Can Quantum Mechanics Explain the Ideology of Karma?

[Singularitarian]

In quantum mechanics, we find that the entire theory turns out to be statistical at best. This means that the entire theory is based upon all the histories and paths it can integrate, and over the possibilities, we can find realities due to amplitude theory.

The possibilities in this universe, such as the tangible possibilities of statistics due to the wave function (a smear of [probabilities] in a field) which can in an enclosed self-contained universe give rise to the likely-hood of any event to happen. This means, strictly obiding by the laws of physics, that events which can happen, will, according to the time it requires for those statistical waves to unfold themselves into real events, whether the tangible events that exist independantly of the observer, or not. Literally speaking, Karma is the universal law or force in which balances the good and bad effects in the world. I refute this as actually being a field which determines only the good and bad dealings. This premise is not exactly a pre-requisite of physics, but from a physical point of view, statistics can easily explain why we may seem to evaluate a force which is synonymous to the human concept of Karma. In this idea, Karma becomes inexorably nothing but a myth of experience, but in a sense, was close to describing the first quantum model of some ''mysterious force'' which does ''deal out events.''

I speculate that what we call Karma is actually just the universe and more locally to us, events which have occured due to statistical reasoning. Given enough time, even within someones lifespan, they will notice perhaps events which seem Karma related. Truth is, statistical analysis will show that the bad events which may turn on someone is just a ''matter of time'' and should not be construded to reason it was an effect from some previous cause, a cause might i add which involves unrelated ties (1) to the original observer who is seeing ''this'' which can be described as being like Karma.

Essentially, this means that Karma is nothing but us mistaking events as some intentional force which balances out the good and evil, to one which is best described under the statistical analysis of wave mechanics. In short, and to end, we will notice uncanny events, but they are nothing more than the statistics mathematicians work on everyday, and on a larger scale, is an emergent property itself of the wave mechanics which has governed the universe since big bang.

So Karma is nothing but a bunch of probabilities, which have high-occurances to happen, expecially from our tiny existences on the planet we call Earth.

(1) - That is it is related under chaotic sytems, which would be in itself a statistical wonder.

[IMST]

nope.

[Aepervius]

The QM police steps in.

Can Quantum Mechanics Explain the Ideology of Karma?

No. One is a philosophy the other a physical theory. If you want to have some state probability , correlation, and similar interpretation in Karma, do your own explanation. But don#t involve unrelated stuff like QM.

The QM police steps out.

[drkitten]

To the OP:

:notm

[Singularitarian]

The QM police steps in.



No. One is a philosophy the other a physical theory. If you want to have some state probability , correlation, and similar interpretation in Karma, do your own explanation. But don#t involve unrelated stuff like QM.

The QM police steps out.
If you had read what i said, i said quantum mechanics can only explain it from a statistical viewpoint. I never mingled philosophy in here. I am stating that a ''ideology of Karma'' (whether or not it is a philosphy), may still be rooted from a more logical and sensible approach to why we experience something like this.

I haven't implied what you have tried to explaining my question. My question is not addressing to take Karma as a real force which is philosophical, but a reasonable approach to explaining it under a mistaken effect of quantum physics.

[~enigma~]

. I never mingled philosophy in here.
No philosophy or religion then this thread is in the wrong forum.

[IMST]

Karma as a concept long predates any observation related in any way to quantum mechanics. Karma as a force is not observed in reality. On macro scales, quantum mechanics has no observable effects.

In other words, nope.

[Singularitarian]

No philosophy or religion then this thread is in the wrong forum.

Acually, Karma is very philosphical. I am attempting to expose this phenemenon. Just as the label on the tin of this site is dedicated to.

[Singularitarian]

Karma as a concept long predates any observation related in any way to quantum mechanics. Karma as a force is not observed in reality. On macro scales, quantum mechanics has no observable effects.

In other words, nope.


Physics has been on the go from the Ancient Greeks.


And by the way, you are absolutely wrong in saying quantum mechanics does not account for macroscales. That is just absurdity.

[Singularitarian]

I don't deal.

Also, its obvious you do not know anything about the history of physics. It was the Greeks who first hypothesized the atom.

Also, probabilities run entire evolution of the universe. One which has an unusual approach is the Wheeler-De Witt equation.

Go learn something.

[Singularitarian]

It's good to see that you're just as knowledgeable about karma as you are about quantum physics.

Karma is the abstractual force that deals out the morality of good and evil justly to human beings. I understand it quite well, thank you.

[Locknar]

All right everyone (especially Singularitarian and ~enigma~)...let's stop the bickering and name calling.

[IMST]

I don't deal.

Also, its obvious you do not know anything about the history of physics. It was the Greeks who first hypothesized the atom.

Also, probabilities run entire evolution of the universe. One which has an unusual approach is the Wheeler-De Witt equation.

Go learn something.

It's obvious you don't understand the concepts behind this history then. The proposal that there's a finite number of divisions possible in matter (hint: this is the Greek atom part) does not imply that those small parts are governed by the mechanics we discovered thousands of years later.

Probabilities, though an inportant concept in quantum mechanics, are not the same as quantum mechanics. For a similar example, engines are important concept to cars, but not everything to do with engines is to do with cars. To say that probabilities run the evolution of the universe has nothing whatsoever to do with quantum mechanics.

I would advise you to take your own advice.

[Singularitarian]

It's obvious you don't understand the concepts behind this history then. The proposal that there's a finite number of divisions possible in matter (hint: this is the Greek atom part) does not imply that those small parts are governed by the mechanics we discovered thousands of years later.

Probabilities, though an inportant concept in quantum mechanics, are not the same as quantum mechanics. For a similar example, engines are important concept to cars, but not everything to do with engines is to do with cars. To say that probabilities run the evolution of the universe has nothing whatsoever to do with quantum mechanics.

I would advise you to take your own advice.

You are being pedantic in your assertions of the roots of physics. I can assure you, essentially, it had rooted from the physicists of the Greek era, no matter how progressed we may seem in comparrison.

Quantum mechanics is universally-known as being a statistical theory at best. The world of atoms and molecules play large part on comological scales, and since the dawn of time, those statistical averages have given rise to the world we see today, so yes, they do have real effects.

[IMST]

There is nothing to do with quantum mechanics in Greek physics. Assuring me otherwise will not change that. Even if there were, I don't understand what that would have to do with any kind of root for karma, a concept that comes from the Hindu religion in India and long predates ancient Greek physics anyway.

Find me the point where I said they don't have real effects. I asserted only that "On macro scales, quantum mechanics has no observable effects."

[Singularitarian]

Well that's well known. The wavelength of a car for instance cannot be seen for it is too small in wavelength.

But that doesn't go against the theor suggested, so i don't see the relevence you do?

[IMST]

What relevance? How bout where you strawman'd me by claiming that I said there were no real effects? How bout the fact that is was a completely unobserved phenomena when you claim some philosphy was based on a misunderstanding of the phenomena? No relevance? Backpedal much?

