Whence Then is Evil?

re. masadi #157:

Will get back to you later on the idea of consciousness as a requirement to collapse the wave function. You`re right, I`m a novice at quantum physics but I recall reading an essay by an eminent physicist on one of the biggest fallacies committed by the layman in interpreting Bohr`s quantum menchanic theories. Will locate that and post later... when time permits...

By the way, I did NOT suggest that the quantum theory itself had been debunked.

Finally, re. ``The Quranic verse has complete relevance to this idea, especially the concept of observation, the ``BE`` that coverts quantum potentialities into a specific reality...``


Now, aside from the fact that as I, and khurram, pointed out, a God is totally unnecessary to even your interpretation of wave collapse causation, I cannot see how the ayat, with the verb BE, which you yourself highlight, can be taken as God being an observer-- as opposed to a Creator. Perhaps you will be willing to explain further...

regards

Re: # 143

Kaal ji
(((((Could you take out a little of your time to write a note on what evil is from Islamic point of view. It will be very helpful))))

Aur aab tak kiya jhak maar raha tha mein...lol...Aap ki is baat par aik shair araz hai;

Bay niazi had se guzri banda parwar kab talak

Hum kahein gay hallay dil aap farmaayan gay,Kiya?

Lol...jutst kidding....Kaal ji its an intresting question and i will try to explain islamic perspective of evil.

It appears match is going on between theists and atheists. Are the agnostics, the true believers, totally discarded?

Samar

Re #156. PM
Actually masadi is right about the Copenhagen interpretation. Only that it does not necessitate God in any way.

Regarding your example, it is meaningless to say that the fish has any state until an observation is made.

Re #152 PM.
This is a valid point and re-inforces what others have been saying that God is beyond good and evil. If God were good then that would imply that there is a standard to which God is held and that standard transcends God. That would violate His ultimacy.

Re #149, masadi
If God is observing all the time, why do we have any uncollapsed wave functions at all?
Why does human observation collapse the wave function? Why isn`t it collapsed already due to God`s observation?

PM writes <<< Care should be taken to not make the mistake of assuming it is the ACT OF OBSERVATION itself, as opposed to the EXISTENCE OF NECESSARY CONDITIONS for making observations, that ``collapse the wave function`` of a system. Analogy? Say you`re trying to see a fish that exhibits >>>

Apparently you have no clue about the behavior at the subatomic levels, hence this analogy and the talk about ``necessary conditions`` There are no ``necessary condtions`` except that act of observation that collapses one out of the infinite quantum potentialities that exist at the subatomic level, comprendey? If you don`t know about something its best to shut up, (respectfully stated)

In addition to this, the thiests did not ``invent``, the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum physics, Neils Bohr was the father of this, together with Werner Heisenberg whom the Gill man is supporting even as he denies God...

PM states <<< Of course, I can understand why theists would jump to and interpretation into which God, to them, is necessitated >>>

PM you don`t have a clue about the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum physics, as is quite evident from you claim that it has been ``debunked``. In order to covert quantum potentials into their real states requires ``consciousness``, otherwise the wave function doesn`t collapse. If there were no observers the early universe couldn`t have evolved the way it did. The Quranic verse has complete relevance to this idea, especially the concept of observation, the ``BE`` that coverts quantum potentialities into a specific reality...

masadi: it`s an itch at this point... :-)

re. ``..objects are ``real`` ONLY when an act of observation by an observer ``collapses the wave function`` granting the system into one or the other of its potential states...``

Care should be taken to not make the mistake of assuming it is the ACT OF OBSERVATION itself, as opposed to the EXISTENCE OF NECESSARY CONDITIONS for making observations, that ``collapse the wave function`` of a system. In other words, the wave function collapses with or without an observer once those conditions, necessary for obserrvation, are introduced.

Analogy? Say you`re trying to see a fish that exhibits a certain behaviour (or state) only in total darkness (and, to anticipate your retort, also in the absence of IR and UV ``light``). Now, you can see why observing this fish in that particular ``state`` is virtually impossible. But you would hardly say that it is the observer, or even the observing that causes this change of state, would you?

re. 151 samar:

Samar, does my #148 address the same issue as the one you seem to doing?

re. my previous post:

correction: `` ... why theists would jump to an interpretation in which God, to them, is necessitated.

khair.. I must leave now... Will be back to take up this issue later, hopefully tonight, after reading up on my high school Physcis litt. :-)

re. masadi #149:

masadi sahib, I thought it was ages ago that the idea that human observation actually interferred with sub-atomic phenomena was debunked. Mian, let me explain in as simple language as is possible, where you-- and Ferris-- are woefully mistaken:

The statement``Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics treats as real only observed phenomena...`` is a crude stating of the the principle that the ``Copenhagens`` treat only observable phenomena as coming under their scope. Of course, I can understand why theists would jump to and interpretation into which God, to them, is necessitated. At best, this is a bad hypothesis based on a ridiculous (mis)understanding of quantam physics.

Further, I haven`t a clue as to how the ayat you quote in #149 is supported by any understanding of the uncertainty principle or probabalistic causation. Every second or third two-bit deity and its followers claims absolute fiat over the physical universe, as I`m sure you know. You really need to do better, masadi sahib.