what are your thoughts on this? (theist, verse, Allah, science)

[bradleykavin]

although this video might just seem like a weird science experiment that was done fifty years ago, i believe it has a significant meaning to our religious views..i have done more reading and this experiment, proves that when no conscious being is present (animal or human) particles act differently. That when no ones around, everything is "Probability". If the big bang is true, that would mean that it would need an initiator, a being of some sort, to initiate its occurance. I know most of you dont even believe in the big bang, but regaurdless, this is very interesting to me and i would be interested to hear your thoughts.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

[Tiberius]

I believe in the Big Bang because of the evidence, and as a quantum level event the big bang did not need an initiator.

[Panda]

Ahh yes a subjective universe, very interesting but it is to above my understanding at this time. Its one of there "its a table because i think its a table" things which confuse me, i did have a really good video all about this but i can't find it.

[PolyHedral]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrodinger's_Cat

It's both dead and alive at the same time.

[maggie2]

Cool stuff. I love exploring all these kinds of possibilities.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by bradleykavin

although this video might just seem like a weird science experiment that was done fifty years ago, i believe it has a significant meaning to our religious views..i have done more reading and this experiment, proves that when no conscious being is present (animal or human) particles act differently. That when no ones around, everything is "Probability". If the big bang is true, that would mean that it would need an initiator, a being of some sort, to initiate its occurance. I know most of you dont even believe in the big bang, but regaurdless, this is very interesting to me and i would be interested to hear your thoughts.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

Most of us don't believe in the Big Bang?? I don't believe that it was really a "bang" as in an explosion, but I most certainly do believe in a rapid expansion of what we call the universe from a singularity.

As for everything being "probability" when no observers are around, doesn't that just mean that the big bang could have happened or it could not have happened? Who knows how many countless universes have not come into existence just by chance. Ours did, and it could have done so just by chance.

The confusion here is that once it did happen, from our perspective it becomes a certainty. But outside of our perspective it might very well not have happened at all.

[fullyveiled muslimah]

That was interesting. My personal conclusion to that is that there is an observer of electrons, etc at all times. Being a theist I will obviously point to Allah as being the constant observer.

I know next to nothing about quantem physics. I did find this rather interesting. I would say something else but it's late and I'm having a hard time gathering my thoughts.

[yuvgotmel]

“The brain selects specific sets of the frequencies out of this vibrating blur and transforms them into sensory perceptions, and abracadabra, our objective reality exists. But what if one could focus attention on the de-localized aspect of self, then what would he or she perceive? …As the ancient religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion. True Reality is emptiness. Consider the following quote in What is Life, from the theoretical Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger, co-discoverer with Heisenburg of quantum mechanics, “Consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular. How does the idea of plurality arise at all? …the only possible alternative is simply to keep the immediate experience that consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown; that there is only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing …”.”

“The Silent Gospel,” by James Barrett, pp. 203

[yuvgotmel]

Originally Posted by bradleykavin

although this video might just seem like a weird science experiment that was done fifty years ago, i believe it has a significant meaning to our religious views..i have done more reading and this experiment, proves that when no conscious being is present (animal or human) particles act differently. That when no ones around, everything is "Probability". If the big bang is true, that would mean that it would need an initiator, a being of some sort, to initiate its occurance. I know most of you dont even believe in the big bang, but regaurdless, this is very interesting to me and i would be interested to hear your thoughts.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

I'm not necessarily doubting the theory of the big bang herein. However, I would like it noted that even that theory is subject to a particular local of thought or algorithm, which may not be taking into account all possible calculations of other fully-valid possible realities.

At any rate, it does not change my view of forces of light and sovereignty.

Additionally, it does, in my opinion, display that there is a lot of responsibility laid upon the shoulders of what appears to be "individual" consciousness and their projected realities from "singular" thoughts.

[gnomon]

This is an interpretation of an iterpretation of the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle. It's interesting but not really verifiable proof of anything metaphysical. I say metaphysical because I notice in the video a computer generated poster of the "What The Bleep Do We Know" video which enters the realm borderlining pseudoscience.

It reminds of the whole nonsense about if a tree falls in the woods does it make a sound. Sound is not solely dependant upon a human observer being able to "hear" the sound waves vibrating the organs which we call sound. Sound is a physical principle which acts independant of humans being able to hear the phenomenon. The same is true with light.

Just because Heisenberg posited a principle that a particle cannot be both measured for position and velocity to come to such far reaching conclusions as Ramtha, or rather, J.Z. Knigh, Fred Alan Wolf and others state doesn't make it true.

It is interesting. But videos such as this seem to jump off the deep end and "woo-woo's", that's right, "woo-woo's" like to take experiments such as these and tell us that there is more than science can tell us. It took thousands of years before humans reached an understanding of physics that Newton, Kepler, Brache and others discovered. It was another few centuries before Bohm, Einstein, Maxwell and others showed us more.

Don't give up yet.

And besides, the big bang was not a bang and no cosmologist would tell you otherwise. It's a euphamism. Big Bang sounds better than inflationary universe.

And last, to conclude that human beings might lack the ability to understand all that we observe must require an initiator is nothing more than conjecture.