[aggle-rithm]

And by the way, you are absolutely wrong in saying quantum mechanics does not account for macroscales. That is just absurdity.

Can you give us examples of the effects of quantum mechanics on macroscales?

(Hint: Schroedinger's Cat is not real.)

[ben m]

Well that's well known. The wavelength of a car for instance cannot be seen for it is too small in wavelength.

But that doesn't go against the theor suggested, so i don't see the relevence you do?

a) People who believe in karma believe that karma-influenced things have actually occurred, within hours or years or human-lifetimes. This doesn't sound like the same theory as one that says "quantum mechanics makes it possible for a dollar to quantum-tunnel into your pocket once every 10^200 years"

b) Any situation without an exact solution is effectively probabalistic. I have no idea whether it will rain tomorrow. How would I respond if it did rain? I'd respond as though there had been an X% chance of rain, and the observed rain is the result of the dice coming up snake eyes. This response is the same whether the uncertainty comes from my own ignorance ("weather.com is down"), someone elses' ignorance ("The radiosonde failed so we don't have humidity data off the coast"), complexity ("we don't run models with that resolution"), classical chaos, or finally---down at the root of some classical-chaotic system that would be chaotic anyway---quantum mechanics.

So if your model for karma is "humans respond oddly to randomness", you have absolutely no excuse for connecting this with quantum mechanics.

[shuttlt]

Is Singularitarian assuming that, in some way due to QM, the occurrence of a bad thing increases the odds of a good thing as if the universe has a bag full of good and bad events and is taking them out of a bag without replacement? In Borrowing the last of My Spare Time's pot to consider this for a moment..... even if that were the case, the universe must have a quite a large bag of events and removing a lifetime of good events isn't going to alter the odds worth a damn.

[Beerina]

Can Quantum Mechanics Explain the Ideology of Karma?


First apply what I like to call Randi's Rule: Before trying to explain a phenomenon, first demonstrate a phenomenon even exists.

Karma has never been demonstrated to exist.

Therefore there's no need to explain how it might work.


It's similar to people interested in psychics and telepathy wondering how, say, electromagnetic waves might be transmitted and picked up by brains. Yet no telepathic abilities have ever been demonstrated to actually exist.


And the corollary: There's a reason the explanations tend to seem bizarre and stretched just to keep within physics as it is known -- because the phenomenon doesn't actually exist.

[shuttlt]

can you give us examples of the effects of quantum mechanics on macroscales?

(hint: Schroedinger's cat is not real.)
homeopathy

[Singularitarian]

First apply what I like to call Randi's Rule: Before trying to explain a phenomenon, first demonstrate a phenomenon even exists.

Karma has never been demonstrated to exist.

Therefore there's no need to explain how it might work.


It's similar to people interested in psychics and telepathy wondering how, say, electromagnetic waves might be transmitted and picked up by brains. Yet no telepathic abilities have ever been demonstrated to actually exist.


And the corollary: There's a reason the explanations tend to seem bizarre and stretched just to keep within physics as it is known -- because the phenomenon doesn't actually exist.

I never said or implied Karma was a real force associated to the moral distribution among events we experience. I am implying that the force is misunderstood as being nothing but statistical mathematics.

Therefore, whether is has been proven or not, it really does not matter. It addresses the personal belief of the reader.

[Singularitarian]

a) People who believe in karma believe that karma-influenced things have actually occurred, within hours or years or human-lifetimes. This doesn't sound like the same theory as one that says "quantum mechanics makes it possible for a dollar to quantum-tunnel into your pocket once every 10^200 years"

b) Any situation without an exact solution is effectively probabalistic. I have no idea whether it will rain tomorrow. How would I respond if it did rain? I'd respond as though there had been an X% chance of rain, and the observed rain is the result of the dice coming up snake eyes. This response is the same whether the uncertainty comes from my own ignorance ("weather.com is down"), someone elses' ignorance ("The radiosonde failed so we don't have humidity data off the coast"), complexity ("we don't run models with that resolution"), classical chaos, or finally---down at the root of some classical-chaotic system that would be chaotic anyway---quantum mechanics.

So if your model for karma is "humans respond oddly to randomness", you have absolutely no excuse for connecting this with quantum mechanics.

Can i address a) first, and come back later, i have things to do.

In response, it seems very likely, and incontrivertible as to say that statistics have played the evolution of events since the primal appearance of time and space itself.

If you have a large void/vacuum, with about 10^80 particles, most of them grouped together in bundles but paraoxically covering only 1% of that entire vacuum, then you have something similar to the universe. Then give it approximately 14 billion years to evolve - the groups of statistical averages are massive, in number, and given the appropriate time, events which seem coincidental are nothing but statistics at play for macroscopic matter. Since macroscopic matter is constituated by particles where statistics are rife one then can see that these smaller statistics give rise to the events we may all experience, because, i don't know about anyone elses social groups, but from my experience of life, everyone gets there just-deserts one way or another and sometimes within close proximity of each other.

Pure concidence, or for a better description,pure probability.

[shuttlt]

Since macroscopic matter is constituated by particles where statistics are rife one then can see that these smaller statistics give rise to the events we may all experience, because, i don't know about anyone elses social groups, but from my experience of life, everyone gets there just-deserts one way or another and sometimes within close proximity of each other.
Explain Aids babies?

[HansMustermann]

What an utterly bizarre hypothesis...

So basically if you redefine karma as something else than it actually means, and handwave something about QM that is fully irrelevant or grossly misunderstood, then they are somehow related...

[ben m]

In response, it seems very likely, and incontrivertible as to say that statistics have played the evolution of events since the primal appearance of time and space itself.

Probability plays a role in quantum mechanics, yes, and also in stat mech, and cryptography, and also in poker, baseball, demography, and college admissions. (So does algebra. So does energy conservation. So does Lorentz invariance.) Insofar as probability also plays a role in the coincidences which get labeled "karma", probability plays a role in karma---I think that would be considered uncontroversial.

Your statement was that quantum mechanics "explains" karma. This has exactly the same truth value as "quantum mechanics explains poker" or "algebra explains karma" or "Lorentz invariance explains baseball". They don't.

[Xulld]

I don't deal.

Also, its obvious you do not know anything about the history of physics. It was the Greeks who first hypothesized the atom.

Also, probabilities run entire evolution of the universe. One which has an unusual approach is the Wheeler-De Witt equation.

Go learn something.

QM is probabilistic, but not all probabilities are related to QM.

[Ragnarok]

Explain Aids babies?

Their mum's came into contact with the disease, and now they are dying.

[Third Eye Open]

Sure it can!! 'Quantum Mechanics' is just a sciencey way of saying 'magic'.

Also, slightly OT, but this (http://www.theonion.com/content/news/sci_fi_writer_attributes?utm_source=a-section)

[ponderingturtle]

Explain Aids babies?

Duh, past lives.

