If it is built on laws, how did that happen with a Creator?
If theres no god, then are physical and mathematical laws that govern the universe just byproducts of their coincidental existences?
2007-08-20 07:08:34 · 11 answers · asked by Antares 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Sorry, the first bit was meant to say: if its built on laws how did that happen WITHOUT a creator.
2007-08-20 07:09:17 · update #1
Im not implying the laws cannot exist without a creator, Im just wondering how the intricate formation of these laws came about by mere coincidence.
2007-08-20 07:18:02 · update #2
Im aware of the mathematical laws salient2 is referring to but Im wondering if these laws had a beginning somewhere.
2007-08-20 07:20:00 · update #3
We may never know what caused the laws. We can only observe them and know they are true, given the information we have. Which is why we get to keep asking questions!
I think that currently the scientific community believes that prior to the Big Bang, the laws of the universe were different than they are now. The implication being that we don't know what happened before it because the variables have changed.
I could be wrong. That's ok, I'm used to it. :)
2007-08-20 07:17:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you put hundreds of two different sized marbles in a can until almost full and shook it on a paint shaker you would expect to find the marbles randomly distributed within the can. This is not the case. The marbles will arrange themselves in a particular pattern, because there are only two distinct sizes. The way the marbles order themselves is an emergent property because the system is not entirely random. Order is imposed by the fact that the marbles are not random diameters and are held within finite boundaries.
Everywhere we look in nature we can discover emergent properties which appear to be the work of intelligence, but are not. The behavior of an entire flock of birds, or of a whole school of fish appears to be the work of an external guiding force. It isn't. Each of the independent entities within the flock or school operates according to a limited set of simple behaviors. When taken as a whole, a distinct behavior of the whole -- greater than a simple sum of the individual parts -- emerges. Biological evolution is a famous example of an emergent property which operates on a time scale of successive generations. Our immune system is another evolutionary system which operates on a time scale of hours. It is now believed that human consciousness is an evolutionary emergent property that requires the complexity of a human brain and operates on a time scale of less than a few seconds.
The physical and mathematical laws which appear to govern the universe are examples of other emergent properties we have discovered and assigned a meaning to. This is properly attributed to the way we think -- not to the way the universe actually behaves. The universe does what it must do and WE discover the mathematics which best describes the behavior. [I am not one of the latest generation of physicists who support string theory and therefore believe (yes, an act of faith) that the basis of reality is pure mathematics itself.]
2007-08-20 14:48:59 · answer #2 · answered by Diogenes 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The laws as described by humans is a try to catch / explain some part of the reality we see around us. It is an approximation that allows us to control and predict with some accuracy the course of events that occurs in the universe.
The 'real' law is ( in my opinion ) 'the most stable configuration of all possible configurations', i dont think that there were first laws and after that the universe with all in it based upon this law. The law and physical things are connected, both depends on each other, for instance you can not have a law for gravity without mass, neither can you have mass without a law that describes how this mass behaves
my 2 cts
2007-08-20 14:30:00 · answer #3 · answered by gjmb1960 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not exactly to the point, but relevant enough, and debunks your implied point nonetheless:
If the complexity of the universe demands a creator, then that creator would have to be just as, if not more, complex than its creation. Therefore, under your own logic, the creator would need a creator as well, and its creator would need one, and so on, for eternity.
If you say that your god doesn't require creation, that he existed from the start, why not simply skip this needless step and conclude, far more reasonably, that the universe or existence itself is similarly capable?
2007-08-20 14:19:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that the apparent isomorphism between mathematical laws and nature cannot be just a coincidence. Neither do I believe in gods. I think the simplest explaination is that mathematics ( necessary tautological logical truth ) is what exists. It only appears to us as space/time/mass/energy because we see it from inside itself and we see so little of it.
Our understanding of reality is layered. You see the world in terms of large physical objects. But you are aware that those are illusions made up of atoms, and atoms in turn are made of smaller particles. Many believe that these so called "fundamental" particles are not fundamental but are built on a layer of mathematical objects called strings. My belief is that all reality including space-time itself is built upon mathematics and mathematics is what is truly fundamental.
The reason why we see top layers instead of lower layers is due to our inability to see all of the the details in the lower layers.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.0646v1.pdf
The problem with the god hypothesis is your god needs to be more complex and hence correspondingly more unlikely than the reality you are attempting to explain. Saying your god just is, still leaves a much bigger question than you had to begin with.
If what exists is all of mathematics then any apparent complexity is explained as resulting from our existence itself selecting a complex subset (the universe we see) from a tautologically simple whole ( all of mathematics) .
Mathematical laws are independent of time and independent of man's understanding of them. They are also tautological, being of the form : "If X then Y", where X consists of a set of axioms and Y consists of a necessary result from those axioms. Man has no freedom when it comes to mathematics. You cannot choose for 7 to not be a prime number, for example. You can only choose which mathematics you wish to consider by changing which set of axioms you wish to examine. Man cannot change what logically follows from those axioms.
2007-08-20 14:17:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You are implying that laws (physical constants, etc.) can not exist without a creator. Please explain your argument as to why this must be.
When you have finished that assignment, please explain how a creator can exist without being created.
servant: Wrong. The chances of the laws being the way they are in our universe is 1:1. This is self-evident by the fact that they are indeed what they are. What we have yet to figure out is WHY they are, and we may never know.
2007-08-20 14:16:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Our Scientific Laws are based on the nature and its functions and that is the tool for the scientists and researchers to work with. We the human beings are learning from it every day.
Holy Book Quran in this regard says:
10:6 for, verily, in the alternating of night and day, and in all that God has created in the heavens and on earth there are messages indeed for people who are conscious of Him!
30:22 And among his wonders is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your tongues and colours: for in this, behold, there are messages indeed for men of knowledge.
27:88 And thou wilt see the mountains, which thou deemest so firm, pass away as clouds pass away: a work of God, who has ordered all things to perÂfection! Verily, He is fully aware of all that you do!
Fore father of science Isaac Newton, when enquired upon his inventions and scientific theories had said:
I am just collecting pebbles from the sea shore.
2007-08-20 14:46:41 · answer #7 · answered by mohammad a 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The laws that most people believe the universe runs on are just our "subjective observation". The "real rules" are rather "mystic" actually, to most folk. Go study quantum mechanics.
2007-08-20 14:19:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Quran tells that God himself has assigned laws for everything meaning it was built on laws and laws were assigned to it.
2007-08-21 00:35:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
all the necessary laws happening in the same universe to create our universe occuring by coincidence are 1 in 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 - plus a lot more zero's but you get the picture
this fact puts the evolutionist group into a corner to say - well it happened so there must be a chance or they will try the theory of mulitple universes - universes just kept forming until we get to ours that got all the conditions right - problem with that is that there is absolutely zero evidence for multiple universes so if they want to stick with that they require faith in a theory with no evidence - far more faith then is needed for a creator
2007-08-20 14:22:04 · answer #10 · answered by servant FM 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