Some physicists claim certain parts of physics are governed not by the identity of the entities involved but by chance (or partially by chance). This however is merely an attempt to evade finding the actual causes involved.

And then they say that Quantum Physics doesn’t just contradict the concept of God, Quantum Physics points to conclusions that are weirder, scarier, and fundamentally harder to accept than the concept of a God. You give your religious buddies shit for believing in an Omnipotent Creator, then your Physics professor shows you a particle that can be in two places at the same time, and the physics glamour dolls go off on a tee proclaiming and preening that the universe is weirder than the stuff we make up. A box of n-dimensional nonlinear spacetime? Energy arising from the inherent curvature of space? Bubbles of “false vacuum?”

Does your head hurt? Mine does.

We’re exploring a new one now, a world where the “rules” of time, space, energy, and matter are suspended or turned upside down.

Talk about a sense of wonder!

Here’s a test for your erstwhile Quantum buddy. Ask him if he thinks that it is possible, even remotely, for K+ to decay to ?+?-?0 (that’s pi, not n), and what is the probability? If he’s blowing smoke, he’ll just bluster, but if he has a clue, he can compute it.

Certainty, in these sciences, becomes “degree(s) of certainty or uncertainty” rather than absolute knowing. But I think folks like us are right to recognize that there is a (fundamental) philosophical difference.

It is not sufficient just to say A is A. One must also find out “what A is”. That requires looking, measuring, experimenting and calculating in a scientific context. Rational philosophy can establish some constraints on science, but it cannot produce science.

And to answer one of their questions: no, a potato is not going to be anything but a potato although an electron and a positron having a clandestine meeting will turn into a photon. In this transformation no conservation laws are violated and the effect has actually been observed. It has also been observed that ice cubes can sometimes turn into puddles and clouds of steam. The lesson here is that the Principle of Identity cannot be applied in a trivial or superficial way with any expectation of coming up with something useful.

Which is why one has to devise a thought process in the first place…to understand it!!

The Principle of Identity A is A is logically equivalent to the principle of Non-Contradiction
not (A and not A).

A is A is logically equivalent to not (A and not A) which is the law of non-contradiction.

Conservation laws are not axiomatic but they are true for the physical world, or so every measurement ever made would indicate.

If a measurement ever indicates that a conservation law is violated, either the measurement is faulty, or physics is in deep dark Kimchee.

Aniket Warty

Aniket Warty

Adventure Capitalist. The creation of wealth is merely an extension of my innate freedom to produce.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Close
error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)