[godless dave]

Karma is the abstractual force that deals out the morality of good and evil justly to human beings.

"Good" and "evil" have no meaning from a physics point of view, so I fail to see how quantum mechanics could be involved in Karma.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

"Good" and "evil" have no meaning from a physics point of view, so I fail to see how quantum mechanics could be involved in Karma.

Damn. You beat me to it. I was going to ask how the Universe knew what was good or bad and thus balance them out. But now I don't have to. :o

[Singularitarian]

Probability plays a role in quantum mechanics, yes, and also in stat mech, and cryptography, and also in poker, baseball, demography, and college admissions. (So does algebra. So does energy conservation. So does Lorentz invariance.) Insofar as probability also plays a role in the coincidences which get labeled "karma", probability plays a role in karma---I think that would be considered uncontroversial.

Your statement was that quantum mechanics "explains" karma. This has exactly the same truth value as "quantum mechanics explains poker" or "algebra explains karma" or "Lorentz invariance explains baseball". They don't.

Before i start (not directed at you Ben) - keep all stupid questions for someone who can be bothered, for asking absolutely irrelevent issues into the example i gave, you are now defining people, more or less babies born with aids, and that obviously is a shame. If anyone decharacterizes the words i have used, then you've done so by chopping your own heads off.

I was talking about my social group, and how Karma can just be mistaken for the great statistical unfold.

Ben,

Hi. Anyway, yes, quantum mechanics can ''explain'' Karma. It does not justify however the traditional meaning, so it explains Karma with a scientific mechanism which ultimately shows that its all just probability. In a way, Karma is a description of a more mythical approach, where some kind of ''hidden scales'' determine the dealings of morality. Making it as personal as this, would be wrong, and construded there is some almighty force which cares for our morality and the dealings of events due to those moral.

As i said, quantum mechanics could help ''explain'' the reason why things seem uncannily like the Karma, explained in traditions stemming thousands of years.

[Singularitarian]

Damn. You beat me to it. I was going to ask how the Universe knew what was good or bad and thus balance them out. But now I don't have to. :o

Is my work misunderstood again?

I am not dictating that the universe ''knows'' anything. What part of ''random statistical averages at the fundamental level'' indicates that there is anything which balances out good and evil?

[Singularitarian]

when working up from subatomic energy and matter, we find atoms, molecules, groups of molecules, cells. Our entire bodies for instance is made up of nothing but the statistical actions of particles whizzing about inside of my body. The statistics are too much for us to ever calculate, because there are so many of them, and the uncertainty principle forbids us from knowing the whole statistical picture. But, events which happen to people ''which seems like a Karmic force'' is nothing but a misunderstanding. Events are dealt out due to the statistics of the universe. They will collapse or decohere to make valuable information. In fact, the wave function of the universe (which is the statistical field over all ''happenings'' in the universe) governs the probabilities and ultimately, us. Being intelligent beings, we relate events together in hope to find some meaning in life, perhaps even some kind of pattern. Bad things happen to people all over the world all the time, and not necesserily people who may be evil. Even a person dies every second, from a vast array of conditions. Even aids, as someone smugly invited.

The world is a place of sadness, this much is true, but there is no confined force to our experiences and moral dealings - just unfortunately, our time comes just because that's how the world works. Cause and effect, but not by any mysterious Karmic force.

Fundamentally, one can even show that the universe itself is fundamentally governed by a field of probabilities \psi. It ultimately governs entire objects, and even galaxies (see Michio Kaku's Hyperspace for confirmation). So in essence, we mix up totally unrelated events (again unless connected by some chaotic system) to something which is considered as some all-pervading force dedicated purely to the subliminal mind. Quantum mechanics does not work this way, so it can only deal with Karma as a theory itself describing fundamental statistical averages, and this is what truely governs why anything happens in one shape or form.

[Singularitarian]

Sure it can!! 'Quantum Mechanics' is just a sciencey way of saying 'magic'.

Also, slightly OT, but this (http://www.theonion.com/content/news/sci_fi_writer_attributes?utm_source=a-section)

He look creepy lol

[Singularitarian]

"Good" and "evil" have no meaning from a physics point of view, so I fail to see how quantum mechanics could be involved in Karma.


Because Karma is explained as being nothing but statistical averages, and a statistical field appropriately. It does not dictate there is any force in the universe which governs a specific balance between good an evil.

[ben m]

Before i start (not directed at you Ben) - keep all stupid questions for someone who can be bothered, for asking absolutely irrelevent issues into the example i gave, you are now defining people, more or less babies born with aids, and that obviously is a shame.

You are not the arbiter of what is relevant or irrelevant.


I was talking about my social group, and how Karma can just be mistaken for the great statistical unfold.

I thought you meant the opposite---statistics can be mistaken for karma.

Hi. Anyway, yes, quantum mechanics can ''explain'' Karma. It does not justify however the traditional meaning, so it explains Karma with a scientific mechanism which ultimately shows that its all just probability. ...
As i said, quantum mechanics could help ''explain'' the reason why things seem uncannily like the Karma, explained in traditions stemming thousands of years.

Did you read my post? Read it again. There are practical uncertainties that make daily life "statistical", but they have nothing to do with quantum mechanical uncertainty. Nothing whatsoever.

Consider the world as known to Pierre-Simon Laplace (read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%27s_demon)---atoms obey Newton's Laws, light is a wave, etc. You seem to claim that if the universe were like this, coincidences would not occur and thus no-one would believe in karma. This is obviously nonsense, so its contrapositive, i.e. your hypothesis, is also nonsense.

[Singularitarian]

You are not the arbiter of what is relevant or irrelevant.



I thought you meant the opposite---statistics can be mistaken for karma.



Did you read my post? Read it again. There are practical uncertainties that make daily life "statistical", but they have nothing to do with quantum mechanical uncertainty. Nothing whatsoever.

Consider the world as known to Pierre-Simon Laplace (read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%27s_demon)---atoms obey Newton's Laws, light is a wave, etc. You seem to claim that if the universe were like this, coincidences would not occur and thus no-one would believe in karma. This is obviously nonsense, so its contrapositive, i.e. your hypothesis, is also nonsense.

I am the arbiter in this case ben. It's my thread, and they argued against something which was actually irrelevent at the time being, for i had not included those subjects in what i was discussing.

Also, i never said that Karma would not be believed if coincidences would not occur. That's something you've added yourself mate.

In which case, it would be ridiculous.

Please tell me where i said this?

[ben m]

I am the arbiter in this case ben. It's my thread, and they argued against something which was actually irrelevent at the time being, for i had not included those subjects in what i was discussing.

You're welcome to *convince* us that something is irrelevant, but it isn't irrelevant on your say-so. Let's recall, for example, your repeated insistence that *units* were not worth dwelling on when you posted something full of unit errors. (Anyway, I agree that you've redefined karma in such a way that the "problem of evil" does not invalidate your argument.)

