|
God- 'The
Uncertainty'
I am an atheist, why?
for a simple reason- " I fail to understand the concept of god". The
misleading definitions, the confusing attributes, the impractical
examples and the analogy. The concept of god is very different to me
as the limits of my belief are exactly coincident with the limits of
my understanding. In this article I'll refer to the term 'god' in a
different manner. I would try to state what my confusions are and
why?
I was never able to
explain certain happenings where I was just saved from disasters
very closely. These are the moments in life where you wish to stop
for a while and thank the one who saved you. But I never believed in
god, so I had no one to thank. Scared of being ungrateful to the
mystical power that saved, me I came up with the concept of sub-consciousness
I named it my 'guardian angel'. In my life I have very often felt
the presence of a guiding force that seems to drive my life in a
soothing way. I believe in a guardian angel that helps me whenever I
need help, saves me whenever I need to be saved and is around when i
need it to be. This is the fact, and supposedly a very basic fact in
life.
I read the 'law of
attraction' and 'power of mind' in a newspaper lifestyles section,
many things were apparently co-incident with my own life. And just
started to believe the old saying-" god resides within oneself."
This saying was assisting my beliefs of my guardian angel, so I
stuck to it. This gave birth to the thought that me and my god is
the same thing, inseparable, just the form is different. Trying to
decipher the concept of god, I encountered many myths, it was easy
to discard them as I never blind foldedly believed in them anyways.
What do you analogue
god with, light or darkness?
Think for a minute or
so and just keep the answer is your mind,
It is light,
God can be attributed
to one self, as sub-consciousness it just resides in you. Light is a
state of flux between matter and energy, the particle of light
'photon' is continuously changing its state from 'mass to energy to
mass'. So at a point, either it is mass or it is energy, both states
can not exist simultaneously. Isn't this the same case with our body
and soul? probably that is why no-one can explain the concept of
god, because when you are body, you do not know what is god, and
when you understand god, you are no longer the body that can explain
the concept to anyone else... You are god himself. Their remains a
confusion, that if we can change from one form to another the why
does the cycle end? or if it is the re-incarnation you believe in,
then how does god (your own sub-C) show his presence in the real
world? If it is not showing its presence in the real, how come every
person in this world believes in him, in one form or the other?
Now, the other
analogy,
It is darkness,
Remember your mom
telling you always, god is everywhere, he is even there where there
is nothing, god is self reproducing, he is omnipotent and supreme,
no one can see him yet he is in front of your senses can not feel
him, he is the biggest and he is the smallest... now think about
this. In this complete universe what is the only thing that is
everywhere? What is the largest of all? The smallest? What is there
where there is nothing? I hope you
have already got the
point. So if any of this is true then god closely resembles
'darkness' or should I say god is ‘black’.
While meditating you
tend to blacken your mind, is it god you wish to see and experience?
In hindu mythology god 'shiva' is treated as the destroyer, he is
referred as 'darkness'. We celebrate 'shivratri' as the night of
lord Shiva. Shivratri is the darkest night of the year. Even not
many hindus are clear about this, I was interested in all this as I
was born on the darkest night of the year, yes, it was a shivratri
'17/2/85' and my parents named me 'Shivam' as an austerity to the
great 'Shiva'.
So now the same
question again,
What do you analogue
god with, light or darkness?
Still having trouble
sorting out the answer? It is simple, God is darkness with
attributes of light. He has all the characteristics of both.
Everything has a dual nature. Imagine the basics of computers,
'binary'- everything can be answered in a 'yes' or a 'no'. The
concept of duality says that if you mix yes and no, then it becomes
everything, and there is no definity to the practical world if you
do not consider duality. It is scientifically proven by 'the theory
of uncertainity'. The more precisely the position is determined, the
less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice
versa.
--Heisenberg,
uncertainty paper, 1927
"uncertainty
relation" between the position and the momentum (mass times
velocity) of a subatomic particle, such as an electron. This
relation has profound implications for such fundamental notions as
causality and the determination of the future behavior of an atomic
particle. Because of the scientific and philosophical implications
of the seemingly harmless sounding uncertainty relations, physicists
speak of an uncertainty principle, which is often called more
descriptively the "principle of indeterminacy."
Read further,
Uncertainty
principle- A revolution in quantum mechanics-
In the summer of 1922
Heisenberg met Niels Bohr, the founding father of quantum mechanics,
and in September 1924 Heisenberg went to Copenhagen, where Bohr had
invited him as a research associate and later as his assistant. In
1925 Werner Heisenberg laid down the basic principles of a complete
quantum mechanics. In his new matrix theory he replaced classical
commuting variables with non-commuting ones. Heisenberg's paper
marked a radical departure from previous attempts to solve atomic
problems by making use of observable quantities only. He wrote in a
1925 letter,
"My entire meager
efforts go toward killing off and suitably replacing the concept of
the orbital paths that one cannot observe." Rather than struggle
with the complexities of three-dimensional orbits, Heisenberg dealt
with the mechanics of a one-dimensional vibrating system, an
enharmonic oscillator. The result was formulae in which quantum
numbers were related to observable radiation frequencies and
intensities. In March 1926, working in Bohr's institute, Heisenberg
formulated the principle of uncertainty thereby laying the
foundation of what became known as the Copenhagen interpretation of
quantum mechanics.
