Before the Big Bang? (Origins)

by dhw, Thursday, August 18, 2016, 21:08 (3018 days ago) @ David Turell

BBella: Maybe the "arrangement of the known particles and their relationship with quantum mechanics, which can be influenced by the human mind," strongly (merely?) suggests the quantum state or fabric of the universe can be influenced by conscious mind, and there is no "mind behind all of it." No great OZ behind the curtain. 
Simply: mind/consciousness did not create the fabric - mind uses it to create.-DAVID: Whose mind? Ours? I can't accept that. The pattern of the particles suggests a planned construction pattern. Only a mind can create such an integrated quantum plan.
BBella: What pattern of the particles? 
DAVID: The discovered particles fit a design described by the 'standard model'… 
dhw: I don't understand any of the “Challenges”, but I'm sure you will: the model (= pattern) does not explain gravitation; it requires 19 numerical constants whose values are unrelated and arbitrary; the hierarchy problem; it is inconsistent with the emerging ‘Standard Model of cosmology'; it doesn't explain the existence of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays. Sorry, but if there are elements that do not fit into the pattern, I don't see how you can claim that the pattern makes “perfect sense”, let alone that it “strongly suggests” that there is a God.-DAVID: You have not looked closely at what I stated. Simply ae far as we have gone in particle discovery, it all fits a reasonable pattern. But we still don't understand gravity because we have no discoveries to explain it. Cosmic rays are part of 'no discovery' as yet. This is a vacuum of knowledge, not a defect in pattern! As far as we have gone it fits together nicely. I repeat, why did Higgs make his accurate prediction! It fits together as far as it goes. And I am sure a mind set it up.-The pattern you referred to was the “Standard Model”. Until the vacuum of knowledge has been filled, how can you claim that the pattern constitutes an “integrated quantum plan”? -DAVID:(Addendum) Ran into an article that illustrates my point about the need for further discoveries in particle physics:-https://www.newscientist.com/article/2101550-surfer-physicist-wins-superparticle-bet-wi...-I don't think anyone would disagree that further discoveries need to be made. And I hope nobody will disagree that until they are made, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will confirm the current pattern, let alone constitute an “integrated quantum plan” which “strongly suggests” that there is a God. You are putting carts before horses in exactly the same way as Dawkins does in describing his atheist approach: “If there is something beyond the natural world as it is now imperfectly understood, we hope eventually to understand it and embrace it within the natural.” (God Delusion, p. 15). He hopes his materialistic pattern will be confirmed (and lots of past mysteries have indeed turned out to have natural explanations, thus confirming his pattern “so far”), and you hope your own pattern will be confirmed (though only bits of it have been confirmed “so far”). No harm in hoping, and you may be right, but BBella's alternative (above) remains just as feasible.