The title of this thread is "quantum mechanics explains karma". You seem to say that random coincidences (which you call "statistics") explain karma, and furthermore you seem to mean that statistics are due to quantum mechanics. Therefore quantum mechanics explains karma. Is that right? Is that a reasonable summary of your argument?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Is my work misunderstood again?

I am not dictating that the universe ''knows'' anything. What part of ''random statistical averages at the fundamental level'' indicates that there is anything which balances out good and evil?

Surely: Karma == do good and you shall be rewarded. If not in this life, then the next. And the reverse for doing bad.

If the good and bad results are random, how is this Karma?

:confused: :boggled:

[Dancing David]

Kamma is the consequence of choices. There are no past lives, there are no souls, there is only the world. The choices made have consequences.

[Dancing David]

I am the arbiter in this case ben. It's my thread, and they argued against something which was actually irrelevent at the time being, for i had not included those subjects in what i was discussing.




Nope, you aren't a moderator and you do not get to tell us what to post.

It is not 'your thread', it is one you started, you must be some sort of control freak. I can't believe it, you have posted at the JREF for almost a month and you still don't get it.

[Dancing David]

Because Karma is explained as being nothing but statistical averages, and a statistical field appropriately. It does not dictate there is any force in the universe which governs a specific balance between good an evil.

You are getting closer pond hopper.

So are you talking about hindu karma, buddhist kamma (Old school or Big school) or what?

Karma does not exist, it is merely the result of causality, it happens at a macro scale and is largely confirmation bias.

[Singularitarian]

You're welcome to *convince* us that something is irrelevant, but it isn't irrelevant on your say-so. Let's recall, for example, your repeated insistence that *units* were not worth dwelling on when you posted something full of unit errors. (Anyway, I agree that you've redefined karma in such a way that the "problem of evil" does not invalidate your argument.)

The title of this thread is "quantum mechanics explains karma". You seem to say that random coincidences (which you call "statistics") explain karma, and furthermore you seem to mean that statistics are due to quantum mechanics. Therefore quantum mechanics explains karma. Is that right? Is that a reasonable summary of your argument?



Yes, i state that random variables give rise to the more complicated system such as human interaction and experience, from personal viewpoints. In fact, since every particle is governed by a single field of probability, we find that events are in turn just the cause and effect of real particle interactions, which in this case, are considered as being absolutely coincidental. Suffice to say i believe that there is predeterminism in the universe, but i am keeping this simple.

Since any good mathematician will admit that the part and parcel of the thing we experience and even observe other people interacting could be interpreted fundamentally as being the field of probability, the same field we use in the schrodinger equation. This explains why events happen, and happen in such a way that may cause suspicion. The truth of the matter, is that Karma is the result of statistical averages, and nothing specifically-tied to it should be mythical and somewhat spiritual.

But at least you agree that abitrary nature of evil or good is irellevant.

[Singularitarian]

Surely: Karma == do good and you shall be rewarded. If not in this life, then the next. And the reverse for doing bad.

If the good and bad results are random, how is this Karma?

:confused: :boggled:


It's not Karma by traditional definition. The quantum mechanical aspect challenges to explain events that are completely random, or if you wish, non-randomized events by choice. Karma is the illusion of the probability field.

[ben m]

Y
Since any good mathematician will admit that the part and parcel of the thing we experience and even observe other people interacting could be interpreted fundamentally as being the field of probability, the same field we use in the schrodinger equation.

Since the world is made of things obeying Schrodinger's equation, it is completely vacuous to say (as in the title of this thread) "Can quantum mechanics explain X?" since the answer is always yes. "Quantum mechanics can explain karma, love, the Lindbergh baby, tomato blight, my taste in tea, and the plot of 'Rear Window'."

Beyond this triviality, daily-life macro-randomness has nothing to do with quantum randomness. Nothing whatsoever. Anything random you encounter in daily life (unless you're in the habit of carrying a geiger counter) is not due to quantum uncertainty---"my cat was in a mixed state until I looked at it and collapsed it"---but rather due to simple classical uncertainty ("I wasn't looking at the cat and I didn't know where it had gone") of already-collapsed systems.

[Singularitarian]

Since the world is made of things obeying Schrodinger's equation, it is completely vacuous to say (as in the title of this thread) "Can quantum mechanics explain X?" since the answer is always yes. "Quantum mechanics can explain karma, love, the Lindbergh baby, tomato blight, my taste in tea, and the plot of 'Rear Window'."

Beyond this triviality, daily-life macro-randomness has nothing to do with quantum randomness. Nothing whatsoever. Anything random you encounter in daily life (unless you're in the habit of carrying a geiger counter) is not due to quantum uncertainty---"my cat was in a mixed state until I looked at it and collapsed it"---but rather due to simple classical uncertainty ("I wasn't looking at the cat and I didn't know where it had gone") of already-collapsed systems.


Actually, quantum mechanics on a large scale does have influences in the macroscopic world, such as the probability-wave field - a taken for granted field we deal with everyday. And if you read up on Bohmian Mechanics, you will find that his wave function of possibilities have already been determined at big bang, and i also showed how Doctor Michio Kaku explains in his book Hyperspace that entire galaxies are even described by their own quantum wave functions. So yeh, quantum field theory does play a part on macroscopic levels.

[Singularitarian]

Since the world is made of things obeying Schrodinger's equation, it is completely vacuous to say (as in the title of this thread) "Can quantum mechanics explain X?" since the answer is always yes. "Quantum mechanics can explain karma, love, the Lindbergh baby, tomato blight, my taste in tea, and the plot of 'Rear Window'."

Beyond this triviality, daily-life macro-randomness has nothing to do with quantum randomness. Nothing whatsoever. Anything random you encounter in daily life (unless you're in the habit of carrying a geiger counter) is not due to quantum uncertainty---"my cat was in a mixed state until I looked at it and collapsed it"---but rather due to simple classical uncertainty ("I wasn't looking at the cat and I didn't know where it had gone") of already-collapsed systems.

And here is a nice proof to show you are wrong.

Solutions to Schrödinger's equation describe not only atomic and subatomic systems, atoms and electrons, but also macroscopic systems, possibly even the whole universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger_equation

[ben m]

Actually, quantum mechanics on a large scale does have influences in the macroscopic world, such as the probability-wave field - a taken for granted field we deal with everyday. And if you read up on Bohmian Mechanics, you will find that his wave function of possibilities have already been determined at big bang, and i also showed how Doctor Michio Kaku explains in his book Hyperspace that entire galaxies are even described by their own quantum wave functions. So yeh, quantum field theory does play a part on macroscopic levels.

Bohmian mechanics (if it works at all) makes exactly the same experimental predictions as Copenhagen or Many-Worlds; don't get distracted.

The macro events you are talking about are ones like "Billy was mean to everyone in homeroom but he got hit in the face with a ball in gym class". Explain, please, how this event would be different in a purely-classical world (clockwork atoms obeying Newtonian physics, etc) than in a quantum world.

