On the mathematics of the universe

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 16951
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 99 times

On the mathematics of the universe

Post #1

Post by JoeyKnothead »

From Post 136 here:

In response to the following quote...
Again, "creation cosmology" has a fatal flaw in that the postulated entity doing the creating has yet to be found or shown to exist in any form. So it is a hypothesis without (as of yet) any supporting physical evidence or convincing theoretical backing.
Our claimant declares...
EarthScienceguy wrote: Mathematically there is no other solution to the origin of the universe.
(My emboldinating to get at the claim this OP seeks to address)

For debate:

Please offer some means to confirm a mathematical calculation provides confirmation of a god creating the universe.
Some say it came from Memphis down in Tennessee
Or it drifted in from Georgia about 1953
Just as long as it's greasy, as long as it's fast
As long as it's pumpin' honey, it's gonna last

It's the hillbilly rock, beat it with a drum
Playin' them guitars like shootin' from a gun
Keepin' up the rhythm, steady as a clock
Doin' a little thing called the hillbilly rock
- Marty Stuart

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 16951
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 99 times

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #2

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Bueller?

Bueller?

Ya see folks, so often theists are em great at making em claims, it's just they so often struggle em to see or understand when they gettem them their claims challenged.


Conclusions?

The liar lies, and the preacher preaches.
Some say it came from Memphis down in Tennessee
Or it drifted in from Georgia about 1953
Just as long as it's greasy, as long as it's fast
As long as it's pumpin' honey, it's gonna last

It's the hillbilly rock, beat it with a drum
Playin' them guitars like shootin' from a gun
Keepin' up the rhythm, steady as a clock
Doin' a little thing called the hillbilly rock
- Marty Stuart

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 7768
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 389 times
Contact:

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #3

Post by William »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Thu May 13, 2021 9:14 am From Post 136 here:

In response to the following quote...
Again, "creation cosmology" has a fatal flaw in that the postulated entity doing the creating has yet to be found or shown to exist in any form. So it is a hypothesis without (as of yet) any supporting physical evidence or convincing theoretical backing.
Our claimant declares...
EarthScienceguy wrote: Mathematically there is no other solution to the origin of the universe.
(My emboldinating to get at the claim this OP seeks to address)

For debate:

Please offer some means to confirm a mathematical calculation provides confirmation of a god creating the universe.
An assumed Creator of this Universe might leave tell-tale signs that the Universe is a created thing. In that, mathematics does indeed point to a mind at work behind the scene...certainly the process [Universe] can be reduced to mathematical equations and clearly there is encoding in the formations.

Have you seen what vibrations at certain frequencies produce when sand [rock] is used? It is called Cymatics - and is science.


When I observe a Galaxy, I wonder about Cymatics...but sure enough, there is evidence of math within this Universe, which is a fair enough indication we exist within a created thing...and thus "Creator".

also of interest re connecting the dots...


User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Under Probation
Posts: 16951
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 99 times

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #4

Post by JoeyKnothead »

Edits cause my formatting got all wonky...
William wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 4:10 pm An assumed Creator of this Universe might leave tell-tale signs that the Universe is a created thing. In that, mathematics does indeed point to a mind at work behind the scene...certainly the process (Universe) can be reduced to mathematical equations and clearly there is encoding in the formations.

Have you seen what vibrations at certain frequencies produce when sand (rock) is used? It is called Cymatics - and is science.
Things act according to their properties, no gods required.
When I observe a Galaxy, I wonder about Cymatics...but sure enough, there is evidence of math within this Universe, which is a fair enough indication we exist within a created thing...and thus "Creator".
'Math' is a tool we use to quantify our observations. There's just not a whole bunch of 2s out there making little baby 4s.

My point here is that our observations show that things act according to their properties.

To then impose a 'creator' is not supported by simply noticing that fact.
Some say it came from Memphis down in Tennessee
Or it drifted in from Georgia about 1953
Just as long as it's greasy, as long as it's fast
As long as it's pumpin' honey, it's gonna last

It's the hillbilly rock, beat it with a drum
Playin' them guitars like shootin' from a gun
Keepin' up the rhythm, steady as a clock
Doin' a little thing called the hillbilly rock
- Marty Stuart

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 7768
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 389 times
Contact:

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #5

Post by William »

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #4]
Things act according to their properties, no gods required.
Point being, we do not know that 'gods' are not part of the reason why "things act according to their properties."
'Math' is a tool we use to quantify our observations. There's just not a whole bunch of 2s out there making little baby 4s.
Yes there are. The Universe is literally made up of such things.
To then impose a 'creator' is not supported by simply noticing that fact.
I am not 'imposing' anything. I am simply pointing out the logic therein. It is noticed. What is doing the noticing? Consciousness is doing the noticing. What is "consciousness"? Joey argues that it is an emergent property of brains. Is Joey 'imposing' this belief upon William? No?

