1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A 2020 vision for Snowflake Multiple Symmetries

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by Unes, Mar 20, 2020.

?
  1. This article makes sense.

    1 vote(s)
    16.7%
  2. This article does not make any sense.

    5 vote(s)
    83.3%
  1. Unes

    Unes Active Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    321
    Ratings:
    +26
    The puzzle of Multiple Symmetries

    in each Snowflake Structure

    A close-up pictures of snowflakes show that there are many tiny blemishes and deformity in the structure of a snowflake, which they have nothing to do with any symmetry, but in our human’s scale we do not see these tiny flaws and blemishes, and we only see multiple symmetrical designs in the beautiful shapes of the snowflakes structures.


    Snowflakes-Closeup-2020.jpg


    From these observations we can conclude that:

    a. These tiny blemishes in the structures of the snowflakes prove that vapor water molecules can get attached randomly and freely to any part of the snowflake, and there is no known restriction or limitation in this process.

    b. In the development of a snowflake there is no biological DNA that it could control, or dictate, or force, a growing segment on each arm, to grow in a specific shape, that it would get the same shape in similar segment, on the other arms. Each segment grows totally independent from each other, and they grow randomly, freely, and without any blueprint. The randomness in this process does not produce any similar shape in the arms.

    c. It is told that at the beginning in the formation of the snowflake, at first a seed in the form of a hexagon shape diamond dust is formed. After few thousands water molecules get attached to that diamond dust seed in the three directions of x, y, and z (just in that tiny center there are more than 10^15 water molecules.), then that diamond dust seed gets buried in that piled-up center, and the shape of the diamond dust seed cannot influence the shape of the developing arms in any form or shape. The photographs of emerging snowflakes show that arms do not grow simultaneously; each arm grows at a different rate; some arms grow faster than the others, just this very point alone proves that there is nothing to force these growing arms to get similar shape; the randomness absolutely forbids the formation of the similar arms in these conditions, but surprisingly we do see many symmetrical similarities get developed in these very random processes.

    Snowflakes-Closeup-2020-B.jpg

    So, the existence of these many symmetries in the developments of each snowflake points to the influence of a Conscious Designer in the development of these multiple symmetrical shapes. This Conscious Force exists in the fabric of the Nature, and its influence can be recognized in these kinds of phenomena. This recognition is very similar to our other discoveries; like the discovery of the planet Neptune, or the discovery of neutrino, and many other phenomena. Of course the element of the Conscious behavior distinguishes this Force to be very different from all the other phenomena.

    The existing claim that the atomic structure of the vapor water molecule is responsible for the formation of multiple symmetries in the structures of the snowflakes, is as bogus as that I claim the atomic structures in the ink molecules has produced all the masterpiece paintings in our art museums.

    Scientists have been trying very hard to explain the multiple symmetrical shapes in the structure of each snowflake, but as you can see all their hard efforts have fallen way too short explaining this natural phenomenon. In fact scientists have been desperate trying to avoid acknowledging the influence of this Active Conscious Force in these natural processes; but the influence of this Conscious Force in this Natural phenomenon is very clear and it is glaring at us without any ambiguity, and only a stubborn person can avoid acknowledging this shining evidence.
     
    #1 Unes, Mar 20, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. Eddi

    Eddi reformed crackpot

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    2,455
    Ratings:
    +1,857
    Religion:
    Progressive Christianity
    I thought this thread was about delicate and easily offended young people

    Edit: I voted that it makes sense, but I doubt a "conscious force" is truly at work
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  3. ratiocinator

    ratiocinator Lightly seared on the reality grill.

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    3,319
    Ratings:
    +2,196
    Religion:
    none
    Not an expert but it looks to me from a few searches that the process is pretty well understood. However, even if it was a complete mystery, a concious designer doesn't follow at all. That's basically an argument from ignorance.

    The existence of an unknown does not make your unsupported guess or faith based beliefs any more believable.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. danieldemol

    danieldemol Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    4,603
    Ratings:
    +4,108
    Religion:
    Spiritual but not religious
    I voted this article does not make any sense.

    A) Because it is argument from ignorance (I don’t know how snow flakes form does not equal that they can have no natural means of formation)

    B) Because the presence of flaws in their formation points at best to a flawed designer, which I suspect is not what you want us to believe about the designer.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  5. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,607
    Ratings:
    +10,699
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    There is a simplified explanation here:
    Symmetry of Snowflakes

    But, as others have pointed out, there a very tired old non-sequitur in what you say. The existence of symmetries in nature motivates the scientist to understand the underlying physical principles, not to throw up his hands in baffled wonderment and say, "It must be a Conscious Designer".

