Evolution, Intelligent Design & Arrogance

[nebula]

I don

[Oh No Melon]

Woohoo! This actually doesn't have anything to do evolution, but look...

God's name of Justice contains five letters = 5 books of the Torah

God's name of Mercy contains four letters = 4 accounts of the Gospel

[Oh No Melon]

Great post, nebula.

I know a little bit about physics, so maybe I can help readers understand some of what Dr. Goldfinger is trying to get across.

First he talked about the two parts of Evolution, traditionally known as

[nebula]

Thanks for responding ONM!

I've been wondering, "Why is no one responding?" and "So, what are people thinking after reading this?"

Yes, Heisenberg was one of the strange words he used. There was likewise another one like Schroeder? or something? Ring any bells?

[Bread_of_Life]

Okay, a few good observations there by dear melon, a few less good ones!

Neo-Darwinism can be considered the result of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution fusing with Gregor Mendel's laws of inheritance. The "facts" I think he's referring to are the fossil record and the doctrine of common ancestry. The "mechanisms" are genetic mutation and natural selection.

Correct! 10 points!

I'm pretty sure he's talking about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It states we cannot know both the position and momentum of a particle at the same time. Incidently, this is one of the biggest obstacles for teleportation.

Partial credit, 7 points! Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that there is a limit to the accuracy that we can know the position and momentum of any particle. We can know both, but not exactly. If we knew one exactly, we would know nothing of the other.

Teleportation, just fyi, has been achieved in the lab!

Right, this is known as the Schrodinger's Cat concept. By observing something in your experiment, you are in effect changing the results.

Partial credit, 5 points!

Schroedinger's Cat is actually explaining a concept called "the superposition of states". Prior to observation, the cat is technically in a superposition of dead and alive states - by opening the box and observing the cat we are "forcing" the cat into one state or other.

However, the concept that when we observe something we are literally changing the results is more fully described in reference to heisenberg, where by observing the position or momentum of an object, we change the other variable so that we know less about it.

Is light a particle (photon)? Or is light a wave (color)? The fact is, light is whatever the observer wants it to be.

Ew, very partial credit, 3 points. The observer, through observation, forces light to be one or other by measuring it. Rather than light being what the observer wants it to be, it exists in a superposition of states until it is observed - and the observation processes forces it into one state or other.

Also, technically, this is not a paradox, unless we define "particle" and "wave" as being mutually exclusive states. Clearly they are not, since light can behave as both, and can exist in a superposition of these states.

All in all 25/40 - much better than I would expect! Keep up the good work!

[Bread_of_Life]

Okay, now to mark Nebula's work:

The mechanism (originally Darwinism, now replaced by what is called Neo-Darwinism) which is basically random change by mutation and shuffling of genes.

Good credit, 8 points. There are now several mechanisms of evolutionary change as well as mutation and natural selection. A major modern addition would be neutral theory - where neutral mutations are immune to selection and build up variation within a population of organisms.

He then looked at what is science, explaining that it is a process involving the application of the scientific method, which requires to components: controlled experiments and repeatability.

Ew, I'm only gonna give you 1 point for this. Sure, science needs to be repeatable, and controlled experiments are one type of scientific experiment, but NOT the only type.

Also, the scientific method involves a LOT more than 2 components. I reckon he said this because, had he listed all the components of the scientific method, it would have become clear that evolution is science, and ID is not.

Consider

[nebula]

I appreciate your input, Nik.

Please keep in mind I was trying to recall someone else's presentation.

As for the pepper moth, this article explains it, I think. (Note, I just did a quick Google search to find an explanation. )

[Bread_of_Life]

Yeah, I know, it's cool - take it that I was marking their work, not yours!

[Oh No Melon]

Partial credit, 7 points! Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that there is a limit to the accuracy that we can know the position and momentum of any particle. We can know both, but not exactly. If we knew one exactly, we would know nothing of the other.

Okay, I think I gotcha. A couple of questions, though. Does chaos theory factor into this? Come to think of it, is chaos theory even applicable to quantum mechanics?

Teleportation, just fyi, has been achieved in the lab!

Are you serious? Haha. I recall an episode of Star Trek where they mentioned "Heisenberg compensators" allowing their transporters to work.

Schroedinger's Cat is actually explaining a concept called "the superposition of states". Prior to observation, the cat is technically in a superposition of dead and alive states - by opening the box and observing the cat we are "forcing" the cat into one state or other. However, the concept that when we observe something we are literally changing the results is more fully described in reference to heisenberg, where by observing the position or momentum of an object, we change the other variable so that we know less about it.

My mistake. I shouldn't have used the word "changed". "Determined" is a more correct term.

Ew, very partial credit, 3 points. The observer, through observation, forces light to be one or other by measuring it. Rather than light being what the observer wants it to be, it exists in a superposition of states until it is observed - and the observation processes forces it into one state or other.

See above. But I think you're being a bit nitpicky. lol

Also, technically, this is not a paradox, unless we define "particle" and "wave" as being mutually exclusive states. Clearly they are not, since light can behave as both, and can exist in a superposition of these states.

No, they aren't mutually exclusive. But I do believe light could be considered paradoxical in nature. What else can be treated as both a wave and a particle? From my perspective, it doesn't make sense. It's just something we have to accept.

All in all 25/40 - much better than I would expect! Keep up the good work!

I'm learning, slowly but surely. So are you a scientist or just a physics buff? I have noticed you often contribute to topics on the natural sciences, and I enjoy reading your posts.

[Bread_of_Life]

Does chaos theory factor into this? Come to think of it, is chaos theory even applicable to quantum mechanics?

Chaos theory is a theory which governs non-linear interactions of systems. One simple non-linear system is when 3 bodies all exert a force on one another at the same time - for example, say three stars were close together - how would that system evolve? Traditional mathematics doesn't help much, because the equations we have are built to deal with 2 objects interacting - add a third, and you have non-linear interaction. The solar system is a non-linear system - the planets are attracted to the sun, but also each other...

Of course, this can apply to quantum mechanics, depending on how complex your quantum system is. But traditionally, the fields are very seperate.

Are you serious? Haha. I recall an episode of Star Trek where they mentioned "Heisenberg compensators" allowing their transporters to work.

Yes, although there is some debate to to whether it was real teleportation - or whether the first photon was destroyed and another exact replica re-created. There's no way of knowing either way, of course. But yes, it's happened, on a very small scale.

No, they aren't mutually exclusive. But I do believe light could be considered paradoxical in nature. What else can be treated as both a wave and a particle?

Yes! Everything can be treated as a wave and particle. Even us. We've all got a quantum waveform, everything has. We even refract, like light - but very very little because we're so big, and our waveforms so small!

I'm learning, slowly but surely. So are you a scientist or just a physics buff?

I'm a physicist - although I now work in business, I don't do any lab science since university. So I'm actually an amateur enthusiast at natural sciences - physics is my area of expertise!