saifuddin wrote:
Apakah itu konsep kebetulan (by chance, accident) dalam sains?
Adakah konsep kebetulan benar-benar wujud?
Adakah konsep kebetulan menafikan kewujudan Tuhan?
Adakah sains itu terbatas?
1. Menyentuh sains sebenarnya menyentuh Sunnah Allah dan subset paling penting di dalamnya ialah Qodo’ dan Qadar. Qodo’ memberikan gambaran kebebasan kita memilih, sementara Qadar adalah kadar-kadar ketentuan yang telah Allah tetapkan untuk menjadi bagaimana sesuatu boleh berlaku. Ibarat satu CD game yang sempurna tanpa kecacatan. Sebaik sahaja kita hidupkan program CD tersebut, kita yang membuat pilihan untuk memastikan kita berjaya menjalani ujian yang diberikan oleh program CD tersebut. Dalam kes QQ Allah, kejayaan kita bergantung kepada ilmu kita memahami segala ketentuan yang telah dimasukkan ke dalam QQ tersebut.
2. ‘By chance’ adalah konsep yang menunjukkan bahawa, apa sahaja pilihan yang kita buat (Qodo’ yang memenuhi kadar-kadar tertentu, yang telah ditentukan Allah, maka ketentuan itulah yang menjadi hasil. By chance tidak membawa konotasi negatif seperti accident, sesuatu yang tidak dirancang. By chance merupakan usaha kita yang mengena kepada kadar yang telah disediakan Allah. Umpama nak lulus ujian kena belajar. Tetapi ada yang belajar tapi tak lulus, kerana caranya tidak menepati kadar untuk lulus. By chance menyatakan, usaha belajar kita itu sesuai dengan ketentuan lulus ujian, maka ianya ‘by chance’ akan berlaku.
3. ‘Kebetulan’ boleh membawa tanggapan sama dengan ‘takdir’ dalam arus perdana Melayu. Kita terlalu banyak menyalahkan takdir tanpa disedari, “Dah takdir .. terima ajalah!”. “Ujian dari Allah” untuk menenangkan jiwa, tetapi tanpa disedari menyalahkan Allah kerana mengatakan segalanya telah ditentukan Allah. Kita perlu faham yang ditentukan Allah adalah ciri-ciri sesuatu untuk berlaku, bukan individu atau waktu akan berlaku. Dua pekara berbeza. Jadi ‘By chance’ yang diterjemah kepada ‘kebetulan’ itu boleh membawa konotasi negatif, kalau disalah erti, seperti mana berlaku kepada ‘takdir’
4. Kita tidak tahu sebenarnya apa yang kita usahakan akan mendatangkan hasil atau tidak. Secara ‘kebetulan’ sekiranya ia menepati kadar-kadar yang disediakan Allah, maka berhasillah usaha kita (dan itu yang selalunya kita harapkan dari usaha kita), sekiranya tidak, maka barulah konsep berserah (tawakkal) boleh digunakan, itupun selepas kita mengulangi usaha buat beberapa kali (iltizam). Kalau mahu dinegatifkan penggunaan ‘kebetulan’ atau ‘by chance’, seperti mana dilakukan dalam terjemahannya semasa membincangkan evolusi, maka kita kan dapat tanggapan bahawa ia berlaku secara sendiri tanpa perlu ada pengeraknya.
5. Oleh itu tanggapan atau persepsi negatif pada ‘kebetulan’ atau ‘by chance’ memang boleh membawa kepada hilangnya fungsi Tuhan, bukan kerana ianya benar, tetapi kerana kefahaman kita kepada konsep ‘kebetulan’ itu yang tidak tepat. Inillah yang berlaku, setiap kali evolusi dibincang, oleh kerana Darwin mengatakan ‘by chance’ kita berpersepsi ianya adalah secara tidak dirancang atau ‘accident’. Evolusi dan ‘by chance’ adalah cara melaksanakannya sementara yang merancangnya ialah Allah, bagi yang percaya dan nature bagi yang tidak mahu percaya.
6. Ilmu sains adalah kefahaman kita kepada Sunnah Allah. Ilmu sains atau Laws of physics adalah subset kepada Law of Nature (by Allah). Kefahaman kita kepada Sunnah Allah atau Laws of nature sudah pasti terbatas. Sebeb itu kita terima kehidupan ini sebagai satu evolusi, sehingga kefahaman kita kepada sesuatupun perlu berevolusi. Jadi pada soalan ‘Adakah sains itu terbatas?’, jawapannya ialah ya … dan dengan hanya menerima petunjuk dari AQ, tidak menjadikan kefaham kita tidak terbatas, kerana terjemahan dari whyu yang diberikan juga memerlukan pemikiran yang mendalam, yang hanya boleh diperolehi melalui displin sains.