Albert Einstein was
not happy with the uncertainty principle, and he challenged Niels
Bohr and Werner Heisenberg with a famous thought experiment (See the
Bohr-Einstein debates for more details): we fill a box with a
radioactive material which randomly emits radiation. The box has a
shutter, which is opened and soon thereafter shut by a clock at a
precise time, thereby allowing some radiation to escape. So the time
is already known with precision. We still want to measure the
conjugate variable energy precisely. Einstein proposed doing this by
weighing the box before and after. The equivalence between mass and
energy from special relativity will allow you to determine precisely
how much energy was left in the box. Bohr countered as follows:
should energy leave, then the now lighter box will rise slightly on
the scale. That changes the position of the clock. Thus the clock
deviates from our stationary reference frame, and by general
relativity, its measurement of time will be different from ours,
leading to some unavoidable margin of error. In fact, a detailed
analysis shows that the imprecision is correctly given by
Heisenberg's relation.
The term Copenhagen
interpretation of quantum mechanics was often used interchangeably
with and as a synonym for Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle by
detractors who believed in fate and determinism and saw the common
features of the Bohr-Heisenberg theories as a threat. Within the
widely but not universally accepted Copenhagen interpretation of
quantum mechanics (i.e., it was not accepted by Einstein or other
physicists such as Alfred Lande), the uncertainty principle is taken
to mean that on an elementary level, the physical universe does not
exist in a deterministic form — but rather as a collection of
probabilities, or potentials. For example, the pattern (probability
distribution) produced by millions of photons passing through a
diffraction slit can be calculated using quantum mechanics, but the
exact path of each photon cannot be predicted by any known method.
The Copenhagen interpretation holds that it cannot be predicted by
any method, not even with theoretically infinitely precise
measurements.
It is this
interpretation that Einstein was questioning when he said "I cannot
believe that God would choose to play dice with the universe." Bohr,
who was one of the authors of the Copenhagen interpretation,
responded, "Einstein, don't tell God what to do." Niels Bohr himself
acknowledged that quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle
were counter-intuitive when he stated, "Anyone who is not shocked by
quantum theory has not understood a single word."
The basic debate
between Einstein and Bohr (including Heisenberg's Uncertainty
Principle) was that Einstein was in essence saying: "Of course, we
can know where something is; we can know the position of a moving
particle if we know every possible detail, and therefore by
extension, we can predict where it will go." Bohr and Heisenberg
were saying: "We can only know the probable position of a moving
particle, therefore by extension, we can only know its probable
destination; we can never know with absolute certainty where it will
go."
Einstein was convinced
that this interpretation was in error. His reasoning was that all
previously known probability distributions arose from deterministic
events. The distribution of a flipped coin or a rolled die can be
described with a probability distribution (50% heads, 50% tails),
but this does not mean that their physical motions are
unpredictable. Ordinary mechanics can be used to calculate exactly
how each coin will land, if the forces acting on it are known. And
the heads/tails distribution will still line up with the probability
distribution (given random initial forces).
Einstein assumed that
there are similar hidden variables in quantum mechanics which
underlie the observed probabilities and that these variables, if
known, would show that there was what Einstein termed "local
realism," a description opposite to the uncertainty principle, being
that all objects must already have their properties before they are
observed or measured. For the greater part of the twentieth century,
there were many such hidden variable theories proposed, but in 1964
John Bell theorized the Bell inequality to counter them, which
postulated that although the behavior of an individual particle is
random, it is also correlated with the behavior of other particles.
Therefore, if the uncertainty principle is the result of some
deterministic process in which a particle has local realism, it must
be the case that particles at great distances instantly transmit
information to each other to ensure that the correlations in
behavior between particles occur. The interpretation of Bell's
theorem explicitly prevents any local hidden variable theory from
holding true because it shows the necessity of a system to describe
correlations between objects. The implication is, if a hidden local
variable is the cause of particle 1 being at a position, then a
second hidden local variable would be responsible for particle 2
being in its own position — and there is no system to correlate the
behavior between them. Experiments have demonstrated that there is a
correlation. In the years following, Bell's theorem was tested and
has held up experimentally time and time again, and these
experiments are in a sense the clearest experimental confirmation of
quantum mechanics. It is worth noting that Bell's theorem only
applies to local hidden variable theories; non-local hidden variable
theories can still exist (which some, including Bell, think is what
can bridge the conceptual gap between quantum mechanics and the
observable world).
some, inferences
from the uncertainty principle,
In the 1997 film The
Lost World: Jurassic Park, chaostician Ian Malcolm claims that the
effort "to observe and document, not interact" with the dinosaurs is
a scientific impossibility because of "the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle, whatever you study, you also change."
"The mere act of
observing a phenomenon changes its nature."
- reference wikipedia
-
Comments,
Discussions and Debates
read
further,
|
