Dilemma of uncertainty principal and God foreknowledge

[Bahman]

I am able to grasp that. The idea is very simple. God sees future, hence he has foreknowledge. Can he change it? No, how it could be foreknowledge then!

 

[Andre1000]

Physic scientist here, sorry for my language I am German.

First: It is absolutely possible that the uncertain principal is only uncertain for us, but might have a hidden determinism.

Second: It is also possible that some being could control such a nature phenomena. If this is the case, then this being could rule the universe, but we would experience this as randomness(if this being does it right).

 

[Beryllos]

I think the fallacy may originate from an incorrect or limited understanding of the uncertainty principle. It is often stated as follows, that one may not know, with certainty, the values of both variables of a conjugate pair (e.g., momentum and position). In other fields like engineering and signal processing, the uncertainty principle is naturally understood as a distribution in each variable.

Something which is confined to a short time is associated with a broad range of frequencies. It is not that the frequency is unknown. Rather many frequencies are present at the same time. Thus a hammer blow, which is a short-time event, is associated with many frequencies, and initiates many vibrational modes of an elastic structure. It would be inaccurate to say the frequency of the hammer blow is unknown. Rather, every frequency within some broad range is present.

Similarly, something which is confined to a narrow range of frequencies, like the ringing of a bell, is associated with a broad range of times. It would be inaccurate to say the time is unknown. Rather, the bell rings for a long time.

When we adapt this classical understanding to quantum mechanics, some things stay the same. If an electron has a precisely determined momentum, its position is spread out over a broad range. It not spread in a probabilistic way (like “it’s somewhere, we just don’t know where”), but spread like a coherent wave (“it’s everywhere”).

If we detect that electron with an position-detecting instrument, which forces the electron to a small region (i.e., precisely known position), that is a different story. Yes, we cannot predict which small region it will appear in, but I think that kind of uncertainty is introduced by the instrument… or perhaps by our incomplete understanding of the detection process. I shouldn’t be surprised, however, if some physicists disagree; since the early days of quantum mechanics, there have been different views.

At any rate, I do not see any contradiction between this view of quantum physics and God’s knowledge or power.

 

[Bahman]

I have never seen such a scattered group of people who they don’t even agree on what they believe.

What is your definition of omniscience?

 

[Bahman]

Physic scientist here, sorry for my language I am German.

First: It is absolutely possible that the uncertain principal is only uncertain for us, but might have a hidden determinism.

Uncertainty principle is related to consciousness. Determinism is correct in very specific regime.

Second: It is also possible that some being could control such a nature phenomena. If this is the case, then this being could rule the universe, but we would experience this as randomness(if this being does it right).

It cannot. This principle is related to the fact that knowledge acts as a constraint on freedom, yet full knowledge manifest itself as determinism which means the lack of freedom, hence consciousness. In simple world you cannot have the full knowledge and has ability to make conscious decision.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Being omniscient means that God knows the complete future of his creation, right down to every decision we make and its effects throughout the universe and he has made suitable adjustments to account for all our decisions. But he has done it already in his eternal now.

Pax
Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

We are talking whether God has the ability to know a specific event happens in a given time and location in universe, namely physical world. The uncertainty principle clearly states that such thing is impossible.

But it is no " uncertainty " to God. He knows the exact action of every particle right to the end of our time, and for him it is all fixed, to him it has already happened. But we and everything around us have to play out our part in the drama. He knows the outcome, but we don’t . So there is no contradiction. That exists only in your mind. And because that doesn’t suite your preconceived notions, you continue butting your head against the proviabial stone wall. Like it or not, God just refuses to be put in your little box.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

But it is no " uncertainty " to God. He knows the exact action of every particle right to the end of our time, and for him it is all fixed, to him it has already happened. But we and everything around us have to play out our part in the drama. He knows the outcome, but we don’t . So there is no contradiction. That exists only in your mind. And because that doesn’t suite your preconceived notions, you continue butting your head against the proviabial stone wall. Like it or not, God just refuses to be put in your little box.

Linus2nd

Hence he is not free, hence he is not conscious, hence he is dead.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Hence he is not free, hence he is not conscious, hence he is dead.

What you think doesn’t matter at all. God is who he is, whether or not you agree. Your problem is that either you don’t want God to exist, or you want him to be a nice manageable little god.

 

[Bahman]

What you think doesn’t matter at all. God is who he is, whether or not you agree. Your problem is that either you don’t want God to exist, or you want him to be a nice manageable little god.

What I am saying is very simple: You cannot have the foreknowledge and be free to change it! Am I so unclear!?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I have never seen such a scattered group of people who they don’t even agree on what they believe.

What is your definition of omniscience?

And that is unfortunately true. We have far too many Christians in the world, even here, who really don’t know what they mean by God. And there really is no excuse for Catholics, they should at least have read and understood the Catechism. But that does not appear to be the case. And I apologize for that.

Linus2nd

 

[Bookcat]

Is God consciousness? By consciousness I mean a thing that has ability to experience and affect. As you stated, your God is outside the time hence see future, but future is fixed because there is only one foreknowledge, hence God is not able to change anything, hence it is not consciousness.

God is God. He knows all. All is present to him - he is outside time.

Read again my post.

And have a good evening.

As I noted I am not planning to spend time in this thread.

 

[Bahman]

God is God. He knows all. All is present to him - he is outside time.

Read again my post.

And have a good evening.

As I noted I am not planning to spend time in this thread.

What? :bounce:

 

[Bookcat]

What? :bounce:

Have a nice evening.