7. Sdr Saifuddin sebenarnya faham kedudukan QQ, ‘by chance’ dan sebagainya, hanya memberikan peluang kita berbincang lebih lanjut tentangnya. Mungkin Sdr Imakubex dapat menghurai ‘Laws of Uncertainity’ yang berkait dengan Quantum Physics, sebagai lanjutan menguatkan hujjah kenapa ‘by chance’ selalu berlaku. Photon has no mass (which mean it should travel at infinite speed) but it has momentum (making it travel at limited speed). And its a wave and a particle. Cantik sungguh ciptaan Allah, untuk sama-sama kita fikirkan. Selamat berbincang.
The problem with it is simply that probability seems to be inherent in nature; that it is imbedded in nature. An electron can have a probability wave, meaning, it can have a finite probability to be here or there, depending on the eigen function and eigen value. Hence, it is probabilistic in nature. If Quantum Mechanics is fundamental, then the whole of the universe is probabilistic. How, then, are we supposed to reconcile that with our notion of determinism?
Hence, I would like to question that premise. The problem with modern science is that it is based on De Cartes’s philosophy which has been developed into the ideology and world view that is deterministic. Empiricist, instrumentalist, realist, positivist, all adhere to some sort of deterministic philosophy. They reject the notion of metaphysics, even though in physics there are metaphysical assumptions (such as matter, energy, space, time exist. All are metaphysical assumptions. Metaphysics = beyond physics, asking things beyond physics).
I am not saying that it is necessary to dump determinism, mind. But there is a possibility that such a way of thinking are misguided. With regards to causality, please read more on it. Philosophers such as Al Ghazali in his Occationalism has clearly rebutted the notion of necessity in causality. Although still open to debate, there are ways to revive that philosophy.
Dari http://www.iluvislam.com/v1/forum/viewthread.php?forum_id=94&thread_id=5378&pid=70551#post_70551
Atheist kerap menyatakan bahawa alam ini terjadi dengan pure chance, coincidence atau randomness. Kata-kata ini cumalah satu alasan atas ketidakupayaan akal untuk mentafsirkan keseluruhan cara kerja Tuhan.
0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55… adakah ia random? Ya, pada mata seorang tukang kebun, tapi tidak pada mata seorang mathematician. Nombor tersebut adalah Fibonacci number.
3.14159265, adakah ia random? Ya pada mata seorang sasterawan tapi tidak bagi physicist. Ia adalah nilai pi.
Quote:
Randomness is an objective property. Nevertheless, what appears random to one observer may not appear random to another observer. Consider two observers of a sequence of bits, only one of whom has the cryptographic key needed to turn the sequence of bits into a readable message. The message is not random, but is unpredictable for one of the observers. One of the intriguing aspects of random processes is that it is hard to know whether the process is truly random. The observer can always suspect that there is some “key” that unlocks the message.
Sumber:Randomness versus unpredictability
Dari http://msaidhawwa.blogspot.com/2008/06/kembalilah-ke-pangkal-jalan.html
Sebagaimana telah disebutkan sebelumnya, kita, manusia, memang memiliki ‘free will’ sebagai anugerah Tuhan kepada manusia sebagai khalifatullah fil ardhi (khalifah/pemimpin pengganti Tuhan di muka bumi). Namun ‘kehendak bebas’ ini hanya berarti ‘bebas memilih sebuah ketentuan diantara beberapa banyak ketentuan/Qodho Tuhan yang berlaku sebagai Hukum atau Sunnatulloh’. Bebas yang terbatas; bebas dalam keterbatasan dimensi universum Takdir Tuhan belaka (yang mana luas dari universum Takdir ini kita pun belum tahu). Ini adalah ‘peran serta’ manusia dalam menentukan pilihan hidupnya, sebagai sebuah anugerah dari Tuhan. Namun kebebasan ini pun tidak terlepas dari peranan kebebasan umat manusia lainnya, karena, suka atau tidak suka, sadar atau tidak sadar, kita semua terkait dalam sebuah ‘Jejaring Takdir Kehidupan’.
