It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What are Atheists' thought's on Quantum Mechanics?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by OkandetreSorry you mistook my words, I am not to say there is none of that happening but just by definition of Atheist is the non belief in God. Yes most Atheists do think various other things that tends to get labelled this way, just like other groups.


Definition is as definition does, Forrest. :p


You said yourself though that you are not required to think these things - these things aren't required doctrine of any sort, they do somewhat come with the terrority often.


But the same can be said about theists. All it takes to be a theist is to believe in a God. Beyond that, a theist need not accept anything. A theist can be a free-lancer having little or nothing in common with orthodoxy.

But there is a sort of credo for materialists, who are also overwhelmingly atheists are they not? Materialist and atheist are virtually synonymous words. From The End of Materialism by Charles Tart I present the materialist credo:

I BELIEVE - in the material universe - as the only and ultimate reality - a universe controlled by fixed physical laws - and blind chance.

I AFFIRM - that the universe has no creator - no objective purpose - and no objective meaning or destiny.

I MAINTAIN - that all ideas about God or gods - enlightened beings - prophets and saviors - or other non-physical beings or forces - are superstitions and delusions.

- Life and consciousness are totally identical to physical processes - and arose from chance interactions of blind physical forces. - Like the rest of life - my life - and my consciousness - have no objective purpose - meaning - or destiny.

I BELIEVE - that all judgments, values, and moralities - whether my own or others - are subjective - arising solely from biological determinants - personal history - and chance.

- Free will is an illusion. - Therefore the most rational values I can personally live by must be based on the knowledge that for me - what pleases me is Good - what pains me is Bad.

- Those who please me or help me avoid pain are my friends - those who pain me or keep me from my pleasure are my enemies.

- Rationality requires that friends and enemies be used in ways that maximize my pleasure - and minimize my pain.

I AFFIRM - that churches have no real use other than social support - that there are no objective sins to commit or be forgiven for - that there is no divine or supernatural retribution for sin or reward for virtue - although there may be social consequences of actions.

- Virtue for me is getting what I want - without being caught and punished by others.

I MAINTAIN - that the death of the body - is the death of the mind. - There is no afterlife - and all hope of such is nonsense.


edit on 21-1-2011 by Student X because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
There is a difference between definition by what groups of certain people do, and an official group definition.

Theists are not an official group, like Atheists. Therefor these people need only meet the one minimum requirements for being described as such. Whereas say Catholics are an official group with a doctrine to be followed as being dictacted by scripture and officials of the group - the pope in this case. The same may apply to Humanists or Brights. Like for like examples as far as possible.

I am not to try say anything you said is wrong, I just didn't like my words been taken for what they were.

Afterall, we are all human so the basic underlying principles will be the same, of course



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Student X
 



But there is a sort of credo for materialists, who are also overwhelmingly atheists are they not?


True, but not all atheists are materialists. It is possible to accept consciousness as an epiphenomenon of the physical universe without reference to any deity. One can even believe in a "spirit filled world" that exists without a creator. Most schools of Buddhism would fall into that category.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Okandetre
 



Theists are not an official group, like Atheists.


In what way are atheists an "official group?"



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Student X
 



But there is a sort of credo for materialists, who are also overwhelmingly atheists are they not?


True, but not all atheists are materialists. It is possible to accept consciousness as an epiphenomenon of the physical universe without reference to any deity. One can even believe in a "spirit filled world" that exists without a creator. Most schools of Buddhism would fall into that category.


Perhaps, but in my years of associating with atheists I have found that atheist mystics are as rare as hair on a billiard ball. A non-significant percentage.


edit on 21-1-2011 by Student X because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   
almost all physicists believe in God, the more they study in their field, the more they understand the complexity and order of the universe. it goes against every law of probability and chance. the order and interaction of matter, time, energy and life in the universe is so harmonious that it can only be by design and not some random fusion of chaos.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Okandetre
 



Theists are not an official group, like Atheists.


In what way are atheists an "official group?"


It is a description of a belief, it's a type-description not a group in the sense of a organised scructured entity.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Student X
 



Granted, but in my years of associating with atheists I have found atheist mystics to be as rare as hair on a billiard ball.


You might want to hang more with Tibetan Buddhists. If you ask them about a particular deity, they will just shrug and say "They, too, are bound by their delusions and desires."



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


I understand what you are saying, but the fact remains that deluded deities are still deities. Tibetan Buddhists have a strong shamanic element in their practice that an atheist would be hard-pressed to accept. So hard pressed that the word atheist may be pushed back from the front-line of their persona in favor of the word mystic.


edit on 21-1-2011 by Student X because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Okandetre
 



It is a description of a belief, it's a type-description not a group in the sense of a organised scructured entity.


But it's not a belief, it's an absence of one. Each individual atheist undoubtedly holds different assumptions about the nature of the world, therefore one cannot make a generalized statement in response to the question "What do atheists think about quantum mechanics."



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Okandetre
 



It is a description of a belief, it's a type-description not a group in the sense of a organised scructured entity.


But it's not a belief, it's an absence of one. Each individual atheist undoubtedly holds different assumptions about the nature of the world, therefore one cannot make a generalized statement in response to the question "What do atheists think about quantum mechanics."


Well, you can worry over the wording, but be it belief of no God or a absence of a belief in a God, you get the same thing. You obviously seemed to have the missed the point I was making, which is entirely on the same lines as your own.

I was trying to say, as you do that you cannot make the aforementioned generalised statement of Atheists because they aren't an organised entity. I used the Cathloic church above as a example of one that is. So you could make the generalised statement of "What do the Catholic church think about quantum mechanics".

