Quote:
Originally Posted by Shubee
I prefer the view of science as given in David Hilbert's philosophy of physics so the only question that remains is if quantum theory contradicts my other two axioms.
|
For those of you who want to know, David Hilbert's Philosophy of Physics basically boils down to the proposition that Physics should be dealt with entirely with abstract Mathematics, which is somewhat parallel to the division that has grown within the Physics community between Theoretical and Applied/Experimental Physicists.
As a result, Hydro's statement that:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HydrogenBond
Probability and quantum mechanics opens the door to anything. So there is a finite probability that Shubee is correct.
|
is certainly relevant, but unfortunately does not at all make the problem with Shubee's first postulate go away.
What's interesting about this tactic is that it takes the *opposite* side of the "
irreducible complexity" argument used by Intelligent Design promoters: whereas Irreducible Complexity says that "evolution is akin to a tornado producing a 747 from a junkyard, therefore is so improbable that there must be a designer," Shubee appears to be arguing that "anything is possible, therefore the unbelievably improbable proposition that a great flood produced the incredibly ordered layering must be accepted as a reasonable hypothesis."
To those who would dismiss his argument out of hand, be aware that there is the lurking "evolution theory is even less probable than the great-flood theory, therefore you're all hypocrites" second shoe that will drop if you're not paying attention.
Of course evolution is *not* more improbable unless one ignores much well-verified theory--both pure mathematics and experimental--of complex systems.
Now this is exactly the issue with Shubee's first postulate: as Craig indicated "improbability" is ill-defined here, and contrary to Hydro's statement, quantum indeterminancy (the more correct concept) does not "make anything possible."
"Improbability" if we take it to mean "inverse probability" is a direct function of the number of "trials" that are available for a rare occurrence to manifest itself. As the number of trials increases, something that is very rare can become an absolute certainty. Thus with only a single "trial" available, the great flood causing the well ordered layering of the earth's geological and paleontological record is indeed astoundingly "improbable."
But as implied, "improbable" is not "impossible" and there we come face to face with the issues that are swept under the rug by the appeal to Hilbert's Philosophy:
If we start to look at the actual physical evidence at hand we have some issues that have to be dealt with: the exact correlation of "carbon-14 age" (which needs to be explained *even if* it is not an "accurate indicator of actual age" because the decrease in frequency with different layers must have an explanation), uplifting of mountains that maintain the layers (in spite of the fact that the Bible claims no earthquakes or other major deformations of land at the same time as the great flood), and morphological progression evidenced in the layers (which are not explained by various "density of bones" theories common among Creationists), as well as many others.
In order to resolve these issues, a simple incredible stroke of luck that makes the great-flood a *possible* explanation is not enough, it requires the violation of known physical laws. These are not issues of improbability, but rather mathematical models providing clear contradictions that even Hilbert would agree with!
To put it more clearly, we're not even talking about a tornado in a junkyard, we're talking about say, gravity disappearing instantaneously, and then reappearing.
This would require a call to divine intervention, and thus make it by definition outside the realm of science.
Until you guys address this, I'm not sure you're going to get anywhere here.
Just after he was awarded the Galactic Institute's Prize for Extreme Cleverness he got lynched by a rampaging mob of respectable physicists who had finally realized that the one thing they really couldn't stand was a smartass,
Buffy