Dari http://azwarti.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/mencoba-memahami-takdir-melalui-akal/ Artikel yang mengancam
Main article: Randomness
In a deterministic universe, based on Newtonian concepts, there is no probability if all conditions are known. In the case of a roulette wheel, if the force of the hand and the period of that force are known, then the number on which the ball will stop would be a certainty. Of course, this also assumes knowledge of inertia and friction of the wheel, weight, smoothness and roundness of the ball, variations in hand speed during the turning and so forth. A probabilistic description can thus be more useful than Newtonian mechanics for analysing the pattern of outcomes of repeated rolls of roulette wheel. Physicists face the same situation in kinetic theory of gases, where the system, while deterministic in principle, is so complex (with the number of molecules typically the order of magnitude of Avogadro constant ) that only statistical description of its properties is feasible.
A revolutionary discovery of 20th century physics was the random character of all physical processes that occur at microscopic scales and are governed by the laws of quantum mechanics. The wave function itself evolves deterministically as long as no observation is made, but, according to the prevailing Copenhagen interpretation, the randomness caused by the wave function collapsing when an observation is made, is fundamental. This means that probability theory is required to describe nature. Others never came to terms with the loss of determinism. Albert Einstein famously remarked in a letter to Max Born: Jedenfalls bin ich überzeugt, daß der Alte nicht würfelt. (I am convinced that God does not play dice). Although alternative viewpoints exist, such as that of quantum decoherence being the cause of an apparent random collapse, at present there is a firm consensus among the physicists that probability theory is necessary to describe quantum phenomena.[citation needed]
[edit] See also
Decision theory
Equiprobable
Fuzzy measure theory
Game theory
Information theory
Important publications in probability
Measure theory
Probabilistic argumentation
Probabilistic logic
Random fields
Random variable
Statistics
List of statistical topics
Stochastic process
Wiener process
Black Swan theory
Calculus of predispositions
The negation of determinism is sometimes called indeterminism.
[edit] Determinism, quantum mechanics and classical physics
Since the beginning of the 20th century, quantum mechanics has revealed previously concealed aspects of events. Newtonian physics, taken in isolation rather than as an approximation to quantum mechanics, depicts a universe in which objects move in perfectly determinative ways. At human scale levels of interaction, Newtonian mechanics gives predictions that in many areas check out as completely perfectible, to the accuracy of measurement. Poorly designed and fabricated guns and ammunition scatter their shots rather widely around the center of a target, and better guns produce tighter patterns. Absolute knowledge of the forces accelerating a bullet should produce absolutely reliable predictions of its path, or so was thought. However, knowledge is never absolute in practice and the equations of Newtonian mechanics can exhibit sensitive dependence on initial conditions, meaning small errors in knowledge of initial conditions can result in arbitrarily large deviations from predicted behavior.
At atomic scales the paths of objects can only be predicted in a probabilistic way. The paths may not be exactly specified in a full quantum description of the particles; “path” is a classical concept which quantum particles do not exactly possess. The probability arises from the measurement of the perceived path of the particle. In some cases, a quantum particle may trace an exact path, and the probability of finding the particles in that path is one. The quantum development is at least as predictable as the classical motion, but it describes wave functions that cannot be easily expressed in ordinary language. In double-slit experiments, light is fired singly through a double-slit apparatus at a distant screen and does not arrive at a single point, nor do the photons arrive in a scattered pattern analogous to bullets fired by a fixed gun at a distant target. Instead, the light arrives in varying concentrations at widely separated points, and the distribution of its collisions can be calculated reliably. In that sense the behavior of light in this apparatus is deterministic, but there is no way to predict where in the resulting interference pattern an individual photon will make its contribution (see Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle).
Some have argued that, in addition to the conditions humans can observe and the laws we can deduce, there are hidden factors or “hidden variables” that determine absolutely in which order photons reach the detector screen. They argue that the course of the universe is absolutely determined, but that humans are screened from knowledge of the determinative factors. So, they say, it only appears that things proceed in a merely probabilistically-determinative way. In actuality, they proceed in an absolutely deterministic way. Although matters are still subject to some measure of dispute, quantum mechanics makes statistical predictions which would be violated if some local hidden variables existed. There have been a number of experiments to verify those predictions, and so far they do not appear to be violated, though many physicists believe better experiments are needed to conclusively settle the question. (See Bell test experiments.) It is possible, however, to augment quantum mechanics with non-local hidden variables to achieve a deterministic theory that is in agreement with experiment. An example is the Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics.
