See the problem is cookie, that at least on the provable portion of this discussion (ie the physics part) i am right, It is obvious to me (A former nuclear engineering major of 3 years) that you dont have a clue about what you are talking about. This also does very little to reinforce my confidence in your logic in other areas. You are again just being argumentative.

For example on the free will portion. There is a massive difference between choosing between physical actions and trying to choose to believe something you know isnt true (im not 15' 9"). You are again applying entirely illogical and absurd situations and circumstances to an entirely logically and philosophically backed argument, and then claiming that because it doesn't hold up to the absurd, it is illogical.

Let me give you some advice, don't argue with me about physics, i am 3 classes away from being a "expert" in nuclear physics and 2 4 credit physics courses away from having all of my physics reqs for a bachelors degree in general physics. I understand relative physics a hell of a lot better then you do and i understand the HB principle and its implications a lot better then you do. And im totally not even being arrogant here. This is just reality.

Also until you prove to me that you know what the hell you are talking about im not going to dignify any physics related argument you make with a response.

"There you go again with your leaping. Cite this conclusion and I might believe you."

This is going to be as dumbed down as it can possibly be made for you.

Let us suppose there are only 2 particles in the universe. We know at time (t) the electrical charge, mass, physical dimensions, velocity, and position of both particles. actually to make this list easier lets just say we know all of the physical properties of both particles.

Given that situation would you believe that one could predict with absolute certainty the behavior of both particles for as long as they should desire?

also congrats me, on the longest kdice discussion thread ever.

Also ffs Ryan why does the kdice forum think that kdice is not a word?

forums arent for thought out, bullet point discussions on religion.

they are for sarcasm and trolling

and for making 300+ post threads

uh
browser spell check lol

blablabla,
christianity sucks and is bullshit because:

they sold FRIGGIN TICKETS TO PEOPLE WHICH SAID THEY WOULD BE FORGIVEN FOR MURDER, yes they did... and the bible makes no sense to begin with since it has been altered many times by certain people, one of them is Louis from england dunno which tho he said that gays should be killed.

End of this forum discussion.

Detenmile:

I got my degree in geophysics from MIT a long, long time ago and had all the core physics courses except the labs. Back then, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle was stated as delta q x delta p = hbar where q was position, p was momentum, and hbar was Planck's constant. I don't remember a reference to the speed of light. But if v is very big the momentum would be huge so a given uncertainty in p would be a very much smaller uncertainty in v, so we could have a small v uncertainty and q uncertainty at the same time? So is that the current take?

judging from someone who is currently taking course #3 in physical chemistry, that sounds about right skrum