[TLEILAXU]

I'm not an expert on this, but from googling around it seems consensus is relatively clear: quantum mechanics are probabilistic.

As far as we understand.  Which, as Wilshire points out, is not complete by any stretch of the imagination.  In fact, a "problem" of quantum mechanics is that, while it "works" it fails to integrate with the rest of physics.  So, this, in all probability, points to there being an incompleteness to our understanding.  It is plausible (I have no idea how probable) that what we can currently understand only as "random" and "probabilistic" might be governed by forces and laws that we simply do not yet understand, nor do we understand how the fundamental particles interact at the macro-scale, which is why physics and quantum mechanics are different fields completely.

That's not correct though. I've watched enough Nima Arkani Hamed (can recommend this guy, he's awesome) talks to know that quantum physics describes fundamental particles /extremely/ well. The thing that doesn't integrate is relativity and quantum physics, i.e. gravity and the three other forces. Physics and quantum mechanics are not different fields, it's just that depending on what you're looking at requires different tools. For larger systems you need statistical mechanics etc. since you cannot do quantum mechanical calculations on these systems.

Hurray!

Evolution is a a wholly random process without direction...

As Above, So Below

I don't buy that at all.  Evolution cannot be random, everything has a cause and effect.

Aren't quarks and muons described by a different set of rules that don't describe evolution though? So comparing the two doesn't work as what we use to understand one doesn't work to understand the other.

Yes and futher, now that I think about Wilshire's quote, evolution, through natural selection absolutely is not random, because natural selection is litterally the opposite of "directionless."  Natural selection does not favor things randomly, it favors things that are best suited to reproduce.  That is a direction and the whole process is "designed" to make organisms better able to make more organisms.

Even if everything has some deterministic cause, evolution is effectively random. Genetic drift is a huge factor in evolution, and that is basically alleles taking random walks. Even if they're under selection, they still behave stochastic, such that genes that confer advantages can be lost by chance and genes that confer disadvantages (to a certain degree) can get fixed by chance. This is especially pronounced in small populations where random fluctuations have a bigger effect.

[themerchant]

Yeah you can't use one theory to describe the other. They aren't compatible. Sure if you add in mathematically extra dimensions to account for the relative weakness of gravity you might create some model but you need an experiment to go along with it, otherwise it's just conjecture.

Scottish Mathematician James Clerk Maxwell unified the electrical and magnetic forces with his elegant equations in his A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field, this included experimentation as well as mathematical models.

Quantum gravity is an idea at the moment.

On evolution for it to be truly random wouldn't it be immune to outside influence? I imagine if we took earth and then took a counterfactual earth but lower the temperature 5 degrees evolution would take different paths.

I guess it depends on what you mean by random, there are different meanings to different people.

[themerchant]

use relativity to describe gravity in quantum scales you run into infinite gravity problems.

Use quantum mechanics to parse large systems it predicts energy levels so high to be wrong.

[themerchant]

Nima Arkani Hamed statisically has already done his greatest work. Most Great physicists do their best work early, much like athletes. I was reading a Paul Dirac biography that was pointing this out. I'll have to get it back out and have a look at it. At 46 it's very unlilkely he'll be the person to solve this for us.

Newton- about 45 but he was late and never published anything. Done much of his work much earlier.

Clerk-maxwell- 34

Einstein- 26

Paul Dirac- 31

"A person who has not made his great contribution to science before the age of thirty will never do so." Einstein.

http://www.openaccessweek.org/profiles/blogs/age-amp-science-do-scientists-make-their-best-discoveries-during

[TLEILAXU]

Yeah you can't use one theory to describe the other. They aren't compatible. Sure if you add in mathematically extra dimensions to account for the relative weakness of gravity you might create some model but you need an experiment to go along with it, otherwise it's just conjecture.

Scottish Mathematician James Clerk Maxwell unified the electrical and magnetic forces with his elegant equations in his A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field, this included experimentation as well as mathematical models.

Quantum gravity is an idea at the moment.