On the macro scale it can matter very much whether a bullet arrives at a certain point at a certain time, as snipers are well aware; there are analogous quantum events that have macro- as well as quantum-level consequences. It is easy to contrive situations in which the arrival of an electron at a screen at a certain point and time would trigger one event and its arrival at another point would trigger an entirely different event. (See Schrödinger’s cat.)
Even before the laws of quantum mechanics were fully developed, the phenomenon of radioactivity posed a challenge to determinism. A gram of uranium-238, a commonly occurring radioactive substance, contains some 2.5 x 1021 atoms. By all tests known to science these atoms are identical and indistinguishable. Yet about 12600 times a second one of the atoms in that gram will decay, giving off an alpha particle. This decay does not depend on external stimulus and no extant theory of physics predicts when any given atom will decay, with realistically obtainable knowledge. The uranium found on earth is thought to have been synthesized during a supernova explosion that occurred roughly 5 billion years ago. For determinism to hold, every uranium atom must contain some internal “clock” that specifies the exact time it will decay.[citation needed] And somehow the laws of physics must specify exactly how those clocks were set as each uranium atom was formed during the supernova collapse.
Exposure to alpha radiation can cause cancer. For this to happen, at some point a specific alpha particle must alter some chemical reaction in a cell in a way that results in a mutation. Since molecules are in constant thermal motion, the exact timing of the radioactive decay that produced the fatal alpha particle matters. If probabilistically determined events do have an impact on the macro events — such as when a person who could have been historically important dies in youth of a cancer caused by a random mutation — then the course of history is not determined from the dawn of time.
The time dependent Schrödinger equation gives the first time derivative of the quantum state. That is, it explicitly and uniquely predicts the development of the wave function with time.
Salam
Occasionalism menjadikan Allah sebagai pengurus kepada cause dan effect, namun apakah kelebihannya berbanding determinism?
Determinism mirip ke arah qadariah, sementara Occasionalism memberikan pilihan kepada mahluk membuat pilihan dengan apabila ‘kebetulan’ akan mendatangkan hasil.
Zat Allah di ‘luar’ dimensi ruang-masa, tetapi kuasaNya hasil dari tajjali zatNya menguasai segala yang ada di Alam, termasuk yang paling asas pengendalian dan penguat-kuasaan Qodo’ dan Qadar.
Ibarat magnet yang diletakkan di bawah meja (tak nampak) tetapi boleh mengerakkan paku (di atas menja) kerana kuasa magnetnya hadir.
Dari http://www.iluvislam.com/v1/forum/viewthread.php?forum_id=94&thread_id=5378&pid=71347#post_71347
17. Apabila ilmu Kalam berkembang dengan pesat dan teori atom dibangunkan, hukum sebab-musabab (causality) telah dikaji dengan mendalam sehingga timbul teori Kesempenaan (Occasionalisme) bagi menerangkan fenomena yang berlaku di luar hukum tabii seperti mukjizat dan karomah. Malah bentuk teori Occasionalisme ini yang digunakan oleh Imam al-Ghazali dalam buku Tahafut Al-Falasifahnya untuk menerangkan hukum sebab-musabab dalam alam semesta terus kepada sebab asal iaitu Allah s.w.t, namun telah memberikan asas penting dalam bidang Mekanik Kuantum iaitu sifat jirim dan jirim itu sendiri terpisah, hanya bersatu apabila pengukuran (pencerapan) dilaksanakan.
Dari http://sharudin.wordpress.com/2008/08/06/s020-dari-blog-ummahonline/
Dr. Bruno Abd-al-Haqq Guiderdoni is the director of the Observatory of Lyon (France). His main research field is in galaxy formation and evolution. He has published more than 100 papers and has organized several
international conferences on these issues. Guiderdoni is one of the referent experts on Islam in France and has published 50 papers on Islamic theology and mysticism. He was in charge of a French television program called Knowing Islam from 1993 to 1999 and is now the director of the Islamic Institute for Advanced Studies.
IslamOnline.net’s Motaz Al-Khateeb interviewed Guiderdoni on his views regarding the interaction between science and Islam.
Dari http://science-islam.net/article.php3?id_article=618&lang=en
Boleh tak kita bincang tentang idea Malim Ghozali Pk dalam bukunya Kebenaran Mutlak: Memahami Kesempurnaan yang cuplikannya ada dalam Dewan Kosmik Julai 2008, kolum falsafah saintis bertajuk
PRINSIP KETENTUAN AL-QURAN LAWAN PRINSIP KETIDAKTENTUAN MANUSIA.