[ben m]

Solutions to Schrödinger's equation describe not only atomic and subatomic systems, atoms and electrons, but also macroscopic systems, possibly even the whole universe.

So what? Yes, "quantum mechanics applies to X" is a trivial statement for all X. Likewise "energy conservation", "CPT invariance", and "special relativity".

Thus, "quantum mechanics explains karma" is not any more interesting or true a statement than "CPT invariance explains the Lindbergh baby kidnapping".

[Elizabeth I]

If you had read what i said, i said quantum mechanics can only explain it from a statistical viewpoint. I never mingled philosophy in here. I am stating that a ''ideology of Karma'' (whether or not it is a philosphy), may still be rooted from a more logical and sensible approach to why we experience something like this.

I haven't implied what you have tried to explaining my question. My question is not addressing to take Karma as a real force which is philosophical, but a reasonable approach to explaining it under a mistaken effect of quantum physics.

What?

I never said or implied Karma was a real force associated to the moral distribution among events we experience. I am implying that the force is misunderstood as being nothing but statistical mathematics.

Therefore, whether is has been proven or not, it really does not matter. It addresses the personal belief of the reader.

Huh?

Sure it can!! 'Quantum Mechanics' is just a sciencey way of saying 'magic'.

I personally blame most things I don't understand on quantums. Damn pesky little objects or packets or whatever they are. See? They're sneaky!

[fuelair]

In quantum mechanics, we find that the entire theory turns out to be statistical at best. This means that the entire theory is based upon all the histories and paths it can integrate, and over the possibilities, we can find realities due to amplitude theory.

The possibilities in this universe, such as the tangible possibilities of statistics due to the wave function (a smear of [probabilities] in a field) which can in an enclosed self-contained universe give rise to the likely-hood of any event to happen. This means, strictly obiding by the laws of physics, that events which can happen, will, according to the time it requires for those statistical waves to unfold themselves into real events, whether the tangible events that exist independantly of the observer, or not. Literally speaking, Karma is the universal law or force in which balances the good and bad effects in the world. I refute this as actually being a field which determines only the good and bad dealings. This premise is not exactly a pre-requisite of physics, but from a physical point of view, statistics can easily explain why we may seem to evaluate a force which is synonymous to the human concept of Karma. In this idea, Karma becomes inexorably nothing but a myth of experience, but in a sense, was close to describing the first quantum model of some ''mysterious force'' which does ''deal out events.''

I speculate that what we call Karma is actually just the universe and more locally to us, events which have occured due to statistical reasoning. Given enough time, even within someones lifespan, they will notice perhaps events which seem Karma related. Truth is, statistical analysis will show that the bad events which may turn on someone is just a ''matter of time'' and should not be construded to reason it was an effect from some previous cause, a cause might i add which involves unrelated ties (1) to the original observer who is seeing ''this'' which can be described as being like Karma.

Essentially, this means that Karma is nothing but us mistaking events as some intentional force which balances out the good and evil, to one which is best described under the statistical analysis of wave mechanics. In short, and to end, we will notice uncanny events, but they are nothing more than the statistics mathematicians work on everyday, and on a larger scale, is an emergent property itself of the wave mechanics which has governed the universe since big bang.

So Karma is nothing but a bunch of probabilities, which have high-occurances to happen, expecially from our tiny existences on the planet we call Earth.

(1) - That is it is related under chaotic sytems, which would be in itself a statistical wonder.

Really, no. The only relation between the two is you putting them in the same post. Otherwise, we are mighty sure quantum exists and strong evidence says karma doesn't.

Next!!

[Gord_in_Toronto]

It's not Karma by traditional definition. The quantum mechanical aspect challenges to explain events that are completely random, or if you wish, non-randomized events by choice. Karma is the illusion of the probability field.

Oh. That Karma. In that case, as every other poster in this thread has explained, you are just plain . . . confused.

:yikes:

[Singularitarian]

To everyone who has posted in the last few posts

I am not declaring that Karma is a real thing. I am sick of people confusing what i have written as thus to suggest that. My written work clearly does not support any mysticism Karma has, as it attempts to take it away, redefine that there is no such thing as a natural balance between the states, and i put it all down to statistical coincidences.

How does this support Karma, seriously guys? Keep up, at least if you are going to accomodate time here, which is becoming very taxing on my patience.

[Singularitarian]

Oh. That Karma. In that case, as every other poster in this thread has explained, you are just plain . . . confused.

:yikes:

Karma is an illusion. It's not a real thing, but we objectively might experience events which may varify it personally to us. I have argued that everything in the universe is governed by one statistical field, which can be construded as the true force in which anything happens, not just a rigid view.

[Mashuna]

So your entire argument is that coincidences happen, people think that they're meaningful, but that's just because people don't really understand statistics.

No need to bring in either karma or QM.

[Singularitarian]

So your entire argument is that coincidences happen, people think that they're meaningful, but that's just because people don't really understand statistics.

No need to bring in either karma or QM.

Sure there is.

Karma, dare i say it, is part and parcel of religion in Asian countries. I personally have shown that what we call Karma is nothing but random events construded as being actual Karmic-related events. You can call it Karma all you like (notice how i have never stopped this) - Karma is but a word, it nothing more than to express something. Quantum Mechanics has a fuel or need to take a forensic look at everything. I have forensically-analysed Karma, and i believe that the variables happen by chance, and fundamentally-speaking, those variables happen by chance from equally a statistical field, we have come to call the quantum wave function.

[Dancing David]

It's not Karma by traditional definition. The quantum mechanical aspect challenges to explain events that are completely random, or if you wish, non-randomized events by choice. Karma is the illusion of the probability field.


Nope, you haven't defined karma, so the rest does not follow at all.

[Dancing David]

To everyone who has posted in the last few posts

I am not declaring that Karma is a real thing. I am sick of people confusing what i have written as thus to suggest that. My written work clearly does not support any mysticism Karma has, as it attempts to take it away, redefine that there is no such thing as a natural balance between the states, and i put it all down to statistical coincidences.

How does this support Karma, seriously guys? Keep up, at least if you are going to accomodate time here, which is becoming very taxing on my patience.

Considering you haven't defined what karma is and insist that we maintain your personal unexplained idiom, your frustration is ironic.

[Singularitarian]

David, read every post please. I do define Karma, more than once.

[lionking]

It really doesn't matter how you define karma. "Ideology of karma" = "ideology of Santa Claus". There is evidence for neither.

[Ocelot]

Karma is the abstractual force that deals out the morality of good and evil justly to human beings. I understand it quite well, thank you.

Thanks for the definition so many different people mean so many different things by this, the meaning has been grossly abused from it's original in hindu pholosophy.

Is my work misunderstood again?

I am not dictating that the universe ''knows'' anything. What part of ''random statistical averages at the fundamental level'' indicates that there is anything which balances out good and evil?

OK break it down for me.