    You are trying a God-of-the-Gaps gambit, in other words: "We can't understand it at the moment ergo Goddidit."

    "God of the Gaps", by the way, was a phrase invented by a Methodist lay preacher called Charles Coulson, whose lectures (on mathematics for chemists) I attended at university.;)

    P.S. I suggest you look carefully at the beautifully clear picture of a snowflake in the linked article. You will be able to see that it is NOT exactly symmetrical at all. There is a 6-fold symmetry in the directions of growth (because chemistry ;)) but not the extent of growth at the detailed level.
     
    #5 exchemist, Mar 20, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
  6. dfnj

    dfnj Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,276
    Ratings:
    +1,565
    Religion:
    My Own
    Pluto is a planet!

    Whoops, wrong forum...
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. Cooky

    Cooky Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    11,639
    Ratings:
    +2,357
    Religion:
    Catholic
    The claim that "the atomic structure of the vapor water molecule is responsible for the formation of multiple symmetries in the structures of the snowflakes" seems incomplete as an explanation.

    ...Those are just words. It doesn't explain *how* it works because it doesn't describe the forces that are involved. It would be equally as valid to say "because".
     
  8. Cooky

    Cooky Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    11,639
    Ratings:
    +2,357
    Religion:
    Catholic
    What prevents snowflakes from bifurcating in random directions?
     
  9. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,607
    Ratings:
    +10,699
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    That's quite a bit of chemistry, but it results from firstly the shape of the water molecule and secondly the lowest energy orientations for water molecules to take up when forming a crystal, which, thirdly, are determined by hydrogen bonding. It turns out that the structure of the resulting lattice of molecules has hexagonal symmetry. The relevant passage in Wiki on this is here, though I don't pretend it is especially easy reading or a self-contained full explanation:
    QUOTE
    The accepted crystal structure of ordinary ice was first proposed by Linus Pauling in 1935. The structure of ice Ih is roughly one of crinkled planes composed of tessellating hexagonal rings, with an oxygen atom on each vertex, and the edges of the rings formed by hydrogen bonds. The planes alternate in an ABAB pattern, with B planes being reflections of the A planes along the same axes as the planes themselves.[6] The distance between oxygen atoms along each bond is about 275 pm and is the same between any two bonded oxygen atoms in the lattice. The angle between bonds in the crystal lattice is very close to the tetrahedral angle of 109.5°, which is also quite close to the angle between hydrogen atoms in the water molecule (in the gas phase), which is 105°. This tetrahedral bonding angle of the water molecule essentially accounts for the unusually low density of the crystal lattice – it is beneficial for the lattice to be arranged with tetrahedral angles even though there is an energy penalty in the increased volume of the crystal lattice. As a result, the large hexagonal rings leave almost enough room for another water molecule to exist inside. This gives naturally occurring ice its unique property of being less dense than its liquid form. The tetrahedral-angled hydrogen-bonded hexagonal rings are also the mechanism that causes liquid water to be densest at 4 °C. Close to 0 °C, tiny hexagonal ice Ih-like lattices form in liquid water, with greater frequency closer to 0 °C. This effect decreases the density of the water, causing it to be densest at 4 °C when the structures form infrequently.
    UNQUOTE

    From : Ice Ih - Wikipedia

    So that gives the symmetry. The reason for the tree-like shape (they are called "dendritic" crystals, from the Greek for tree, dendros) is that the tendency for molecules to add onto the lattice structure is greater at the tips than on flat edges. I think there can can be several reasons for this, but I don't remember them. I think it may be something to do with the structure at the tip being more "incomplete" than along a straight edge, and therefore being at higher energy, which can be lowered by adding molecules at that point. Or something. But I'd need to dig into it to find out.

    Sometimes the shortest questions have the longest answers.;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,840
    Ratings:
    +8,029
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    The defects in the structure of snowflakes are due to dust and chemical impurities. The variation in the snowflakes follows a fractal pattern, and is not random. Yes, no two snowflakes are alike (almost.all), but the pattern of the design of snowflakes is naturally symmetrical the angles of the bonding of water molecules.
     
    #10 shunyadragon, Mar 20, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2020
  11. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,607
    Ratings:
    +10,699
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Just a short addendum to post 9. There is a layman's explanation of the two modes of crystal growth, via branching and via facets, on this link, from Caltech: Snowflake Branching

    Suffice it to say that the scientists have NOT thrown up their hands in baffled wonderment and invoked a Conscious Designer: they have studied the phenomenon, in exquisite detail, and have a pretty good understanding of the process. So the conclusion of the OP is bunk (as most of us knew anyway:D).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,840
    Ratings:
    +8,029
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Not the "conscious force" at work here, but an "unconscious force." where the mind has been disengaged with reality.
     
Loading...