Atheist Physicists VS God our Creator

[Steven Merten]

So Milton, in the PBS Space Time Video, what did you think of Niels Bohr's, 'Peek A Boo' universe,, a universe which does not exist when man is not looking at it? Do you agree with Niels Bohr's thinking, that if all the subatomic particles in the universe are in the superposition, wave state of all possibilities, then there is no universe?

What is even more interesting is that it is 'the universe' which chooses just where, and with what properties, a particle wave will materialize into a physical particle, when man looks at it. Wow! This really looks like God controlling every subatomic particle in the universe, in order for God to choose which reality man will experience, out of all possible realities. How spectacular is that!

A few months ago, physicists accomplished multiple realities in the lab. Wow! God can even use the same subatomic particles to give two different observers, two different realities. That is incredible!

 

[Milton Platt]

Neils Bohr (Father of Quantum Theory)
"It is meaningless to assign Reality to the universe in the absence of observation; in the intervals between measurement, quantum systems truly exist as a fuzzy mixture of all possible properties"​

Hello Milton,

I am not here to prove the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to atheist physicist.

‘Father of Quantum Theory’ Neils Bohr’s observation of the double slit experiment, indicates to him, that the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it. A universe that does not exist until Adam opens his eyes to look at it, is a very Creationist view. We Creationists simply want to be given the same respect and dignity that atheist physicists give to Niels Bohr, as we believe the same thing he does. If atheist physicists have a problem with what Neils Bohr, ‘Father of Quantum Theory’, believes, fight him, not us.

I'm not a physicist.
What are you here for, then?
You can have the same level of respect for creationist claims as soon as creationists do the work of scientifically demonstrating the claims are correct. that is how it works.

 

[Steven Merten]

I'm not a physicist.
What are you here for, then?
You can have the same level of respect for creationist claims as soon as creationists do the work of scientifically demonstrating the claims are correct. that is how it works.

Neils Bohr (Father of Quantum Theory)
"It is meaningless to assign Reality to the universe in the absence of observation; in the intervals between measurement, quantum systems truly exist as a fuzzy mixture of all possible properties"​

Hello Milton,
Father of Quantum Theory, Neils Bohr, scientifically reports that the universe does not exist when man (Adam) is not looking at it. Do you accept Neils Bohr's scientific report?

 

[Milton Platt]

Neils Bohr (Father of Quantum Theory)
"It is meaningless to assign Reality to the universe in the absence of observation; in the intervals between measurement, quantum systems truly exist as a fuzzy mixture of all possible properties"​

Hello Milton,
Father of Quantum Theory, Neils Bohr, scientifically reports that the universe does not exist when man (Adam) is not looking at it. Do you accept Neils Bohr's scientific report?

His model applies to quantum physics, not classical physics, right?

 

[Steven Merten]

His model applies to quantum physics, not classical physics, right?

Albert Einstein,
“I’d like to think the moon was there, even when I wasn’t looking at it!”
​

Hello Milton,

Can you have dinosaurs, evolution and a 13.8 billion year past, if you do not have a universe, until man (Adam) opens his eyes to look at the universe? What gives meaning to Archaeologists, Anthropologists, Cosmologists, jobs, is that there really was a universe before Adam opened his eyes to look at the universe. Talk about pressure! When Albert Einstein realized what the double slit experiment meant, (no universe when man is not looking at it), he fully opposed Neils Bohr and his, the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it. The ‘realism’ scientific philosophy was created to counter Niels Bohr’s scientific proof, of how things are on the quantum level.

In the following video, they describe the big debate between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein over the decades. The weird, crazy laws of the Quantum world, which defied the Classical Newtonian Laws of physics. The video talks about how Quantum Theory was almost given up on by Bohr and Einstein. Then, it was heard, that the Nazis were working on an atom bomb. An atom giving off the blast of millions of tons of TNT is non-intuitive. The US government did not care what any physicist thought about whether or not these new weird Quantum Mechanics laws actually translated to the macro world we live in. The US said, Build it! Hindsight, we all know that the weird laws of the quantum world does, in fact, translate up to the macro world, in an extremely explosive way.

 

[Milton Platt]

Albert Einstein,
“I’d like to think the moon was there, even when I wasn’t looking at it!”
​

Hello Milton,

Can you have dinosaurs, evolution and a 13.8 billion year past, if you do not have a universe, until man (Adam) opens his eyes to look at the universe? What gives meaning to Archaeologists, Anthropologists, Cosmologists, jobs, is that there really was a universe before Adam opened his eyes to look at the universe. Talk about pressure! When Albert Einstein realized what the double slit experiment meant, (no universe when man is not looking at it), he fully opposed Neils Bohr and his, the universe does not exist when man is not looking at it. The ‘realism’ scientific philosophy was created to counter Niels Bohr’s scientific proof, of how things are on the quantum level.