Person A does mainly evil things
Person B does mainly good things

According to your definition of Karma it;s an abtract force which would influence good events to be less likely to be experienced by evil Person A than good Person B and evil events more to be more likely to be experienced by evil Person A than good Person B.

I must pressume that Karma is not the dominant force here as the opposite is very often the case.

I think from what you're saying that this is not an artifact of actual quantum mechanical events but that the statistical approach to analysing quantum mechanical events may be of some help in understanding this supposed phenomenon.

[Dancing David]

Woo?

I'm anything but. My condition excels me to find out truths rather than dishonest facts.
"My condition exceeds me, in order to find truths out rather as dishonest facts"

Hi, transalted your original phrase into german and then back on Google it now states

"My status about me to find the truth rather than dishonest Facts"

Spanish
"My situation is over me, to find the facts as facts rather dishonest"

Hindi
"Order as dishonest, but in fact know the truth for my condition, I'm more"

Nippon
"I am not my condition, excellent for the truth of the facts of corruption"


Turkish
"Im very honest with me to find the perfect truths are not facts"

[Dancing David]

David, read every post please. I do define Karma, more than once.


Not really, but you do expect us to know what you mean without having defined it.

[Singularitarian]

Hint*

Post 15, David.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Hint*

Post 15, David.

Karma is the abstractual force that deals out the morality of good and evil justly to human beings. I understand it quite well, thank you.

You have not shown that QM has anything to do with this definition.

Are you trying to say, "Things happen at random and people think they are not random but there is a reason behind them such that justice is done"?

If so, please say it. :boggled:

[Singularitarian]

You have not suggested any explanatory connection between the facts "there is a statistical field" and "a tree branch fell on Billy".

In fact, it sounds a lot like you're going to say that the tree branch's wavefunction collapses, quantum-mechanically, into a falling state or not-falling state and that that's where the randomness comes in. Sorry, this is completely wrong---the wavefunction of the real world is incoherent, with zillions of little "collapses" happening all the time, and thus large-scale behavior is effectively classical. As we've said.

And watch your attitude.

Trying to give a satisfactory explanation of why events happen, like the example of the branch falling on Billy, can only be left to God. Essentially,there are too many variables for us to account, also we would need to know certain aspects about the future - this is because of chaos theory. I cannot give you an explanation, only a statistical theory. Hence, the Butterfly Effect:

''It is hypothesized that something as simple as the flap of a butterflies wing can cause a hurricane half way across the world.''

If one would even dare to calculate the statistics of this happening, would be extreme in itself. The branch which fell of the tree, could be me potentially sneezing on my way to college.

Quantum mechanically-speaking i would indeed put it down to systems which either decohere or collapse under the all-pervaiding field of \psi.

Indeed, the quantum highway is buisy with all these averages, collapsing by the trillions all over the place. On a larger scale, these collapses can vanish, and the wave function of entire galaxies can be considered, given also their own wave functions.

Whilst the large scale take approximately well for classical mechanics, the union of a statistical field is still henceforth a quantum field, which governs all particles, and by deduction, macroscopic events themselves follow quite predictable paths on our scales.

[Singularitarian]

You have not shown that QM has anything to do with this definition.

Are you trying to say, "Things happen at random and people think they are not random but there is a reason behind them such that justice is done"?

If so, please say it. :boggled:

That definition is absurd from a cold logical view of quantum mechanics, that is why Karma cannot be treated literally as this kind of force, but nothing more than random variables which we insipidly mark with some illusionary meaning.

[Ocelot]

So I can better understand what you're saying was my analysis in post 80 close to what you're trying to say?

[ben m]

Essentially,there are too many variables for us to account, also we would need to know certain aspects about the future - this is because of chaos theory. I cannot give you an explanation, only a statistical theory. Hence, the Butterfly Effect:

''It is hypothesized that something as simple as the flap of a butterflies wing can cause a hurricane half way across the world.''


Yep. That's true in classical chaos theory as well as quantum chaos theory. The genuinely-unpredictable randomness of the world comes from the chaoticness, not from the quantumness.

And that's still irrelevant for most daily-life coincidences. Continuing the example of the tree branch: imagine a forest where small mechanical timers were mounted on each branch. Each timer has a countdown running on a glowing red display, plainly visible if you bother to look. Also visible is the explanatory label: "when this counter reaches zero, this tree branch will fall". Now Billy, having been mean to his classmates in homeroom, goes and sits under a tree as usual during his regularly-scheduled recess; today, though, is the day that a counter over his head reaches zero. The branch falls and hits him on the head---an utterly deterministic, predictable event, easily foreseen to anyone who sought out the relevant information---and still, I think, people would say "He got hit by a clock-triggered branch? That's karma coming back to him!".

Quantum mechanics is one of many sources of the unpredictability of macro-events, and it's far, far, far from a dominant one---unless your "macro events" take place in a physics lab. Other sources are classical chaos, simple non-chaos complexity, and simple lack of information, as in the clock example above. The statement "karma is just misinterpreted unpredictability" is fine. The connection between that unpredictability and quantum mechanics is ... well, it'd be charitable to call it an oversimplification.

[ben m]

That definition is absurd from a cold logical view of quantum mechanics, that is why Karma cannot be treated literally as this kind of force, but nothing more than random variables which we insipidly mark with some illusionary meaning.

Sing, did you read Gord's statement before deciding to call it absurd? I think he's paraphrasing your definition of karma perfectly accurately.

[Dancing David]

Hint*

Post 15, David.

This one? http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4996924&postcount=15

Nope you just use your idiom and it isn't even related to the traditional one.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

That definition is absurd from a cold logical view of quantum mechanics, that is why Karma cannot be treated literally as this kind of force, but nothing more than random variables which we insipidly mark with some illusionary meaning.

Instead of applying the "cold logical view of quantum mechanics", why not apply something called "reason"? :confused:

[Dancing David]

Trying to give a satisfactory explanation of why events happen, like the example of the branch falling on Billy, can only be left to God.

Well, that says it all, doesn't it ?

You also don't know what an explanation is.

[Dancing David]

That definition is absurd from a cold logical view of quantum mechanics, that is why Karma cannot be treated literally as this kind of force, but nothing more than random variables which we insipidly mark with some illusionary meaning.

You stuck in hole, Gord he say this:
""Things happen at random and people think they are not random but there is a reason behind them such that justice is done"?"

Eet meen da same fing.

[Dancing David]

Kamma, choices made help set the boundaries on the future, someone who fights in bars all the time is going to get beat up frequently.

DUH.

No QM there.

[Elizabeth I]

Sure there is.

Karma, dare i say it, is part and parcel of religion in Asian countries. I personally have shown that what we call Karma is nothing but random events construded as being actual Karmic-related events. You can call it Karma all you like (notice how i have never stopped this) - Karma is but a word, it nothing more than to express something. Quantum Mechanics has a fuel or need to take a forensic look at everything. I have forensically-analysed Karma, and i believe that the variables happen by chance, and fundamentally-speaking, those variables happen by chance from equally a statistical field, we have come to call the quantum wave function.

