Does the existence of physical laws that govern the world prove the existence of a creator?

Question

Humans observe their surroundings and make conclusions about physical laws.

As such, without the laws of physics we cannot make distinct generalizations and would have to constantly renew our data because of the non stability of things.

Does the existence of a stable framework, that governs all living things, i.e. a set of laws for existence, prove the existence of an awareness that has created the laws in the first place?

by 'prove' I mean making a logical deduction.

Even chance is governed by laws.

So if laws came about by chance..

why dont they change by chance..

men cannot have babies...do you see this changing anytime soon? a couple of billion years?

I thought my sarcasm in the billion year thing was highly obvious

Answer 1

This is a highly debated topic exactly because it is impossible to prove the views of either side. However, to answer your question directly, I would say no it doesn't. I'll give you examples.

Say you believe in an omniscient being that created the universe. While this is a possible explanation, there is an enormous flaw in it: how did the creator come into existence out of nowhere? There had to be a time in history when there was literally nothing ... right?

Then, say you believe there is no creator and the universe just came into existence out of nowhere. This has a very large flaw in it as well. Science has shown us time and time again that energy (matter) can neither be created nor destroyed. Aside from that, can you imagine that such a complex system working in perfect harmony came into existence out of nowhere? I sure can't.

Personally, I believe we as a species aren't smart enough to understand how we came into existence. Everything we do on this planet is based on intuition and experience. As such, it is nearly impossible for us to grasp the bigger picture which probably is nothing like what we have experienced on our relatively tiny planet.

I hope that answers your question.

Answer 2

Even in the accepted Laws of Physics there is always uncertainty, and there is no such thing as a stable framework because the accepted scientific laws always change with the introduction of new data (remeber that scientists before 1200AD belived the universe revolved around the earth and created laws based on that). That is why Laws are based on reprodution of set variables and do not apply to everything. There in no conclusive Law that governs all part of physics. Scientist still have no clue what exactly goes on inside the human brain. In space, many of the Laws of Physics have to modified in order to work properly. And with the introduction of String Theory, there is even more doubt as to what is controling the physical forces. But it is the inclusion of doubt in a system that has been proven true for earth is what allows me to believe that there is some other force out there other than what we know. And I use the term "other force" loosly; it could some divine power, or some exponentially huge creature playing with us in his petry dish, or a new type of physics.
As for the the evolution of humans, if thats even how we came about, there is very little evidence to say that males didnt bear children at some point, (scientist still have very little idea what function an apendix serves in the human body). Besides, look at certain types of fish: the males in a population can change gender to female in order to bear young and propagate the species, whos to say that mamals have never done that in all the history of the world?

Answer 3

Not that I know of, if by prove you mean by logical deduction. The existence of physical laws can be interpreted in various ways (i.e. by chance or by design). However, this speculation passes from the realm of science into philosophy, at least given the current technology/knowledge that we have, and philosophy does not seem to be able to come up with a deduction-based proof either. Many scientists have indeed attributed the symmetry/beauty of physical laws to a creator (i.e. Maupertuis and his least-action principle), though many scientists have contested this interpretation.
However, there is in fact nothing that science holds that prevents us from attributing the physical laws to a creator (intelligence design), or attributing to chance (I don't know if this will hold though), or simply refusing to answer the question (the agnostic position, which is actually not as silly as it may seem).

Answer 4

Of course it doesn't prove that.

As for human males having babies? Sure... it doesn't sound like you know much about biology. You cover yourself by saying 'in a few billion years' but if humans survive that long they'll be totally unrecognisable - we were indistuinguishable from chimps about 4 million years ago... imagine another 4 million years, with genetic technologies...

I think a better 'proof' that God exists would be if we could view different physical laws elsewhere - chaotic, fluctuating constants whereas our planet was stable, but then I don't know if that was enough. If you listen to creationists you get the impression that God if he exists only wants stupid and ignorant people to believe in him, and that's not a God worth believing in.

Answer 5

Many physics laws prove the existance of God!
Usually dense objects sink, how did it come that ice floats on water?
Also, a scientist discovered that there was a celestial body, that if it went 1 nanometer away from its path, the whole universe wud collapse!

All of these things cud not have happenned by coincidence

Answer 6

No, it doesn't, but I've just been reading a book by Physics Professor Paul Davies about the mounting evidence of ongoing creativity in the world (contrary to what the first answerer says). Davies, though a Christian, (I think), makes no attempt to make the jump from this to "therefore God is doing it", but those of us who already believe in God will see this as a description of what God is doing. Atheists can still work their way around it if they need to.

Answer 7

If you think so, then it begs the question who created the rules that that govern the creator? I don't believe having physical laws proves the existence of a creator.

Answer 8

Whatever the true answer might be, I'd sure like IRIS to explain how her atheist friends have explained the existence of universal physical laws as being "natural." I'd put up money in a bet that I could easily poke holes in their arguments.

YOU LISTENING, IRIS...??????

Answer 9

Prove? No.
The more intelligent atheists I've known have explained to me how these things could have come about naturally.

Fortunately, faith doesn't rely upon proof.

Answer 10

you are right. God set the laws, triggered Big Bang, and did not intervene ever since.