Am I agnostic, atheist or something else?

[a500lbgorilla]

So... what were the experiments?

And did you show that probability is what dominates the tiny-verse or did you demonstrate that our best understanding of the tiny-verse is made by the vehicle of probability?

[MadMojoMonkey]

So... what were the experiments?

The single slit experiment is a great example showing that when space-information becomes confined, momentum information becomes spread out. The wave-interference is also interesting, but not the fascinating thing as pertains to the uncertainty principle.

Stern-Gerlach showed that an electron beam can be split into multiple beams, each containing electrons with only a single spin-state. When one of these beams is used as the input to another Stern-Gerlach experiment, the beams will split again. Showing that even though the electrons had been determined to be of one spin, they were immediately afterward determined to have a (perhaps) different spin.

The long history of the EPR "paradox" has shown that the randomness associated with particle states is thoroughly described by specific probability functions. (I haven't personally confirmed anything on the subject of quantum entanglement.)

And did you show that probability is what dominates the tiny-verse or did you demonstrate that our best understanding of the tiny-verse is made by the vehicle of probability?

What would be the difference? I honestly don't know that those are 2 different things. Are you are implying that what can be sensed is somehow NOT the "real" universe?


If this is not a troll, then you need to make that clear to me, because you're asking me grade-school questions and not offering any indication that you are actually interested in learning from my answers. It seems like you're only interested in tricking me into saying that I don't know what I know and that what I believe is without foundation...

.. and that's fine. Let me save you some time:

All belief is without foundation. Faith is to believe something despite the shocking lack of proof. It is impossible to live a sane life without faith in many things...

I'm thinking the guy who rules the universe in Hitchhiker's Guide... the one with a cat named, "the lord".

So I'm not worried about being shown that faith is the root of science. Of course it is. I have faith that basing what is considered to be knowledge on what can be repeated is a good way to be sure that something isn't a fluke occurrence, or poorly controlled process.

I have faith that my understandings are imperfect, but that through sharing understanding with others, and comparing our processes and conclusions, we can form a more consistent understanding, which is, at it's heart, the root of science.