You're operating from a personal dictionary, aren't you?

So, for you, karma = confirmation bias; that is, there is a group of people that counts only the coincidences that seem significant and ignores all the other random coincidences that occur. That's true. Why do you think quantum mechanics needs to be brought into the picture to explain anything?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

You stuck in hole, Gord he say this:
""Things happen at random and people think they are not random but there is a reason behind them such that justice is done"?"

Eet meen da same fing.

I see upon re-reading this that I could have expressed myself a little better. :o

How about: "Things happen at random and people think they are not random but they (the people) think there is a reason behind them such that the Universe somehow ensures that justice is done."

I could add: "If not now but in the hereafter," but I won't. :D

[Singularitarian]

Instead of applying the "cold logical view of quantum mechanics", why not apply something called "reason"? :confused:

Reason cannot be taken seriously in physics. It can be taken seriously who believe such matters exist, but they are highly mythological and religiously-based.

[Singularitarian]

Sing, did you read Gord's statement before deciding to call it absurd? I think he's paraphrasing your definition of karma perfectly accurately.

No silly :) I am saying that the traditional Karmic definition is absurd.

[Singularitarian]

You're operating from a personal dictionary, aren't you?

So, for you, karma = confirmation bias; that is, there is a group of people that counts only the coincidences that seem significant and ignores all the other random coincidences that occur. That's true. Why do you think quantum mechanics needs to be brought into the picture to explain anything?

Well, it's a morality balancing force.

[ben m]

I never said or implied Karma was a real force associated to the moral distribution among events we experience. I am implying that the force is misunderstood as being nothing but statistical mathematics.

Well, it's a morality balancing force.

I hereby retract all of my statements of the form "your redefinition of karma is reasonable enough"

Please replace them with: your redefinition of karma is so poorly stated that nobody has any idea what you are talking about. Perhaps it is poorly formulated in your mind, or perhaps you are incapable of explaining it.

(Statements of the form "... all of this has nothing to do with QM" are still, as far as I can tell, operative.)

[Singularitarian]

I hereby retract all of my statements of the form "your redefinition of karma is reasonable enough"

Please replace them with: your redefinition of karma is so poorly stated that nobody has any idea what you are talking about. Perhaps it is poorly formulated in your mind, or perhaps you are incapable of explaining it.

(Statements of the form "... all of this has nothing to do with QM" are still, as far as I can tell, operative.)



Perhaps its my innability to express karma into words?

Either way, i think everyone gets the just of what i am saying. Probability fields govern the role of events, none that should be related to Karma. There is no magical force in the sky which governs such things, nor is there any reason to believe there is.

[BNRT]

Either way, i think everyone gets the just of what i am saying.

I just might give it a shot, here.

Probability fields govern the role of events, none that should be related to Karma. There is no magical force in the sky which governs such things, nor is there any reason to believe there is.

So, there is no Karma. Why should you need quantum mechanics to explain it, if it doesn´t exist?

[kerikiwi]

So, there is no Karma. Why should you need quantum mechanics to explain it, if it doesn´t exist?

I was wondering about that too.

Admittedly I have not read all of Singulatarian's posts closely, but I had the impression that s/he accepted that there was such a thing as karma. Perhaps just poor phrasing...

[Elizabeth I]

Well, it's a morality balancing force.

What? Physics has nothing to do with morality.

[ben m]

Either way, i think everyone gets the just of what i am saying.

Given that:

a) All posts seem to disagree with you
b) Half of the thread consists of you complaining that people aren't getting it ("wakey wakey"?), and
c) my post, the one you just responded to, says "I used to think I knew what you were saying, but now I don't"

I would not conclude that everyone gets the justgist of what you are saying.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Reason cannot be taken seriously in physics. It can be taken seriously who believe such matters exist, but they are highly mythological and religiously-based.

This is the silliest thing you have written so far. Reason must be "taken seriously" in Physics -- otherwise it's not Physics. I can't parse you second sentence.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

No silly :) I am saying that the traditional Karmic definition is absurd.

Does what I wrote accurately represent your "definition" of Karma? If not, why not?

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Well, it's a morality balancing force.

What "it" are you referring to in this sentence?

[thaiboxerken]

Seems to me that the OP is asking a similar question to "can Mathematics to explain Numerology?"

[Singularitarian]

This is the silliest thing you have written so far. Reason must be "taken seriously" in Physics -- otherwise it's not Physics. I can't parse you second sentence.

There is keeping an open mind, then there is letting your brains dribble from your ears.

I do recall someone saying that once.

Besides, the ''reason'' in question is too considerable to ignore. Karmic followers would have a scientist believe otherwise.

[Singularitarian]

Seems to me that the OP is asking a similar question to "can Mathematics to explain Numerology?"

Ironically i admit, yes, it is very analogous.

Whilst we know fundamentally that numerology is not a fascet of the rigour of true mathematics with their own abstractual laws.

[Dancing David]

Well, it's a morality balancing force.


And that is your idiomatic defintion.

In your balance, someone who is good will experience evil to create balance?

[Ron_Tomkins]

Can Kepler's law explain how Spiderman shoots spiderweb out of his wrists?

[Myriad]

Regression to the mean is a very simple (even obvious) observed (and mathematically quantifiable) statistical phenomenon. The more fortunate a person has been in the recent past, the more probable it is that they will not continue to be as fortunate (that is, they will be less fortunate) in the near future. The less fortunate a person has been in the recent past, the more probable it is that they will be more fortunate than before in the near future.

"Fortunate" in this case refers only to events based on random chance, not for example persistent favorable/unfavorable circumstances or behaviors (such as wealth, hard work, a winning personality; or laziness, illness, sociopathy, etc.).

This is not Karma by any definition I'm aware of, nor does it have anything to do with Quantum Mechanics. But it is, at least, a known statistical phenomenon that vaguely resembles Karma in its effects. So, Singularitarian, could you perhaps explain how what you're talking about differs from regression to the mean?

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Singularitarian]

Regression to the mean is a very simple (even obvious) observed (and mathematically quantifiable) statistical phenomenon. The more fortunate a person has been in the recent past, the more probable it is that they will not continue to be as fortunate (that is, they will be less fortunate) in the near future. The less fortunate a person has been in the recent past, the more probable it is that they will be more fortunate than before in the near future.

"Fortunate" in this case refers only to events based on random chance, not for example persistent favorable/unfavorable circumstances or behaviors (such as wealth, hard work, a winning personality; or laziness, illness, sociopathy, etc.).

This is not Karma by any definition I'm aware of, nor does it have anything to do with Quantum Mechanics. But it is, at least, a known statistical phenomenon that vaguely resembles Karma in its effects. So, Singularitarian, could you perhaps explain how what you're talking about differs from regression to the mean?

Respectfully,
Myriad


I guess it differs very little.

[Wowbagger]

Singularitarian,

I have not read all the posts in this thread, so forgive me if this was already addressed.

