Pure Probability, Fake Probability, and
Cosmic Intent
Quantum
Physics is revolutionizing how physics describes nature. Some of its experiments are producing
stunning results. In quantum physics, common
sense seems to go out the window, and even down the rabbit hole. Is the universe really that weird?
At the heart
of quantum physics (or quantum mechanics) is the principle of uncertainty, and
this in turn involves quantum probability.
QM seems to say that everything in the universe is based on chance. In an infinite quantum multiverse, chance
alone would create universes populated by clowns riding unicycles, and every
coin flip in them would always land as heads.
If you think I’m making this up, look up what the premier physicists tell
us—that in the infinite multi-verse, everything that can happen, will happen,
and must happen an infinite number of times.
If this is
true, then the universe is the ultimate absurdity, a cosmic madhouse with no
rules except eternal rolls of dice.
Since we cannot lead productive lives based on the belief that all is
futility, then we should seek a more well-grounded worldview.
This is
where the concept of Cosmic Intent comes in.
But first, we must dispel the notion of randomness, since if randomness
rules, then intent is irrelevant.
There are
two kinds of probability, pure and fake.
Since fake is easier, let’s discuss that first.
Fake
probability (called pseudo-randomness) is best demonstrated by using a normal
deck of standard playing cards. If you
look at the top card, you do not have to guess what it is, but otherwise, you do. Nature already “knows,” so to speak, what the
top card is, but you don’t, until you see it.
Your guess has one chance in 52 of being correct.
Now for the
hard part. Quantum probability, or pure
probability, does not work like that. Quantum
cards would be like dice. While the dice
are rolling, they have no specific result.
Only when they come to rest do the results become certain. In principle, in the quantum deck of cards,
no card has a specific identity until it is seen, or perceived. This is pure probability.
In quantum
physics, a radioactive atom will decay at a truly random time, within the
parameters of its half-life. Even if you
could look inside the atom, and see everything that is happening there, you
still could not predict with certainty when the atom will decay. Inside the atom, pure probability rules. Not even nature “knows” when the atom will
decay.
Fake
randomness only seems to be random, because it is our ignorance that makes us
uncertain. Pure randomness is truly
random, truly uncertain. The difference
is all the difference in the universe.
But what if
we can show that randomness requires intent?
We can show that. Let’s start
with a trick question. If I roll one
die, what is the chance that it will land a six? One in six?
Yes, but only if the die has six sides.
If it has four sides, there is no chance, and if it has twelve sides,
there is one chance in twelve.
The key
point is that dice do not have random numbers of sides. They are designed and manufactured with a
specific intent and purpose.
Randomness
in the universe is like that. The
universe, like dice, has specific parameters within which chance must
operate. The universe, like dice, is
intelligently designed and created for a specific purpose.
We can call
this principle, Cosmic Intent, but we could also call it, God’s will.
-
-
-
Response to an agnostic on discussion group
ReplyDeletehttps://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/metaphysical-speculations/Yjn9SpdcBZ4/34_n1k4UBAAJ
Hi, Benjayk;
You ask excellent questions to which I can give only "good" answers, if that much.
Let's start with the question of who designed the designer.
If the universe did not need a designer, then why should the designer need one?
In my thread about diagramming God, we used concentric circles with an absolute central point.
That central point is the center, and therefore, it has no center of itself.
It is the ultimate beginning, so to speak.
If God is self-existent, then He has no beginning.
Hawking ran into this problem when he asserted that God could not have created time,
since there was no time in which to create time.
As great a thinker as he was, even he stumbled over this concept. Then it is no surprise that others do, as well. Time did not need time in which to be created,
which is obvious, because time exists.
Nature cannot have come about by natural means, because until nature existed,there were no natural means.
As to the imperfections we think we detect in the universe, the amazing thing is that it works.
More amazingly yet, as Einstein noted, the universe is, to an extent, comprehensible to the human mind.
This is significant because even the human mind is not comprehensible to the human mind.
The dice argument is weak as presented here, because it is only partially excerpted from my self-published book, The God Paradigm. There are many parts to the argument, and in fact,
the book assembled many eclectic parts over many years before I was able to synthesize them.
Nevertheless, randomness needs nonrandom parameters. Those are not themselves randomly
determined, contrary to as QM would seem to have it.
One of the parts not mentioned here is one that you mentioned, which is
"the order that constrains randomness."
The book treats it more thoroughly, showing that ultimately,
orderliness cannot arise spontaneously unless there is first an already underlying set of rules.
The dice argument can be seen as a subset of that principle.
Randomness needs non-random rules.
The best conclusion that can be drawn from these points is that
the universe is intelligently designed. Whatever the flaws in that
conclusion, all the others have even more flaws.
-