This was entirely my point to the OP. Which seemingly has been missed right from the off.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Student X
 



I understand what you are saying, but the fact remains that deluded deities are still deities. Tibetan Buddhists have a strong shamanic element in their practice that an atheist would be hard-pressed to accept. So hard pressed that the word atheist may be pushed back from the front-line of their persona in favor of the word mystic.


One of the unspoken assumptions that is causing confusion on this thread is that mysticism, consciousness, psychic phenomena, supernatural beings, deities and the "Creator" are all in some way related. They are not. There are atheistic mystics, materialistic paranormal researchers, theistic scientists, and so forth. It is unclear what the OP wants to know, if indeed they are actually asking a question rather than trying to stir up conflict.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by SlyFox_79
I know that Atheist believe in a material world, one that can be proven through Newtonian physics, proven through Science, experiments, and hard evidence.


No, you're talking about materialists and naturalists. Atheists don't believe in god(s).

As an atheist, what do I think of quantum mechanics? Interesting stuff. However, I feel it is frequently used by new age kooks to validate their unproven metaphysical nonsense.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Okandetre
 


Sorry. You're right, of course. The point is that if you wish to be a Catholic, you have a large and detailed series of prescribed beliefs to accept. To be considered an atheist, there is only one qualification.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Wow....I's fun to learn about what I am supposed to believe in and what I don't believe in...LOL....Tell you what, I'm an Atheist and for the record, I don't believe in god, heaven, satan or hell, no after life of any kind, my body is an energy source, it is a material composition of neutrons and electrons put together in a way that I do not resemble a piece of asphalt that is composed of the same neutrons and electrons but just put together in a different structure.

QM and QP are absolutely fascinating, based on Mathematics and probable deduction utilizing logical thinking, I don't see where a god could come in to play at any level aside from supposing that the big bang was a wanted event based on a god's need and wants thus relying on faith and in turn maybe a religion or two.......

As an Atheist I truly believe that when I pass, I will be put into the Earth and fertilize the dandelions for a few years, thus the transfer of energy in the ever lasting life cycle.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Non evidence is merely one reason atheists reject the idea of a deity. The fact that something isn't visible doesn't preclude it from being believable. We can't see gravity, nor can we see the wind. We know it is there though because we can measure and view the effects. We know that praying to god (any god) gets exactly the same result as praying to an empty can of ravioli. We know that good is good, and bad is bad. We also do not think that we have all the answers. We don't know how life formed on the planet. We don't know if there is life out there beyond earth. We don't know how waves of pure energy can vibrate at a certain frequency and produce matter from 'nothing'. To some people, this seems like a good place to interject 'AH HA! GOD did/does it!' - for us that answer simply will not do for it's not an answer at all, it merely misdirects by adding another mystery into the context. God always seems to hide in the areas that we do not understand. A thousand years ago, when nearly everything was a mystery and bolts of lightening were seen as actions of an angry deity it was easy for everyone to believe that god was directly responsible for the otherwise inexplicable events. Now, we know better - and anyone making such claims is laughed at. The fact of unexplainable events and forces in the universe doesn't make them supernatural. It makes them unknown.
How does an atheist view QM? As a naturally occurring phenomenon. How do we explain it? Did you miss the part where I said we don't have all the answers? The only answer we refuse to give it is that 'god' is responsible



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Thank you everyone for your replies. Hopefully we can keep this going!



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Does nobody here now what a scientific theory is?

wilstar.com...


Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.


Anyway the op's thinking on how quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle works is seriously lacking.

Besides if you are going to pick on any theory, DO NOT PICK ON QUANTUM MECHANICS BECAUSE IT HAS THE HIGHEST AMOUNT OF OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT. FAR MORE THAN ANYTHING RELATIVITY HAS!


And an observer is just a particle used to observe a quantum system. I.e. an electron, photon, or proton.




posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Good post OP. Quantum mechanics is discovering crazy things lately...I really would like to hear what atheists think about it- according to Q.M. nothing in our universe -should- work, but it does! Quantum physicists say that consciousness affects reality...the saying comes to mind, 'if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a noise?' The answer according to Q.M. is NO! But obviously we know that is not the answer, if you left a recording there it would make a noise. So there must be a higher consciousness besides human consciousness. That is what I believe God is-the creator of everything. Not only did He create everything, but everything is a part of Him. His fingerprints are on everything. So when a tree falls, it makes a noise, and God hears it.


-Now here's some food for thought...when you are in a dream, everything seems very real. And even people in your dreams -seem- real. But they aren't...they are made up, and if you could lucid dream and tell one of them that they aren't real they wouldn't believe you. The person in your dream might even be 'offended' that you said that. Now think about this- what if we are all participating in one of God's dream? What if we aren't -actually- real, and the only reason things work together is because God allows it to.
edit on 21-1-2011 by freedish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by freedish
Good post OP. Quantum mechanics is discovering crazy things lately...I really would like to hear what atheists think about it- according to Q.M. nothing in our universe -should- work, but it does! They say that conciousness affects reality...the saying comes to mind, if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a noise? The answer, according to Q.M. is NO! But obviously we know that is not the answer, if you left a recording there it would make a noise. So there must be a higher consciousness besides human consciousness. That is what I believe God is-the creator of everything. Not only did He create everything, but everything is a part of Him. His fingerprints are on everything. So when a tree falls, God hears it.


Uhhhhh...... NO!


Nobody said consciousness affects reality! If you had read the whole thread you would have seen my post directly above yours that explained the whole observer thing.

It just a particle used to observe the quantum system. I.e. Like using photons to observe other objects. This photon will cause a lot more change when we get into very small distances.

No I'm not atheist, I have a completely valid reason, at least to me, in believing in God.




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join