Will atheists win the fight?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#62 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
The Boltzmann brain problem says there is a better chance of there being a God, one disembodied brain, then for the billions of human brains on earth to exist.
Damn, that is a problem, since it is so obviously a demented thing to even say. After all we have absolute proof of human brains and never once has a god been proven. Brain, eight arms, magic woo-woo? Nada, there be no gods.
Lincoln

United States

#63 Apr 15, 2013
No final victories in philosophy or discussions of history.

No winners and no losers ....
just saying ...peace
Thinking

Aberdeen, UK

#64 Apr 15, 2013
Believe in sh!t hair product.
Lincoln wrote:
Believe in love. Believe in magic. Hell, believe in Santa Clause. Believe in others. Believe in yourself. Believe in your dreams. If you don't, who will?
Jon Bon Jovi

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#65 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
The Boltzmann brain problem says there is a better chance of there being a God, one disembodied brain, then for the billions of human brains on earth to exist.
Clearly you don't understand the puzzle of Boltzman's brain and when it is relevant.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#66 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Clearly you don't understand the puzzle of Boltzman's brain and when it is relevant.
Apparently you don't understand it's a paradox. There is more reason to believe in one disembodied self-aware entity then there is for the billions of self-aware brains we know exist on this planet. This one self-aware disembodied entity could be called God.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#67 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently you don't understand it's a paradox. There is more reason to believe in one disembodied self-aware entity then there is for the billions of self-aware brains we know exist on this planet.
Which shows the reasoning is wrong somewhere. We *know* that these billions of self-aware brains exist. If your reasoning says that a disembodied brain is more likely, then your reasoning is at fault. THAT is the paradox.
This one self-aware disembodied entity could be called God.
It could also be called George.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#68 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Which shows the reasoning is wrong somewhere. We *know* that these billions of self-aware brains exist. If your reasoning says that a disembodied brain is more likely, then your reasoning is at fault. THAT is the paradox.
<quoted text>
It could also be called George.
The one disembodied self-aware being gave rise to the billions of self-aware brains. There is more evidence for this hypothesis than there is for the multiverse or many world theories. There are records of miracles supporting the Boltzmann Brain, called God; while there is no evidence for the multiverse or many world theories. Yes, you will deny there are miracles as creationist deny evolution. You denying there are miracles does not prove there are no miracles.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#69 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
The one disembodied self-aware being gave rise to the billions of self-aware brains. There is more evidence for this hypothesis than there is for the multiverse or many world theories. There are records of miracles supporting the Boltzmann Brain, called God; while there is no evidence for the multiverse or many world theories. Yes, you will deny there are miracles as creationist deny evolution. You denying there are miracles does not prove there are no miracles.
No, we have direct evidence that billions of self-aware brains exist. On the other hand, we have speculation that claims that *from random fluctuations* it is more likely that a disembodied brain is made than billions of self-aware brains. These random fluctuations are the expected situation of the universe *trillions of years* in the future when quantum fluctuations dominate. The problem is obvious. It is only in your delusions that you make a connection between these speculations and your deity.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#70 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we have direct evidence that billions of self-aware brains exist. On the other hand, we have speculation that claims that *from random fluctuations* it is more likely that a disembodied brain is made than billions of self-aware brains. These random fluctuations are the expected situation of the universe *trillions of years* in the future when quantum fluctuations dominate. The problem is obvious. It is only in your delusions that you make a connection between these speculations and your deity.
Give reference to your claim here:

"These random fluctuations are the expected situation of the universe *trillions of years* in the future when quantum fluctuations dominate."
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#71 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we have direct evidence that billions of self-aware brains exist. On the other hand, we have speculation that claims that *from random fluctuations* it is more likely that a disembodied brain is made than billions of self-aware brains. These random fluctuations are the expected situation of the universe *trillions of years* in the future when quantum fluctuations dominate. The problem is obvious. It is only in your delusions that you make a connection between these speculations and your deity.
There is more probability in my 'delusion' then in your multiverses and many worlds 'delusions'.

