Tim Ikeda wrote:
> We know that all formulations of QM are lacking key components that map
> QM theory to the observed "macro-world" (or perhaps how it is that we
> observer the world). I suspect that much of what we consider to be a non-
> violation of QM theory today -- whether it's slugs on Phobos or energy-
> less information transfer leading to the formation of new species -- will
> turn out to be a problem for QM theory as it becomes better formulated.
> Until then, invoking QM as an "out" for non-violating, form-imposing
> intervention is close to meaningless for me.
I gather that what you are saying is that our current
understanding of QM is inadequate and invoking arguments
about God's actions in the world sounds like what Ted Davis
calls a "God of the Gaps (GG) strategy" (an argument
from ignorance). That is in distinction to a the GG
theology but is tottering near the same slippery slope.
Also, since QM has observable consequences, you seem to
be asking for is a tangible mechanism.
We religious folk _might_ be able to say something about
what God wants, but we seem to be in a far less clear
position to understand what God is. It seems that the
final decision remains a choice, particularly since coming
back from the dead seems to be ruled out (Lk 16:19-31).
I recently encountered an interesting article in Nature
on the difference in the structure of classical and quantum
Quantum ripples in chaos
Nature 412, 687 - 688 (16 August 2001)
There is a corresponding article on that too.
On the _extremely_ speculative side, one thing I am a
bit curious about is _IF_ the "Great Holder of the Die"
can actually tweak the sub-Planck structure just an
infinitesimal amount on a large group of atoms, whether
that can bring about control of events on a cosmic scale.
That of course neither answers why that structure is there
nor whether the "Great Holder of the Die" is in a position
to manipulate it for any reason.
by Grace we proceed,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 30 2001 - 20:11:17 EST