In the following video, they describe the big debate between Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein over the decades. The weird, crazy laws of the Quantum world, which defied the Classical Newtonian Laws of physics. The video talks about how Quantum Theory was almost given up on by Bohr and Einstein. Then, it was heard, that the Nazis were working on an atom bomb. An atom giving off the blast of millions of tons of TNT is non-intuitive. The US government did not care what any physicist thought about whether or not these new weird Quantum Mechanics laws actually translated to the macro world we live in. The US said, Build it! Hindsight, we all know that the weird laws of the quantum world does, in fact, translate up to the macro world, in an extremely explosive way.

Your working from aged information, and what's more, you are not working from the published data on physics, either quantum or classical.
No.....one atom does not produce the power of a million tons of TNT. It is a chain reaction of an untold number of atoms.
I am not qualified to postulate on physics, classical or quantum, and from your posts, it is apparent that you aren't either.

 

[Steven Merten]

Your working from aged information, and what's more, you are not working from the published data on physics, either quantum or classical.
No.....one atom does not produce the power of a million tons of TNT. It is a chain reaction of an untold number of atoms.
I am not qualified to postulate on physics, classical or quantum, and from your posts, it is apparent that you aren't either.

Hello Milton,
The PBS Space Time video is 2017 material. I prefer to go with that anyway. What do you think of Space Time's description of Niels Bohr's, 'Peek A Boo' universe, a universe which does not exist when man is not looking at it?

They are saying that Niels Bohr's 'Peek A Boo' universe has had two major, scientific experimental proof, wins over Einstein's 'Realism' philosophy, over the past century. They say that Einstein's 'Realism' philosophy, 'may be able to be salvaged by some obscure loop hole, but it does not look promising. They end with saying that it is likely that Neils Bohr's 'Peek A Boo' universe, a universe which does not exist when man is not looking at it, is highly likely that is the way that it is. This is exciting! Well not for the archaeologists, evolutionists, and 13.8 billion year old, cosmologists.

Please watch the video and let us discuss it.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

@Steven Merten -

Do you realize that no atheists - physicists or otherwise - can respond to you and specifically your question regarding them - because you posted this in a DIR?

Bug or feature?

 

[Steven Merten]

Bug or feature?

Hello Kangaroo Feathers,
Actually, I posted this thread in the Catholic Dir, to discuss with my fellow Catholics, the attack on our God and Church from atheist physicists. It was not my choice to have my thread moved here, in a conflict with atheists, and have to battle for our Creator, God. I already had my thread Proven Science says there is No Universe without Conscious Man to Observe it. in the Evolution VS Creationism forum, where all are welcome. Pro-atheist Stephen Hawking was always at the Vatican, why? It wasn't for the salvation of his soul, it seems, he was simply there to attack God and His Church. I guess the world is not going to allow us Catholics to discuss this attack on our God and Church, in our own little private home of the Catholic dir. I will now keep my thread here, please.

 

[Milton Platt]

Hello Milton,
The PBS Space Time video is 2017 material. I prefer to go with that anyway. What do you think of Space Time's description of Niels Bohr's, 'Peek A Boo' universe, a universe which does not exist when man is not looking at it?

They are saying that Niels Bohr's 'Peek A Boo' universe has had two major, scientific experimental proof, wins over Einstein's 'Realism' philosophy, over the past century. They say that Einstein's 'Realism' philosophy, 'may be able to be salvaged by some obscure loop hole, but it does not look promising. They end with saying that it is likely that Neils Bohr's 'Peek A Boo' universe, a universe which does not exist when man is not looking at it, is highly likely that is the way that it is. This is exciting! Well not for the archaeologists, evolutionists, and 13.8 billion year old, cosmologists.

Please watch the video and let us discuss it.

I will watch when i get an opportunity.
Why would it cease to exist when mankind is not looking at it? Why is it dependent upon mankind looking at it, and not a bird, or a donkey, or a rabbit, or a monkey?

The fact that particles go into and out of existence (as far as we have determined so far) does not mean that the universe goes into and out of existence, just as the fact that cells in the human body are born, and then cease to exist as others are born does not mean the human body ceases to exist.
I will watch the video, however, that will not educate either of us on quantum theory.

 

[Valjean]

Stephen Hawking is totally trying to deceive us into thinking that our God’s Creation, where God Created our universe from nothing, nothing meaning no electrons, no empty space, no strings, no quarks, no gravity, in fact no physical realm exits, could spontaneously happen on its own without God. This is deception by Stephen Hawking. In a situation of nothingness, no empty space, no mass, no energy, no quarks no strings, absolutely nothing physical at all, this ‘spontaneous creation’ that Stephen Hawking is talking about cannot happen on its own.