The wave function collapse requires an observer; further supporting there being a self-aware entity being present before the Big Bang to give direction to the chaos.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#72 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
The wave function collapse requires an observer;
No, it does not. Decoherence shows how 'wave function collapse' happens in detail. it requires no intelligence to operate, just a sufficiently complex environment. For most collapsing, the photons in the environment produce enough complexity to do the job.
further supporting there being a self-aware entity being present before the Big Bang to give direction to the chaos.
Wrong.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#73 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Give reference to your claim here:
"These random fluctuations are the expected situation of the universe *trillions of years* in the future when quantum fluctuations dominate."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15b...

quote:
"But the cosmologists say the brain problem serves as a valuable reality check as they contemplate the far, far future and zillions of bubble universes popping off from one another in an ever-increasing rush through eternity. What, for example is a “typical” observer in such a setup? If some atoms in another universe stick together briefly to look, talk and think exactly like you, is it really you?"

----------
The whole point of the Boltzman brain paradox is that statistical mechanics allows random fluctuations that violate things like the second law of thermodynamics. They are just incredibly unlikely. But, in an infinite universe that lasts infinitely long, these very low probability fluctuations will happen eventually. In particular, the reasoning goes, it is possible for complete brains to pop out of these random fluctuations and over an infinite future, it is more likely that any particular conscious brain is one of these. That is the paradox: how do you know you aren't one of these fluctuations?
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#74 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15b...
quote:
"But the cosmologists say the brain problem serves as a valuable reality check as they contemplate the far, far future and zillions of bubble universes popping off from one another in an ever-increasing rush through eternity. What, for example is a “typical” observer in such a setup? If some atoms in another universe stick together briefly to look, talk and think exactly like you, is it really you?"
----------
The whole point of the Boltzman brain paradox is that statistical mechanics allows random fluctuations that violate things like the second law of thermodynamics. They are just incredibly unlikely. But, in an infinite universe that lasts infinitely long, these very low probability fluctuations will happen eventually. In particular, the reasoning goes, it is possible for complete brains to pop out of these random fluctuations and over an infinite future, it is more likely that any particular conscious brain is one of these. That is the paradox: how do you know you aren't one of these fluctuations?
Sounds like one of those 'delusions' you are were talking about: "... as they contemplate the far, far future and zillions of bubble universes popping off from one another in an ever-increasing rush through eternity." There is nothing to suggest this fantasy has any bases in reality. Has anyone seen any of these bubble univeres poopping off from one another?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#75 Apr 15, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like one of those 'delusions' you are were talking about: "... as they contemplate the far, far future and zillions of bubble universes popping off from one another in an ever-increasing rush through eternity." There is nothing to suggest this fantasy has any bases in reality. Has anyone seen any of these bubble univeres poopping off from one another?
And yet, you were the one that brought the whole thing up.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#76 Apr 15, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet, you were the one that brought the whole thing up.
I didn't bring up bubble universes popping into existence, you did. There is no evidence for bubble universes popping into existence.
Thinking

Sheffield, UK

#77 Apr 15, 2013
How else would bubbles behave?
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no evidence for bubble universes popping into existence.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#78 Apr 16, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
No final victories in philosophy or discussions of history.
No winners and no losers ....
just saying ...peace
Said the creationist troll loser trying to speak for everyone in the face of the fact that he has no proof of god whatsoever.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#79 Apr 16, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like one of those 'delusions' you are were talking about: "... as they contemplate the far, far future and zillions of bubble universes popping off from one another in an ever-increasing rush through eternity." There is nothing to suggest this fantasy has any bases in reality. Has anyone seen any of these bubble univeres poopping off from one another?
you're so full of sh*t its leaking out of your fingers.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#80 Apr 16, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
you're so full of sh*t its leaking out of your fingers.
You've not proven me wrong.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#81 Apr 16, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't bring up bubble universes popping into existence, you did. There is no evidence for bubble universes popping into existence.
Again, that is part of the background for even discussing the Boltzman's brain paradox. The whole point is that when the universe get to the place that random fluctuations are dominant, it is more likely that any given consciousness is from such a fluctuation than it is that it is from 'ordinary' physics like what we see.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 11 min Regolith Based Li... 93,375
News Scientific, Philosophical Case for God's Existe... 23 hr blacklagoon 3 78
News American Atheists terminates its president over... Fri Eagle 12 - 19
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) Apr 14 blacklagoon 3 4,141
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) Apr 14 Into The Night 258,515
News The Anti-Christian Movement Apr 10 blacklagoon 3 11
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) Apr 9 Wisdom of Ages 6,048