Re: Evolution is NOT random
- From: John W Edser <edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 17:53:14 -0400 (EDT)
r norman <r_s_norman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
You are arguing for a Laplacian demon with full knowledge of the
position and momentum of all particles in a Newtonian deterministic
universe. In your thread of the same subject line in talk.origins I
describe a series of reasons why the universe is not deterministic in
this sense. Yes, it ultimately is based on either quantum randomness
in how the wave function is interpreted or else it is based on
uncertainty where a particle does not really _have_ a simultaneous
position and momentum, not merely that we can't measure it. In a
conceptual framework, even were the universe a Newtonian mechanism, I
argue that no finite system can have the knowledge of all the
particles to compute the system. So the universe may be deterministic
to some conceptual infinite power, to a god, but not to any
conceivable science.
JE:
The random element means WE CAN MEASURE IT (using mathematics) BUT WE
SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT (using the sciences). Mathematics is not a
science. Just because we can measure probability does not mean that we
understand it. Todays confusion between science and mathematics has sown
the seeds for a destructive Post Modern epistemology which was and
remains based on the misuse of mathematics. Today's Neo Darwinistic
evolutionary theory establishment is Post Modern because it predicates
itself on things like probabilities, i.e. something that we can measure
_but do not understand_. Science is all about understanding in a
falsifiable way and not just, not understanding.
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Prev by Date: Re: sci.bio.evolution mailing list
- Next by Date: Re: Researchers document rapid, dramatic 'reverse evolution' in the threespine stickleback fish
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolution is NOT random
- Next by thread: Re: Evolution is NOT random
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
