it even knows how it does a single thing. Just like you don't actually know how you breathe.
Sorry, I meant omniscience. Omnipotence doesn't seem to imply full knowledge about anything