Please go to Catholic Sources such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church to come to understand better how we understand God as God has revealed and as we have continued in faith and reason to think about what has been revealed. Also various Catholic Philosophers such as Jacques Maritain. Modern one such as Peter Kreeft can be of assistance too.

 

[Bahman]

Have a nice evening.

Please go to Catholic Sources such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church to come to understand better how we understand God as God has revealed and as we have continued in faith and reason to think about what has been revealed. Also various Catholic Philosophers such as Jacques Maritain. Modern one such as Peter Kreeft can be of assistance too.

I have already mastered that. I want to know your argument.

 

[Bookcat]

I have already mastered that. I want to know your argument.

Have a good evening and seek out those sources.

 

[MrSnaith]

I think the fallacy may originate from an incorrect or limited understanding of the uncertainty principle. It is often stated as follows, that one may not know, with certainty, the values of both variables of a conjugate pair (e.g., momentum and position). In other fields like engineering and signal processing, the uncertainty principle is naturally understood as a distribution in each variable.

Something which is confined to a short time is associated with a broad range of frequencies. It is not that the frequency is unknown. Rather many frequencies are present at the same time. Thus a hammer blow, which is a short-time event, is associated with many frequencies, and initiates many vibrational modes of an elastic structure. It would be inaccurate to say the frequency of the hammer blow is unknown. Rather, every frequency within some broad range is present.

Similarly, something which is confined to a narrow range of frequencies, like the ringing of a bell, is associated with a broad range of times. It would be inaccurate to say the time is unknown. Rather, the bell rings for a long time.

When we adapt this classical understanding to quantum mechanics, some things stay the same. If an electron has a precisely determined momentum, its position is spread out over a broad range. It not spread in a probabilistic way (like “it’s somewhere, we just don’t know where”), but spread like a coherent wave (“it’s everywhere”).

If we detect that electron with an position-detecting instrument, which forces the electron to a small region (i.e., precisely known position), that is a different story. Yes, we cannot predict which small region it will appear in, but I think that kind of uncertainty is introduced by the instrument… or perhaps by our incomplete understanding of the detection process. I shouldn’t be surprised, however, if some physicists disagree; since the early days of quantum mechanics, there have been different views.

At any rate, I do not see any contradiction between this view of quantum physics and God’s knowledge or power.

It’s too bad the most expert comment here is the one that is completely ignored. It doesn’t surprise me though.

Thank you for the (name removed by moderator)ut!

 

[MrSnaith]

First, what is uncertainty principle:

Uncertainty principle states that for any measurable variable, X, there exist another conjugate measurable variable, Y, such that any knowledge of the exact value of X leaves the value of Y completely undetermined and vice versa. This principle can be written in a simple form DX*Dy~C where DX is a measure of certainty in measurement of variable X, DY is a measure of certainty in measurement of variable Y and C is a constant.

There is of course a tension between uncertainty principle and God foreknowledge meaning that God cannot possibly have the exact knowledge of universe state if uncertainty principle is correct and vice versa.

Your thought.

The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment has demonstrated that one can escape Heisenbergs uncertaintity principle:

In the double-slit experiment, conventional wisdom held that observing the particles inevitably disturbed them enough to destroy the interference pattern as a result of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

However, in 1982, Scully and Drühl found a loophole around this interpretation.

Therefore, the foundation for your argument, that the uncertainty principle is absolute, is faulty. As such, I have no reason to accept your conclusion. Because… if we can get around the principle… you can bet God can too.

 

[Bahman]

I think the fallacy may originate from an incorrect or limited understanding of the uncertainty principle. It is often stated as follows, that one may not know, with certainty, the values of both variables of a conjugate pair (e.g., momentum and position). In other fields like engineering and signal processing, the uncertainty principle is naturally understood as a distribution in each variable.

I don’t agree with statical interpretation of quantum mechanics as it is against the existence of an objective reality.

Something which is confined to a short time is associated with a broad range of frequencies. It is not that the frequency is unknown. Rather many frequencies are present at the same time. Thus a hammer blow, which is a short-time event, is associated with many frequencies, and initiates many vibrational modes of an elastic structure. It would be inaccurate to say the frequency of the hammer blow is unknown. Rather, every frequency within some broad range is present.

Please read the previous comment.

When we adapt this classical understanding to quantum mechanics, some things stay the same. If an electron has a precisely determined momentum, its position is spread out over a broad range. It not spread in a probabilistic way (like “it’s somewhere, we just don’t know where”), but spread like a coherent wave (“it’s everywhere”).

But there is no specific wave length which can explain the the momentum state of electron. And what do you mean with coherent?

If we detect that electron with an position-detecting instrument, which forces the electron to a small region (i.e., precisely known position), that is a different story. Yes, we cannot predict which small region it will appear in, but I think that kind of uncertainty is introduced by the instrument… or perhaps by our incomplete understanding of the detection process. I shouldn’t be surprised, however, if some physicists disagree; since the early days of quantum mechanics, there have been different views.

At any rate, I do not see any contradiction between this view of quantum physics and God’s knowledge or power.

It is related to consciousness not physical instrument. The key question is that could we exactly know the state of an electron as an objective being? The answer is no. Why? Because the objective reality is intertwined.

 

[Bahman]

The Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment has demonstrated that one can escape Heisenbergs uncertaintity principle:

It seems that is your interpretation. I would be happy to know how did you reach to such a conclusion.

Therefore, the foundation for your argument, that the uncertainty principle is absolute, is faulty. As such, I have no reason to accept your conclusion. Because… if we can get around the principle… you can bet God can too.

Please read the previous comment.