Heisenberg's principle is only true for finite beings who cannot omnisciently measure like god can, if we were god and could measure things without effecting them, i.e. we didn't have to hit or break apart things to detect other things. Then their positions were always absolute but beyond our technology to make it clear how they are behaving, taking any scientific investigation that relies on exposing nature through cause and effect on other material objects has no meaning for an omnipotent being who *sustains* and *controls* nature, if nature is sustained by gods power, then it's also clear that natures very substance is an extension of god himself.Heisenberg.Q: what is the minimum entity needed to be resurrected on Judgment day - to have successfull resurrection? Heres some possibilities

- The same atoms in the same positions as the deceased brain.

- Different atoms in the same positions as the deceased brain.

- Different atoms in the different positions as the deceased brain.

For instance:

In quantum physics, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, sometimes called the Heisenberg indeterminacy principle, expresses a

**limitation on accuracy of (nearly) simultaneous measurement of observables such as the position and the momentum of a particle.**It furthermore precisely quantifies the imprecision by providing a lower bound (greater than zero) for the product of the dispersions of the measurements. For instance, consider repeated trials of the following experiment: By an operational process, a particle is prepared in a definite state and two successive measurements are performed on the particle. The first one measures its position and the second immediately after measures its momentum. Suppose furthermore that the operational process of preparing the state is such that on every trial the first measurement yields the same value, or at least a distribution of values with a very small dispersion dp around a value p. Then the second measurement will have a distribution of values whose dispersion dq is at least inversely proportional to dp.

Then there is dispute:

Einstein was convinced that this interpretation was in error. His reasoning was that all previously known probability distributions arose from deterministic events. The distribution of a flipped coin or a rolled dice can be described with a probability distribution (50% heads, 50% tails). But this does not mean that their physical motions are unpredictable. Ordinary mechanics can be used to calculate exactly how each coin will land, if the forces acting on it are known. And the heads/tails distribution will still line up with the probability distribution (given random initial forces).

Einstein assumed that there are similar hidden variables in quantum mechanics which underlie the observed probabilities.

**Edited by mordecai, 06 June 2005 - 02:44 PM.**