On evolution for it to be truly random wouldn't it be immune to outside influence? I imagine if we took earth and then took a counterfactual earth but lower the temperature 5 degrees evolution would take different paths.

I guess it depends on what you mean by random, there are different meanings to different people.

Random to me just means that you cannot predict something exact, only the probability that x will happen etc.

[themerchant]

Yeah you can't use one theory to describe the other. They aren't compatible. Sure if you add in mathematically extra dimensions to account for the relative weakness of gravity you might create some model but you need an experiment to go along with it, otherwise it's just conjecture.

Scottish Mathematician James Clerk Maxwell unified the electrical and magnetic forces with his elegant equations in his A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field, this included experimentation as well as mathematical models.

Quantum gravity is an idea at the moment.

On evolution for it to be truly random wouldn't it be immune to outside influence? I imagine if we took earth and then took a counterfactual earth but lower the temperature 5 degrees evolution would take different paths.

I guess it depends on what you mean by random, there are different meanings to different people.

Random to me just means that you cannot predict something exact, only the probability that x will happen etc.

You mean right now or in an absolute way, i mean, even with all information we cannot predict like say a particle, either velocity of position cannot know both.

[MSJ]

Yeah I'm pretty surprised someone with MSJ's family heritage would be so quick to jump to lynching as a solution to solve ones differences.

My family heritage has nothing to do with it. I have 3 half sisters whom are black. Lynching and the death penalty by hanging are two different things.

[MSJ]

Again, you're exactly the same. You suggesting killing someone for seeing the world differently than you. At what point does that give you moral high ground?

Killing "defective" children is totally different than killing the adult who thinks they have the right to do so.

You right along with them, as you fall into your own category here.

No, I'm not trying to play god. But, handing out a death penalty to those trying to play god.

What makes a family and what makes for better humans are not the same discussion.
By that logic, an adopted child cannot be loved. I assume you don't believe that.

Of course a adopted child should deserve that same love. I was talking about government or scientists deciding who mates with who.

Not everyone has the same values.

Apparently. Ill let you all get back to your playing god and fixing the world. No problem with scientists when they work towards bettering life and extending life and curing diseases. Not when deciding on who should live and die.

[MSJ]

Oh the irony. I also like how you obviously barely read the thread or the arguments presented, yet feel entitled pass on judgement and lynching  . Also, what's with the bashing on scientists? Showing some deep prejudices there.

Oh, I've read the threads. And, seen the comment that you'd have no problem with putting down "defective" kids. And, again, no problems with scientists as long as their not playing god.

[TLEILAXU]

Oh the irony. I also like how you obviously barely read the thread or the arguments presented, yet feel entitled pass on judgement and lynching  . Also, what's with the bashing on scientists? Showing some deep prejudices there.

Oh, I've read the threads. And, seen the comment that you'd have no problem with putting down "defective" kids. And, again, no problems with scientists as long as their not playing god.

No you haven't. You skimmed through it on your phone, got triggered and sperged out. Read the arguments instead closing your ears and insisting on executions.

You mean right now or in an absolute way, i mean, even with all information we cannot predict like say a particle, either velocity of position cannot know both.

I guess both, but they become the same by recursion eventually in a sense.

[themerchant]

It's a mad world in the smaller scales

Considering the very act of observation changes the result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

So you can predict but if you go to check your prediction...

if you fancy a a non animated one here's the royal institution one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ

[MSJ]

I've read the arguments. Its interesting, except for killing whom some of you deem defective. There's no argument for that in my eyes. You or no one else gets to choose who lives and who dies, or decide on who gets to mate with whom. I've read it all just fine. Because, I find it disgusting doesn't mean I haven't read it and no amount of further evidence for why it would be good would change my mind.

[Madness]

I was going to respond but then I realized I'm going to close the thread and I don't need to have "a last word" on the content in that case.

If any of you want to talk to me about that privately, do so. There are a couple of conversations in this thread that could be continued in more specific threads so we can try those anew separately as members choose.