You might be surprised to find that the idea of God doesn't occur to most scientists. They just follow the facts. They have no anti-god agenda.

But you, as well, are claiming spontaneous creation from nothing. Inventing an agent doesn't explain the mechanism any more than physics has. At least physics isn't proposing magic, but is researching the actual physics involved.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Hello Kangaroo Feathers,
Actually, I posted this thread in the Catholic Dir, to discuss with my fellow Catholics, the attack on our God and Church from atheist physicists. It was not my choice to have my thread moved here, in a conflict with atheists, and have to battle for our Creator, God. I already had my thread Proven Science says there is No Universe without Conscious Man to Observe it. in the Evolution VS Creationism forum, where all are welcome. Pro-atheist Stephen Hawking was always at the Vatican, why? It wasn't for the salvation of his soul, it seems, he was simply there to attack God and His Church. I guess the world is not going to allow us Catholics to discuss this attack on our God and Church, in our own little private home of the Catholic dir. I will now keep my thread here, please.

I don't percieve it as an attack, and nor should you. You can also stop subscribing to quantum woo misconceptions just anytime.

 

[Steven Merten]

I don't percieve it as an attack, and nor should you. You can also stop subscribing to quantum woo misconceptions just anytime.

Hello Kangaroo Feathers,
I am unfamiliar with the term 'subscribing to quantum woo misconceptions'. What does this mean? I do not want any problems of getting evicted for breaking any forum rules. I am trying to para-quote PBS Space Time videos as close to what they are saying as possible.

 

[Steven Merten]

In the 1990s, I watched a science documentary The Cosmos, narrated by Stephen Hawking. It had many stunning Hubble Telescope pictures of our universe, which were awesome. Hawking went on to talk about 13.8 billion years from the ‘big bang’, dinosaur eras and evolution, it was very interesting. All of a sudden Hawking (a devout atheist), in a scientific documentary, is at the Vatican, demanding that Pope John Paul II, declare that this 13.8 billion year ‘big bang’ is what the Church sees as ‘creation’ in the bible. I, a Catholic Creationist, was greatly insulted! On a scientific documentary, why is an atheist activist, who claims God does not exist, running to the Vatican to demand what Christian believers in God, must have as their Theology?

The ‘scientific documentary’ went on to show an image of Hawking with shadows of bars, from a Vatican window, on him, to present an image that Hawking was being persecuted by the Church for his belief in the ‘big bang’ 'creation'. Hawking went on to talk about ‘what happened before the ‘big bang’ ‘creation’. Christians, of course, believe that there was nothing, no empty space, no strings, no quarks, no electrons, no energy fields, and even no physical realm itself, before God’s Creation. I see Hawking's attempts to demand the Church accept his ‘big bang’ 'creation' theory as Catholic doctrine on Creation, and then later talk about, what came before ‘big bang’ ‘creation’, as Hawking mocking our God.

So

The way for Christians to defend our Faith in God our Creator, is to discuss Quantum Mechanics. Where Hawking focuses on Classical, macro world physics to develop his atheist view on ‘creation’, we believers in God, at the Quantum level, can easily see how God Created the universe, on the week Adam was made.

Neils Bohr
'Anyone who is not shocked by Quantum theory has not understood it.'​

For those who see Quantum Mechanics as woo, crazy, weird beyond imagination, sorry, but that is just the nature of Quantum Mechanics. The laws of QM are totally different from those of classical, Newtonian ‘big bang’ 13.8 billion year atheist Stephen Hawking ‘creation’, physics.

In the following PBS Space Time’s ‘The Quantum Experiment that Broke Reality’ video, they state, ‘The Single particle double slit experiment hints, the fundamental nature of reality many not be physical at all.’ and ‘wave (subatomic particle, superposition, wave state) holds information about all the possible final positions of a particle’, and ‘wave must map out all the possible paths that a particle could take’ and ‘for some reason a wave chooses a final position’.

While watching the PBS video ‘The Quantum Experiment that Broke Reality’, insert God, instead of ‘the universe’, as the One choosing where, and with what properties, out of all possible properties, a particle will collapse from wave state, to physical particle state, and you have God deciding what our reality will be at any given moment.

 

[night912]

Father of Quantum Theory, Neils Bohr, scientifically reports that the universe does not exist when man (Adam) is not looking at it. Do you accept Neils Bohr's scientific report

I don't accept this but that doesn't mean that I don't accept Neils Bohr's scientific report because his report is not what you said it is.