Then "why" [William asks himself] does Joey interpret William's argument as 'imposing' something [unwelcome] into Joey's world view. Is Joey's WV simply a fortified position Joey is defending from the ramparts?
Is Joey and his thought-fort, a "thing act according to its properties" where 'no gods are required'?

Image

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9086
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #6

Post by Bust Nak »

William wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 4:10 pm An assumed Creator of this Universe might leave tell-tale signs that the Universe is a created thing. In that, mathematics does indeed point to a mind at work behind the scene...certainly the process [Universe] can be reduced to mathematical equations and clearly there is encoding in the formations.
Isn't that backwards? The usual reason for thinking there is a someone who has caused an event is that we don't see an obvious naturalistic cause. Seeing how such patterns are produce by mere mathematics is all the more reason to dismiss "a mind at work" by my reckoning.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 7768
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 389 times
Contact:

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #7

Post by William »

Bust Nak wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 5:50 am
William wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 4:10 pm An assumed Creator of this Universe might leave tell-tale signs that the Universe is a created thing. In that, mathematics does indeed point to a mind at work behind the scene...certainly the process [Universe] can be reduced to mathematical equations and clearly there is encoding in the formations.
Isn't that backwards?
No.
The usual reason for thinking there is a someone who has caused an event is that we don't see an obvious naturalistic cause.
How 'usual' is that? And why think that IF the universe is a creation, that The Creator(s) are not a naturalistic cause?

Seeing how such patterns are produce by mere mathematics is all the more reason to dismiss "a mind at work" by my reckoning.
Not by mine.

And it isn't 'merely mathematics'. Why reduce something as 'mere', simply because it might point to us being within a creation?

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9086
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #8

Post by Bust Nak »

William wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:29 pm How 'usual' is that?
Every time? Presumably "ghosts" isn't the default answer when you see a smashed vase. First we look for open windows or maybe the cat before resorting to the conclusion that there is some hidden forces at work.
And why think that IF the universe is a creation, that The Creator(s) are not a naturalistic cause?
I don't think that. If the universe is indeed a creation, then the creator(s) has to be naturalistic.
And it isn't 'merely mathematics'. Why reduce something as 'mere', simply because it might point to us being within a creation?
I use "mere" because there is no intent required, just pure mechanical process. Intent is extra baggage.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 7768
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 135 times
Been thanked: 389 times
Contact:

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #9

Post by William »

Bust Nak wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:44 pm
William wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:29 pm How 'usual' is that?
Every time? Presumably "ghosts" isn't the default answer when you see a smashed vase. First we look for open windows or maybe the cat before resorting to the conclusion that there is some hidden forces at work.
the 'open window/cat' represents 'the brain created consciousness' whereas "Ghosts" are more accurately a description for consciousnesses, even if brains did create them...perhaps even especially if that were the case.
And why think that IF the universe is a creation, that The Creator(s) are not a naturalistic cause?
I don't think that. If the universe is indeed a creation, then the creator(s) has to be naturalistic.
I agree. Trying to force a supernatural creator into the mix is unnecessary. Separating creator from creation is therefore unhelpful.
And it isn't 'merely mathematics'. Why reduce something as 'mere', simply because it might point to us being within a creation?
I use "mere" because there is no intent required, just pure mechanical process. Intent is extra baggage.
The word itself is based on intent - a particular intent to make something sound less than it really is.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9086
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: On the mathematics of the universe

Post #10

Post by Bust Nak »

William wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:55 pm the 'open window/cat' represents 'the brain created consciousness' whereas "Ghosts" are more accurately a description for consciousnesses, even if brains did create them...perhaps even especially if that were the case.
I don't understand what you are trying to say here. How is a pure natural processes represent consciousness? Why would you conclude that someone did something where there is a natural explanation for it?
The word itself is based on intent - a particular intent to make something sound less than it really is.
I have an intent when I use that word, sure, but why this and not "a particular intent to highlight the insignificance of something that it really is?" Intent behind mathematics is what I was referring to as excess baggage.

Post Reply