I am only reminding you
My God, I still have my English weblog!
Let’s write something in it then, something like… God for scientists.
We had interesting discussion in the already closed Orkut.com and I’d like to put here the spark which put the atheist forum in fire.
Here it is with small changes and additions:
So let’s see is there such a thing as God for scientists.
I’ll start with the famous question: “Did a falling tree in the forest made a sound if nobody heard it?”
The answer is NO. The tree didn’t make any sound but did produce vibration with frequency between 20 and 20000 hertz.
Sound appears to us (and some sentient beings) when we with our ears detect (observe) these vibration frequencies.
The same explanation stands for all observations we do.
We do not observe matter but patterns created by wave interferences.
Those patterns have to be observed in order to “turn in to” the thing, which we named “matter” in all its observable variations. If not observed everything is nothing but waves interfering with each other.
When Einstein heard about “consciousness causes the wave function to collapse”, he said – “Does that mean that if I don’t look at the moon it doesn’t exist?”
Now we have the answer for Einstein. The moon is still there as pattern from wave interference but it becomes the moon Einstein knows only when observed by Einstein.
To simplify it in simplified scientific language I’d say that by observing we make the wave function to collapse, making it possible for as to see the particle behavior exhibited in what we call matter.
Since the singularity is beyond any mathematical explanation, we don’t have mathematical proof for the Big Bang theory but that doesn’t stop science using this explanation for the creation of the universe.
I’ll use part of the Big Bang theory to make my point.
Science doesn’t have explanation for the first moments of the Big Bang but at one point all which Universe was is put in two words – photons and neutrons (wave-particles), and to be more scientifically precise I’ll add space and time..
Note that some of you can be deceived from the “particle” part in the “wave-particle” name.
That entity is not particle. It is entity said to behave either as wave or as particle, but behavior is not consistence.
Therefore, it would be safer to think of it as wave.
Every wave emission needs source and since the Universe was waves, it could not be the source for itself.
That missing source in the scientific theories is what people call God.
I would not call it emission source though.
I would call it “awareness-wave” which interferes with itself.
My favorite explanation about this interference is a DREAM.
A mind creates dream by interfering with itself.
The dream is the pattern created by the interference
I can imagine the difficulties that many of you would have, comprehending my idea.
It is not that difficult to understand, that your observation makes the things appear in their sensible nature. Your minds are like medium, in which the wave turns into particle and becomes interactive sensible part of your surrounding.
The mind as part of the “awareness-wave” (God) can observe its own interference thus creating delusion about existence out of the self, hence the observable surrounding.
From this point on, the science can be right in most of its conclusions, but also very wrong in some of its bases.
Religious people BELIEVE that God created the world.
Creation implies deliberate action, intention.
The world wasn’t intentionally created therefore we can not call it creation.It is appearance.
God, which I already explained as “awareness-wave”, is not even aware of its “creation”, but we as part of the “awareness-wave” can become aware of the “fact” that we observe pattern of our self-interference, and the state of the mind, knowing and observing its own self-interference is known as “awaken”.
You read about many such awakened people who brought the knowledge for God in this world.
That knowledge was given in different times to people with different intellectual levels, and the explanations about God had to mach the intellectual capability of the auditory.
People with low intelligence tend to accept old explanation without questioning, thus becomimg blind religious followers.
The need for salvation brings obedience to rules, which were (and still are) used by the church for self-interests.
– We may not hear the sound but it is still there. We can not say that we create the sound by hearing it.
Answer to the above:
The “sound” meaning has no absolute value, because it describes our perception for certain vibration frequency.
That is valid for all concepts created by our perceptions.
Why our perceptions have no absolute value?
Lets take “red” (the color) for example.
It is word for color.
We named a range of light spectrum with the name “red”.
We agree on the fact that most humans can recognize that certain range, and use the word red for it, but we can not know how each of us see the color with that name.
Therefore, “red” is just a word for certain range of the light spectrum, which has no absolute value for all observers.
In other words, one must not put absolute value for what we see, hear, touch, taste and smell.
The universe is just a perception of the wave interference.
Lets try to make it clearer: The Universe is a big mixture of waves which interfere with each other, and our senses are detecting this interference, thus creating the the surrounding image for us.
And now to make it complete: The Universe is wave interference + conscious observation.
We can not apply noise, and light as property of the Universe, because for sentient being without the ability to perceive that wave frequency range, it is not noisy and visible.
To say that the noise and the light are still there is illogical knowing that we are using not absolute values.
The absolute values are in the length and the phase of the interfering waves not in our perception of those values.
Another possible argument:
– Do you know what “wave function collapse” is?
Answer to the above:
Yes I know.
In not simplified language, I mean that we as measuring (observing) tools are defining the value to which the set of calculated probabilities will collapse. Everything around us is set of systems, interfering with each other and us. We are defining the values for the wave function collapse of all that systems.