Bukunya saya belum baca, tapi daripada artikel tu banyak perkara yang menarik untuk dibincangkan antaranya
-Einstein dan cosmological constantnya ,apa yang sebenarnya berlaku?
-Prinsip Ketakpastian Heisenberg sebenarnya memmberitahu kita yang manusia tak dapat mencerap satu zarah pun (momentum dan kedudukannya serentak) dengan tepat dan pasti, atau memberitahu bahawa alam ini dicipta dengan ketakpastian? Adakah dengan percaya pada prinsip ini dapat melemahkan iman dan merosakkan aqidah?
-Isu bilangan planet surah yusuf ayat 4 dan pengguguran pluto oleh IAU daripada senarai planet di sistem suria. Benarkah ada agenda barat untuk menentang al-Quran disini?
Banyak lagi persoalan yang rasanya perlu dikupas. Sesiapa yang dah baca buku tu tolonglah ye..
Ulasan buku. Boleh klik;-
http://www.ipij.info/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id=422&forum=21&post_id=4237
http://www.ipij.info/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?
Dalam rentetan hujahan logik menuju rumusan, penulis mengemukakan persoalan dulu, seperti `Apakah sebenarnya wujud infiniti seperti dihuraikan ahli matematik?’ Jawapan penulis sebelum berhujah ialah “Saya mengatakan tidak”.
Kemudian, `Dapatkah kewujudan Allah SWT dibuktikan secara matematik?’ Kemudian dengan tegas penulis menjawab: “Saya memilih untuk mengatakan ya”.
Yang satu lagi “Adakah alam ghaib berlawanan dengan sains moden?”. Sudah pasti tidak kerana hujah penulis “Sains dan fizik menyokong kuat kenapa beriman dengan yang ghaib diletakkan di tempat teratas oleh Allah Yang Maha Berkuasa”.
Alasannya terletak pada kesimpulan yang sudah diterima bahawa ‘matematik, mekanik kuantum, ilmu falak, dan semua bidang sains adalah sebahagian daripada dinamika fizik atau dalam perkataan mudah adalah fragmen daripada gambar yang sebenarnya’.
Justeru, usaha paling mudah mencari Allah SWT ialah dengan mengenali-Nya, sekali gus memahami pengertian ciptaan diri manusia itu sendiri serta hubungan mereka dengan-Nya. Allah SWT menyebutkan kedekatan Dia dengan manusia menerusi surah Qaaf ayat 16 yang bermaksud: Dan sesungguhnya Kami telah menciptakan manusia dan mengetahui apa yang dibisikkan oleh hatinya, dan Kami lebih dekat kepadanya daripada urat lehernya’.
Ertinya `Jika manusia dianggap sebagai imej Allah SWT, tidaklah sesulit mana hendak memahami kewujudan-Nya. Apa juga yang berada di bumi dan di langit hanya pengukuhan kewujudan-Nya. Semuanya adalah hakikat isyarat serta petanda Allah SWT’.
Kata penulis lagi: “Semua makhluk sama ada di langit mahupun di bumi menyatakan pujian kepada Allah Maha Pencipta, tanpa sebarang alasan”.
Dari http://www.ipij.info/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id=422&forum=21&post_id=4237
An electron in an atom could jump up from one fixed orbit to an orbit of higher energy, but only if it absorbed energy precisely equal to the difference of energy between the orbits. Likewise, an electron could jump down to an open lower-energy orbit by giving off energy precisely equal to the energy drop. These two events are the origins of the so-called absorption and emission spectra of the elements–their characteristic colors.
The quantum behavior of electrons in atoms contradicted not only the “classical” mechanics of Sir Isaac Newton, but also the classical electromagnetic theory, which was developed in the nineteenth century and was spectacularly successful for describing light and radio waves. Even worse, while an electron orbited in a quantum energy state, it did not radiate away its energy as the electromagnetic theory required. Instead, as Bohr postulated but could not explain, each quantum orbit could be considered a “stationary state,” with energy losses or gains occurring only when the electrons jumped between the stationary
http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p05c.htm
[...] di tahap Ahsanul Takwim) hanya mampu memiliki sedikit sahaja dari ilmuNya, segalanya menjadi ketidak-pastian. Ilmu sains merangkumkan ini di dalam ‘Theory of [...]
[...] Allah menciptakan sesuatu dengan Kadar. Apabila kadar tertentu yang telah ditetapkan sejak Azali, untuk sesuatu berlaku, maka ianya tidak [...]