dfnj
Well-Known Member
I recently watched a video on the golden ratio which has to do with a sequence of numbers. This sequence is seen a lot in nature because of the way cells grow and divide. It turns out as things grown the cell counts follow a Fibonacci sequence. Things express a kind of fractal image in nature. An example is a tree. As the branches grow the smaller branches look like a miniature version of the whole thing. This a very popular aesthetic for most people because it expresses a kind of natural recursion we see in nature.
So the question what does this mean. It is somewhat surprising how nature is relentless is following patterns that can be represented with mathematics. This has always astonished me how consistent nature can be. And there are two camps in response to how nature behaves.
One side, the philosophical materialists conclude since nature follows patterns that can be represented, therefore, there is no God but just mathematics. I don't see how they can make such an enormous leap. Even further they claim because nature's patterns of behavior can be represented with mathematics there's no grand purpose to the existence of the Universe. Again, I don't see the connection or how someone can come to this conclusion.
And on the other side is the creationists. This is the opinion or point of view expressed in the referenced video below. This camp makes the argument since nature consistently follows patterns that can be represented that this is evidence of some grand conspiracy and this is proof for the existence of a grand intelligence in the Universe which is God. Again, I think this is also a huge leap to come to this conclusion because as far as I can tell it's just a pattern of behavior. I'm not sure it really means much.
I would like to suggest there is a third possibility. This third possibility does not support either camp or way of thinking so relax if you feel your dogma is under attack. I was just thinking how strange our Universe is in terms of how everything is NOT more symmetrical and geometric. If fact there's probably not two perfectly straight parallel lines anywhere on the planet. Nature has this amazing ability to introduce originality or variability to how things behave in very subtle ways.
I like to think of this third way of thinking about nature as kind of like a rogue wave. Google rogue waves if you are not familiar with the concept they are quite spectacular. I think everything in nature is analog with waves of energy bouncing every which way and in every direction. At any scale of existence waves of energy sometimes converge in such a way it results in disturbances in reality at the higher or lower scale of focus. This results is all kinds of unimaginable consequences at the macro level we experience.
I think for the two camps defending their precious dogmas there needs to be some humility. On the philosophical materialists side just because you have a mathematical equation representing nature's behaviors doesn't mean anything. You can't conclude you "know" anything about nature simply by putting mathematics to a pattern. If you really want to impress people then explain why the laws of physics show up in nature. What is IT that governs the laws. Otherwise, humble yourself. You are just a glorified number cruncher and nothing more. And given the way nature really behaves in reality we do NOT live in a clockwork Universe with hard determinism. Unless you can predict experimental error you really do not understand what is going on completely and accurately.
And on the other side, for the creationists, the Universe is not governed by perfection. I would argue we live in Universe governed by imperfection. As what always seems to be the case. We have absolutely no evidence, not a single shred, a majority of the people would consider is valid evidence for the existence of God. Stop reaching for something that doesn't exist. People have faith precisely because there is no evidence. The only credible evidence I can see for the existence of God is ALL of existence. As far as I can tell God is choice not based on reason. If God were choice based on reason then it would not be a choice but a decision. If creationists are looking for some magical way to turn their faith from a choice to a decision I don't think it will ever exist.
I think the best definition for the word God is God is the force in our Universe that keeps our full understanding of nature's behaviors always just one step beyond our comprehension.
So the question what does this mean. It is somewhat surprising how nature is relentless is following patterns that can be represented with mathematics. This has always astonished me how consistent nature can be. And there are two camps in response to how nature behaves.
One side, the philosophical materialists conclude since nature follows patterns that can be represented, therefore, there is no God but just mathematics. I don't see how they can make such an enormous leap. Even further they claim because nature's patterns of behavior can be represented with mathematics there's no grand purpose to the existence of the Universe. Again, I don't see the connection or how someone can come to this conclusion.
And on the other side is the creationists. This is the opinion or point of view expressed in the referenced video below. This camp makes the argument since nature consistently follows patterns that can be represented that this is evidence of some grand conspiracy and this is proof for the existence of a grand intelligence in the Universe which is God. Again, I think this is also a huge leap to come to this conclusion because as far as I can tell it's just a pattern of behavior. I'm not sure it really means much.
I would like to suggest there is a third possibility. This third possibility does not support either camp or way of thinking so relax if you feel your dogma is under attack. I was just thinking how strange our Universe is in terms of how everything is NOT more symmetrical and geometric. If fact there's probably not two perfectly straight parallel lines anywhere on the planet. Nature has this amazing ability to introduce originality or variability to how things behave in very subtle ways.
I like to think of this third way of thinking about nature as kind of like a rogue wave. Google rogue waves if you are not familiar with the concept they are quite spectacular. I think everything in nature is analog with waves of energy bouncing every which way and in every direction. At any scale of existence waves of energy sometimes converge in such a way it results in disturbances in reality at the higher or lower scale of focus. This results is all kinds of unimaginable consequences at the macro level we experience.
I think for the two camps defending their precious dogmas there needs to be some humility. On the philosophical materialists side just because you have a mathematical equation representing nature's behaviors doesn't mean anything. You can't conclude you "know" anything about nature simply by putting mathematics to a pattern. If you really want to impress people then explain why the laws of physics show up in nature. What is IT that governs the laws. Otherwise, humble yourself. You are just a glorified number cruncher and nothing more. And given the way nature really behaves in reality we do NOT live in a clockwork Universe with hard determinism. Unless you can predict experimental error you really do not understand what is going on completely and accurately.
And on the other side, for the creationists, the Universe is not governed by perfection. I would argue we live in Universe governed by imperfection. As what always seems to be the case. We have absolutely no evidence, not a single shred, a majority of the people would consider is valid evidence for the existence of God. Stop reaching for something that doesn't exist. People have faith precisely because there is no evidence. The only credible evidence I can see for the existence of God is ALL of existence. As far as I can tell God is choice not based on reason. If God were choice based on reason then it would not be a choice but a decision. If creationists are looking for some magical way to turn their faith from a choice to a decision I don't think it will ever exist.
I think the best definition for the word God is God is the force in our Universe that keeps our full understanding of nature's behaviors always just one step beyond our comprehension.