I was reading through your opening post, and it appears as though you are actually debunking the idea of Karma, and dismissing it as merely an illusion from the effects of quantum mechanics.

Is that a good interpretation of your opening post? It seems a few initial responders were under the impression that you were trying to prove the existence of karma, using QM. And, I was wondering if my reading of it was more appropriate.

If I am right: Then you don't really need QM to debunk karma. A good understanding of skeptical analysis, and magical thinking, is sufficient.

If I am wrong about you: Then good luck! You're gonna need it, if you try to argue karma is real, in this Forum.

[Singularitarian]

Singularitarian,

I have not read all the posts in this thread, so forgive me if this was already addressed.

I was reading through your opening post, and it appears as though you are actually debunking the idea of Karma, and dismissing it as merely an illusion from the effects of quantum mechanics.

Is that a good interpretation of your opening post? It seems a few initial responders were under the impression that you were trying to prove the existence of karma, using QM. And, I was wondering if my reading of it was more appropriate.

If I am right: Then you don't really need QM to debunk karma. A good understanding of skeptical analysis, and magical thinking, is sufficient.

If I am wrong about you: Then good luck! You're gonna need it, if you try to argue karma is real, in this Forum.

Yes you're right.

[kerikiwi]

Then if karma is bunk, why would you try to explain how it works?

That makes no sense.

[Singularitarian]

Then if karma is bunk, why would you try to explain how it works?

That makes no sense.


The reason why is to have a rational explanation of events, not one which obides by mysticism. I see nothing mystical in these events. Humans over the years have tied events together, and gave it the name Karma. That's just us and our insipid natures. From a quantum mechanical viewpoint, if you want to get techinical why anything happens, is truely down to one single statistical field which governs anything to happen.

[Wowbagger]

Then if karma is bunk, why would you try to explain how it works?I think he was trying to explain why it appears to work, to some people.

But, again, I don't think it is necessary to invoke quantum mechanics.

Karma probably works off of human mentality: The tendency to develop the idea that the universe works off of some good "plan", in the absence of knowledge gained by scientific investigation. It appears to work, through reinforcement of the culture.

[Wowbagger]

From a quantum mechanical viewpoint, if you want to get techinical why anything happens, is truely down to one single statistical field which governs anything to happen.But, what does this have to do with karma, specifically?

It looks like you are turning into a "greedy reductionist". ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greedy_reductionism )

[Singularitarian]

And i said explaining the ''ideology'' - not as a real thing.

[Singularitarian]

I think he was trying to explain why it appears to work, to some people.

But, again, I don't think it is necessary to invoke quantum mechanics.

Karma probably works off of human mentality: The tendency to develop the idea that the universe works off of some good "plan", in the absence of knowledge gained by scientific investigation. It appears to work, through reinforcement of the culture.

Bolded by me,

Yeh. That's right.

[Singularitarian]

For instance - you said ''he believes karma is real and was attempting to show that it is a scientific concept that QM can explain.''

Which is blatently wrong, as i said:

''I speculate that what we call Karma is actually just the universe and more locally to us, events which have occured due to statistical reasoning. Given enough time, even within someones lifespan, they will notice perhaps events which seem Karma related.''

I further go on to state that Karma is only a word. Wowbagger was 100% correct in saying: ''I think he was trying to explain why it appears to work, to some people''

[Wowbagger]

He is taking the out Wowbagger provided since he realizes he can't convince anybody here. Or, perhaps his opening post was an act of greedy reductionism, that few others recognized as such.

Some of you are hypersensitive to cliches. If someone claims Q.M. explains some "woo-sounding" force, your knee-jerk reaction is to call B.S. Which, in most cases, is perfectly suitable. In fact, I first read the O.P. that way, myself. But, upon reaching the final paragraph, it struck me as something different:

So Karma is nothing but a bunch of probabilities, which have high-occurances to happen, expecially from our tiny existences on the planet we call Earth.

It sounded, to me, like this was a poor attempt to debunk the existence of Karma, not an explanation for why we should accept the idea of Karma.

I call G.R. (greedy reductionism), which is a special, more specific case of B.S.

[Wowbagger]

Singularitarian, just curious: When did you learn English?

[Singularitarian]

I would have agreed it was by greedy reductionism this was based, if it where nor for the gaining of knowing that events are not predetermined that way.

[kerikiwi]

The reason why is to have a rational explanation of events, not one which obides by mysticism. I see nothing mystical in these events. Humans over the years have tied events together, and gave it the name Karma. That's just us and our insipid natures. From a quantum mechanical viewpoint, if you want to get techinical why anything happens, is truely down to one single statistical field which governs anything to happen.

I fail to see what events you are talking about.
If karma is bunk there are no events to explain.

[kerikiwi]

Enigma, i'm going to report you now for trolling. The OP is more less than clear in its assertions, just other people like yourself had picked this up incorrectly, apart from a few.

Fixed that for you.
If most people people misunderstood what you were saying, you need to consider (and you can do this via quantum mechanics if you like) that you were the one at fault.

[kerikiwi]

How more clear could it have been?

I'm not promoting Karma at all.


... I give up in this thread. It's waste of *********** time.

Again, the problem is yours if you are unable to present your thoughts so others can understand them.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Yes you're right.


Oh. Goody. Can we all go home now? :jaw-dropp

[Tricky]

A number of posts have been split to AAH mostly for bickering and some off-topic or responding to bickering. Please keep it civil here, especially Singulatarian and ~enigma~

[Wowbagger]

I would have agreed it was by greedy reductionism this was based, if it where nor for the gaining of knowing that events are not predetermined that way. Wha..?!

Did you read the Wiki summary? Imagine someone trying to explain how Internet hyperlinks work, by describing how electrons flow through the wiring and circuit boards. How is your argument different?

Can you state, for us, more clearly, how quantum mechanics adds anything significant to our understanding of why karma is such a persistent delusion for some people, that is not covered by the more direct topic of magical thinking tendancies?

If (for some reason) one wanted to convince a believer that karma does not exist, how would bringing up the topic of quantum mechanics help us do that?

[Dancing David]

The reason why is to have a rational explanation of events, not one which obides by mysticism. I see nothing mystical in these events. Humans over the years have tied events together, and gave it the name Karma. That's just us and our insipid natures. From a quantum mechanical viewpoint, if you want to get techinical why anything happens, is truely down to one single statistical field which governs anything to happen.


Confirmation bias would explain most of it.

[shuttlt]

All this confusion between QM and dull old fashioned randomness/regression to the mean got me wondering. Might this same confusion be in the heads of at least some of the homeopaths, psychics, etc... who explain what they're doing through QM?

QM==Magic, Regression to the Mean == QM

If somebody thought this way, I can see how conversations in which we explain homeopathy as regression to the mean could end up very confused. When we see random variation, they see the action of QM and some kind of validation that 'something' is going on. Do they think QM causes people to get better due to regression from the mean?

Just a thought.