How could one explain oneself. . .                                       how the world came into being

 

The world was created by connecting and solving eternal substances and their laws in the infinite universe.

 

 

All masses (mass physics) consist of substances. These are controlled by laws. Laws have no causes, they are intrinsic to substances.

 

The conditions in the empty spaces (of the vacuum in space) - in the universe can produce virtual substances. These are also controlled by laws.

 

So, all substances have their laws in them. They are one (inseparable).

 

When one substance joins another, a new one forms. This is not the sum of the two original ones, but one that also runs according to their inner exact laws that form through the merger.

Every change in the substances, e. g. by dissolving them, changes their inherent laws accordingly.

 

Neither has the universe come into being (since it contains everything, it cannot have arisen from anything), nor the basic substances (however one wants to designate them, for example as energy).

 

That's why it makes no sense for religious people to believe that God is the first mover. Because the substances themselves "flow" through their laws and are usually exposed to interactions.

 

People used to think that God created the world. And also, what you encounter in life. Therefore, they have hardly investigated - but just accepted it.

 

But in fact, the laws have made it all happen.

 

Now there are quantum physicists who claim that there is objective coincidence in elementary particles, perhaps because they do not "know" what to do.

 

I mean, they already "know" that, because it's laid down in their inherent laws.

As I said: every substance in the universe carries its laws in itself. So also, the elementary particles, which we describe as particle / wave. The decisive factor will be the interaction with the respective environment.

 

When elementary particles are measured, the superposition immediately becomes a discrete position.

This is a legitimate process that cannot be changed.

Every elementary particle in quantum systems thus collapses during a measurement. The hitherto "infinite" possibilities of the particle are thereby reduced to a precisely defined state. This, as I said, is always legitimate in interacting with something else.

This is called the collapse of the wave function.

 

The quantum particles / waves are thus not free in the sense of objective chance, but dependent on the laws in them.

 

General: If a substance has changed, then one should not always look for a cause in the sense of a causality lying outside of this substance. For the changes can, as in an atom, be caused by a legally determined point in time within the atom.

 

It is said: Since one cannot accurately predict the exact time of decay in the half-life of atoms, this is unpredictable.

That's right without a doubt. The reason is because one does not know all the laws within the atomic structure - and probably will not know, due to the interactions of the substances.

 

Why one looks for causalities, causes, it is obvious: for the daily life and survival you should know why something has come and adjust accordingly for the future.

(For survival, the cause research is not really necessary regarding the reason for a nuclear decay).

 

The idea that the respective substances are governed by internal laws that structure them, was previously not possible. Because they believed that they only changed according to the factors outside of them, which were the cause of the causalities. The role of internal laws was not seen.

Therefore, one came to the conclusion: if no cause was to be recognized - one therefore did not recognize the laws, one also could not speak of determinism.

 

So, it was concluded that things can move freely (such as objective coincidence) - without a determining cause.

Or one believed that God - or any mystical cause - was the mover.

This then produced statements like: There is an objective coincidence.

 

Coincidence is something that has lawfully fallen to an object. That There are laws in the object and these interact with what has happened. This creates other laws.

 

So whoever claims that there is "objective coincidence" should think through his assertion exactly in terms of these facts.


Psychologically, it could be behind refuting determinism.

 

 

 

© It is permitted to use or reproduce this content without restriction on the condition of naming my website www.karlheinzhermsch.de and without changing or shortening the texts. (Please inquire about exceptions via my imprint.)