Proven Science says there is No Universe without Conscious Man to Observe it.

[tas8831]

But what it appears that the OP is claiming is that God (a supernatural being) is not why reality exists[. Reality exists because humans conjured it up by perceiving it.

Counter-productive for a creationist to write/imply such things, right?

Maybe that's true. It doesn't make any sense to me, but lot's of things don't. It certainly eliminates God. There's no reason to consider the existence of a supernatural being conjuring up reality if we mortals can do it on our own.
Tom

Good points.

 

[tas8831]

Hello Columbus,
I never said anything near implying that God is not why we exist. On the contrary, a universe which only exists in conjunction with man, is very close to God's story of building everything in the universe, in six days, as a home to place, love for God capable, man.

And yet you write approvingly of the notion that none of this is real unless a human can conjure it up.

Trying to have your cake and eat it too, it seems.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Just so you avoid even a moment's consideration that
he might have a point.

It’s far better talking to my plants.

 

[loverofhumanity]

So, the slow process of man evolving naturally over billions of years of time is too incredible for you to accept.

Yet you readily accept that a fully formed "Supreme Being of unimagined intelligence" has existed for all of eternity with no beginning.




Yet you can readily accept that something as complex as a fully formed Supreme Being of unimagined intelligence does not need an assembler.

I believe there is an Unformed and Unborn zone.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Has everyone watched the PBS Video? What are they talking about when they say Neils Bohr's 'Peek A Boo' universe, a universe which does not exist when conscious man is not observing it?

Maybe a frog or a bee is looking at it when we aren't. When we don't observe the universe the universe doesn't disappear, our map our interpretation of the universe disappears

 

[ecco]

I believe there is an Unformed and Unborn zone.

Oh, goody.

 

[Audie]

Oh, goody.

'Tis as I have betimes pointed out-

Believers just believe things, like singers
sing and fish swim.
Nothing is too outlandish or phony for
them, they just swallow it whole and
believe.

 

[ecco]

'Tis as I have betimes pointed out-

Believers just believe things, like singers
sing and fish swim.
Nothing is too outlandish or phony for
them, they just swallow it whole and
believe.

Nice lyrics. About 90 years too late...
"Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man"

Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly
I gotta love one man till I die
Can't help lovin' that man of mine​

 

[night912]

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"

Verses​

Albert Einstein
"I'd like to think the moon was there even when I wasn't looking at it." (Realism)
​

Science cannot claim evolution when proven science indicates that the universe does not exist without conscious man to observe it. No universe before/without conscious man, thus no evolution before conscious man.

If there was a universe five days before Adam was created, it would be a scientific miracle.

Instead of trying to force Bohr's model to fit your beliefs, you should look at it for what it is. He's not suggesting that there was no universe before/without consciousness man. And just so you know, it's laughable that you would actually use Bohr to support that a god created the universe. The reason is because it goes against the idea of "the universe was intelligently designed by a designer." You do realize that his argument is essentially saying that the universe is about being random.

 

[Polymath257]

First of all, the Bohr-Einstein debates were 80 years ago. We've learned a bit since then.

Ultimately, Einstein was wrong, but Bohr was also wrong in some ways.

It does NOT take consciousness to collapse a wave function. All it takes is a sufficiently complex environment. So it *is* possible to have the universe exist before conscious beings. The complexity of the universe itself is enough to mean that *some* aspects have objective existence (including the moon).

One of the *big* challenges for quantum computers is how to keep the wave functions from collapsing too quickly. It isn't just a matter of having a conscious observer, but instead of how much interaction there is with the surrounding environment.

On the other hand, Einstein was clearly wrong. The universe does, in fact, play dice. AT its heart, many events are random, although subject to predictable probability distributions. And there *are* correlations that persist across vast distances.

 

[atanu]

A philosophical discussion on this:

When Einstein Met Tagore: A Remarkable Meeting of Minds on the Edge of Science and Spirituality

 

[atanu]

And now to a photo of entanglement —

Scientists Just Unveiled The First-Ever Photo of Quantum Entanglement

 

[shunyadragon]

A philosophical discussion on this:

When Einstein Met Tagore: A Remarkable Meeting of Minds on the Edge of Science and Spirituality

I have read this several times over the years, and it is a classic of two different views of the nature of our existence with Tegore emphasizing the Hindu spiritual and Einstein the scientific physical existence.

Tegore has a view something like 'No Universe without Conscious Man to Observe it.'

Einstein proposed that our physical existence simply exists regardless of human existence.

I am somewhere in between.

 

[Sunstone]

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"

Verses​

Albert Einstein
"I'd like to think the moon was there even when I wasn't looking at it." (Realism)
​

Science cannot claim evolution when proven science indicates that the universe does not exist without conscious man to observe it. No universe before/without conscious man, thus no evolution before conscious man.

If there was a universe five days before Adam was created, it would be a scientific miracle.

The Great Neils Bohr VS Albert Einstein Debate
on scientific Reality

Your OP is fascinating in a sick sort of way.

 

[Kk4mds]

So, until G-d created Adam the universe did not exist and the six days of creation never happened. So much for creationism.

 

[Steven Merten]

So, until G-d created Adam the universe did not exist and the six days of creation never happened. So much for creationism.

Hello Kk,
Our Omni-Potent Creator, God, is Capable of a miracle where six days of Creation happened, regardless of whether or not there is a conscious observer. Would you not agree?

 

[Audie]

It’s far better talking to my plants.

You are all my dear brothers and sisters. I am most humbled to know you all. God bless and may good fortune shower upon you all.


Well, that makes two nominal "christians" who have
today demonstrated what they really are by thinking
it suitable to express contempt for me.

 

[Audie]

Nice lyrics. About 90 years too late...
"Can't Help Lovin' Dat Man"

Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly
I gotta love one man till I die
Can't help lovin' that man of mine​

....and birds gotta fly
but they wont last long if they try

 

[shunyadragon]

Hello Kk,
Our Omni-Potent Creator, God, is Capable of a miracle where six days of Creation happened, regardless of whether or not there is a conscious observer. Would you not agree?

The miracle of a six day Creation would not leave the objective verafible evidence of billions of years of history of the universe and evolution and history of life over billions of years.

The literary origins of Genesis is more ancient legends and myth, and as with most of Bible without provenance nor known authorship.

 

[Steven Merten]

Instead of trying to force Bohr's model to fit your beliefs, you should look at it for what it is. He's not suggesting that there was no universe before/without consciousness man. And just so you know, it's laughable that you would actually use Bohr to support that a god created the universe. The reason is because it goes against the idea of "the universe was intelligently designed by a designer." You do realize that his argument is essentially saying that the universe is about being random.

Creationism vs Atheism
Niels Bohr vs Albert Einstein
What is Reality?
​

Albert Einstein (Determinism) says,
"God does not throw dice!"

Neils Bohr (Chance) replies,
"Nor is it our business to prescribe to God how He should run the world."
​

Hello night,
I think it is pretty obvious that Niels Bohr sees all the 'random chances' constantly going on in the universe today, and every day previous, as God choosing which, position and property, out of 'all possible properties', subatomic particles will take on, when conscious man observes subatomic particles, and they transform from, a wave of all possibilities, to a specific physical property, in a specific position.

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"​