Divine Will versus Free Will

[Avinash]

Yes, because God can perform miracle, he can go beyond law of physics. However, this in turn, this cause the problem with the concept of the mind which possess freewill, which was created by him.

Namaskar,

There is no problem or conflict. Our "free will" is simply a relative one. If we could see things from His position, there is no such freedom (we are like puppets). But because we have to play our roles on the stage, we have to act as if there is such a thing as free will (and there is, from our limited viewpoint). So it's all a question of perspective or dimension.

 

[samabudhi]

Einestein didn't think the universe couldn't be that way and famously said "God doesn't play dice"? It turned out otherwise.

Nothings turned out any which way. We still faced with the same basic questions we always have. If the universe is infinite, how can the universe ever be calculated as being ordered or chaotic?

See my thread on Cold Fusion for what else Einstein said.

 

[IlluSionS667]

Ah, i'm not talking about chaos theory. I'm talking about quantum mechamics. When a radiactive decay occurs or exactly where a particular blip of light gets absorbed seem not to be determined by anything.

It seems that way, indeed. But things are not always as there seem to be. Everything in the universe is determined. Why should this be an exception?

Einstein didn't think the universe couldn't be that way and famously said "God doesn't play dice"? It turned out otherwise.

Maybe one day, science will prove Einstein to have been right after all.

Oh, there is nothing self contradictory about God being omniscient as an idea. Problem is that this idea come in conflict with the idea of freewill.

There simply is no necessity for such a God, and it's uncredible.

If the universe is infinite, how can the universe ever be calculated as being ordered or chaotic?

Who says the universe is infinite? If the universe is curbed, it could just as well be finite, without having a beginning and an end. That's how I see the universe.

 

[Vapour]

ah, it's is more like concept of "space" no longer apply at certain point. therefore, infinite become incorrect usage of the term.

As of "Everything in the universe is determined", it so far being unproven presumption. In fact, at this point in time, opposite is true.

 

[IlluSionS667]

ah, it's is more like concept of "space" no longer apply at certain point. therefore, infinite become incorrect usage of the term.

Why would the concept of space not apply to the entire universe?

As of "Everything in the universe is determined", it so far being unproven presumption. In fact, at this point in time, opposite is true.

It's only proven that man is limited. There is no reason to assume that determination does not count for quantum effects, other than that we can't predict it.

 

[Vapour]

ah, you are confusing galaxies with universe. At current knowlege of physics about existence goes beyond 4 dimentional world. Now, since I'm not trained as a physicist, I shouldn't go over this too far. But anyway, the concept of space is no longer an appropriate way to comprehend univers if not galaxy.

As of "Everything in the universe is determined", if one cannot provide proof for such hypothesis, then your assertion is mere presumption. So far, the experimental result/proof in quantum physics indicate the opposite result. It doesn't help to go against such finding just because it doesn't fit with your agenda. Otherwise, we would still be thinking that sun orbit earth.

 

[IlluSionS667]

ah, you are confusing galaxies with universe.

I certainly am not.

At current knowlege of physics about existence goes beyond 4 dimentional world. Now, since I'm not trained as a physicist, I shouldn't go over this too far. But anyway, the concept of space is no longer an appropriate way to comprehend univers if not galaxy.

You can see it as an N-dimensional space (with N a specific number). At the age of 18 I came up with a spherical/torus model of the universe that needed a 5-dimensional space. When I read Stephen Hawking, a while later, I noticed that his model was very similar, but he had different (and much more complex) means to get there. I used nothing but common sense

I do not agree on everything with qualified scientists though. For instance, I see no proof that the universe is expanding. Surely, matter in the universe is going away from the center. But that does not mean that the universe (as container of matter) itself is expanding.
I've always had a mind of my own, quite to the dislike of some

As of "Everything in the universe is determined", if one cannot provide proof for such hypothesis, then your assertion is mere presumption.

True. I fear that this, niether it's negative can be proven. But who knows, right?

So far, the experimental result/proof in quantum physics indicate the opposite result.

Again, man is limited. We all know how the weather works, yet chaos theory makes it impossible for us to calculate the weather properally. Why wouldn't this also be a matter of man falling short?

It doesn't help to go against such finding just because it doesn't fit with your agenda. Otherwise, we would still be thinking that sun orbit earth.

It just doesn't seem logical. As long as something is not proven, there are other options. A logical person should therefor accept the most logical conclusion, as long as a proof is absent, but in the meanwhile stay sceptical and realise that this statement may one day be proven false. That's my stand to pretty much of what I believe in. That doesn't stop me from being convinced, as long as someone doesn't smash my arguments.

 

[Vapour]

You know, saying something like "4 dimentional space" would be an oxymoron because 4 dimention is combined comcept of three dimention (hight/width/length=space) with time. The fact that time could be relative is against common sence as well. "It just doesn't seem logical", does it. But that is what emperical result show, hence the theory of relativity. So what is wrong with concept of "space" being relative. That is why the description *infinite* wasn't the right word to use.

If you want to go bit philosophical about it. Here is a bit of brain twister for you. So everything have to have cause. A classic cosmological argument. This kind of logic obviously lead to quest to discover further cause of the cause of the cause..... Ultimately futile quest.

Eventually, you might simply arrive where certain thing such as universe (or God) exist withought any underline cause for it and only the form keep changing. Then why is it difficult to accept that something just happen or exist for no reason? If you can't accept the fact that something could exist without underlying cause, then nothing should exist in the fist place because the first thing which supposed to have caused everything can not by logic exist.

 

[IlluSionS667]

You know, saying something like "4 dimentional space" would be an oxymoron because 4 dimention is combined comcept of three dimention (hight/width/length=space) with time.

A fourth dimension doesn't have to be time. Just to have the universe being curved, you'd need a 4th dimension.

And second, time can be seen as a dimension, but with special behavior.

It's hard to imagine a multidimensional space though. But it's mathematically not very usual, and physicians seem to believe that there are much more spacial dimensions in real life than just 3.

The fact that time could be relative is against common sence as well.

Well, what's common and logical for one person isn't common or logical for another. That's why different people often come up with different conclusions from the same facts. Time has to be regarded differently than we do it intuitively.

Eventually, you might simply arrive where certain thing such as universe (or God) exist withought any underline cause for it and only the form keep changing.

Perhaps time is circular? Perhaps there is no beginning or an end?

If you can't accept the fact that something could exist without underlying cause, then nothing should exist in the fist place because the first thing which supposed to have caused everything can not by logic exist.

If time is circular, there is no first thing to have happened.

 

[Vapour]

ah, you are making linguistic mistake. Dimention in physics is not concept of space. Yes, current phisics theory indicate that that there are more dimention than 4, but it is not the same as *spacial* dimention being more than 3.

As of there is no begining and end in time, this is separate issue from somehow end and begining is connected.

If time could exist without cause, there is no problem at all of of other parameters to exist without cause. Then what is wrong with having something which exist or happen withoug a case. You at least think time can.