muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
It is the same as a beam of light in a torch.
Individual nuclei don't exist by themselves.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The first cause argument
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Individual nuclei don't exist by themselves.
Leahpolitan_icecream
Member
Why is there no reason for the time?
it isn't just 'not knowing'. It is that a nucleus that decays NOW is *exactly* the same as one that decays in an hour.
So, it is not like a cuckoo clock where some internal mechanism determines the time of the bird coming out. Different clocks have the mechanism set at different points, so the bird comes out at different times. That is a *caused* event.
Nuclei decaying isn't like that. One C14 nucleus is identical to any other C14 nucleus. There is no internal mechanism that determines when they will decay. And it isn't the result of some outside influence either.
So, the time of the decay is uncaused.
Yes, of course they do. I can have a single, isolated C14 nucleus.
Your question asks for a cause when there is none.
The point is that quantum events are *random* and usually uncaused.
Prior events constrain the probabilities but do not fully determine the future event characteristics.I don't see the point in arguing about whether particles behave in a random fashion or not.
A beam of light that is composed of photons happens when you turn on the torch. It doesn't happen when the torch is switched off.
In quantum physics, the quantum system is characterized by what is called the wave-function which describes everything that could happen in the future for that system. Then, when this system interacts with another system the wavefunction randomly and irreversibly collapses in one of those possible future states with there being no fact of the matter determining why it took on one particular future state rather than the other one-billion possible future states. The only thing that can be said that the probabilities associated with the transformation are satisfied...i.e. if one of the possible future is 1/4 th likely and another is 3/4 likely, then if there were 100 identical quantum systems...25 will usually go one way and 75 will go the other way.
But to the best of experimentation and theory, which way a given system will evolve (among the allowed possibilities) is not determined by anything about its past. Hence we cannot say that past state is the cause of the future state.
Leahpolitan_icecream
Member
I don't get it
It sounds like it has cause if it can't happen without other things
I'm sorry
We Never Know
No Slack
These things are over my head, so if I say or ask something stupid, bare with me
"So, the time of the decay is uncaused"
Why is time itself not the cause?
No it does not mean that way.I don't get it
It sounds like it has cause if it can't happen without other things
I'm sorry
For example if I ask the question as "What caused me to get Head instead of a Tail on the particular coin toss" then if the toss is truly random then we are forced to say there is no answer to this question. Saying that "You got a Head instead of a Tail because there was coin out there to be tossed" is obviously not an answer.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
What does "you can have" mean?
Can you give me one example of where a single isolated nucleus exists in nature?
firedragon
Veteran Member
But the coin had a cause.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Everything has a cause
This talk about random, quantum uncertainty reminds me of Schrödinger's cat
firedragon
Veteran Member
How is that a non-answer? I don't think actual randomness (as I understand it at least) actually exist, but it seems to me "because the coin flipped" is a valid answer, that's the cause of said event.
Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
And now the thread has reached full circle. It has been an amazing social experiment of colossal misunderstanding, dodging, and so on, when the argument is simple. Amazing, entertaining, and most importantly educational.
I don't get it
It sounds like it has cause if it can't happen without other things
I'm sorry
Once again, the *time* of the event is what is uncaused. The instability is the result of the number of protons and neutrons. But the *time* of the event is not determined.
But we have good evidence that quantum events *are* random.
And the flipped coin can be a cause even if it's value (heads or tails) is uncaused.
It is possible to get a single, isolated C14 nucleus in the lab.
Also, in space, there is around *one*hydrogen atom per cubic meter. That is pretty isolated.
We Never Know
No Slack
So did the flip
These things are over my head, so if I say or ask something stupid, bare with me
"So, the time of the decay is uncaused"
Why is time itself not the cause?
Of the decay? The time is *when* the decay happens, not the cause of the decay. Time isn't different for the different decaying nuclei.