Intelligent Design
POSTED BY: rue
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 17:04
VIEWED: 14833
PAGE 2 of 14
Rue:
Some people (many) believe that PI is equated to 22/7. It is not. This is an approximation to make math by hand more manageable. PI is the ratio of a circle’s diameter to it radius. Thus PI = C/R. To the end, PI is a NEVER repeating NEVER ending value. If you counted to the digit minus one end of PI, you would have never seen the same number sequence repeat. What’s even more insane = if you average the occurrence of each digit 0-9, they all fall with a delta 10% of each other. Some are around 9.8 others 10.2 – and if you do it in real time, they each take a chance at beating and then losing to each other. A circle is one of the most elegant forms in geometry. It extends into a sphere when rotated around any give axis that intersects its center. Every model of everything is typically based on this form. So for every ‘random’ event demonstrated through this form, it is based on an object that has a particular destiny to always exhibit the same infinitesimal stream of numbers that ARE NOT random, and yet defies all logic in their propagation. Not only that, but the results are the same for ANY scale, be it a basketball, baseball, ping pong ball, molecule, protein, atom, electron, quark, and even further.
Atomkey
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Crikey, I've gone cross-eyed!
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm still unravelling the contradictions in algebra. Geometry is next on my list. 
I think I undertstand the demoralization that comes with thinking the universe is deterministic. And the conundrum of the concept of 'random' ('nothing happens without cause'). The circular logic of the big-bang and the same circular logic of religion (if god made all, what made god?)
Perhaps some things happen on scales we can't perceive.
Let me just think along some new lines ... not going to an end, just musing ... Physical randomness is classically thought of as coming from thermal motion. High aggregate thermal motion is the same as high temperature and high energy. With a thermal gradient, it CAN be used to drive work. It can also thermally smash to smithereens. It drives work which is order, and diffusion which is disorder.
Maybe we need a new language for these concepts, it may be that different things are lumped together.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, moving along, does it seem that an intentional design from the past is a static state? And that randomness (which may just be a different level of order we can't perceive) is a dynamic process? And that dynamic processes will overwhelm static states?
Would the next step be to think that a countervailing dynamic process must exist to maintain life? (SignyM's housekeeping)
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wow. This thread got very heavy (not due to a shift in the Earth's gravitational field-kind of heavy), and all I can respond with is: I think, therfore I am.
I also have a recollection of being a lowly private-type in a fuedal war in China in my last (partial) life, however, the technology to prove it's validity won't come on-line for several score years, so I am taking my 'awake dream' on faith that it was a true account of it's existance.
Or maybe I ate too much popcorn at the theatre that evening. Anything is possible.
Flexable Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Jokes aside, have you written a book, or could you recommend a book detailing what you're talking about? Your shorthand is losing me a little, but it sounds facinating.
Originally posted by Atomkey:
Not only that, but the results are the same for ANY scale, be it a basketball, baseball, ping pong ball, molecule, protein, atom, electron, quark, and even further.
Quantum mechanics and theoretical physics were sort of glossed over at my H.S., and all I studied in college was art and film.
Scientifically challenged Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:One last thing, are you referring to LOVE here?
Originally posted by Atomkey:
One seeks the others potential so the electrons may complete a circuit and allow the flow to realize itself?
Scientifically romantic Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I’m not a big supporter of Intelligent Design, but then I’m not a big supporter of Evolution either. They both seem very speculative to me. On the one hand, the shear enormity of the complexity of life does suggest something more then simple random events. There is mathematics that suggests that the probability of life occurring with the complexity that we observe is astronomically small. And while some Evolutionists scoff at the notion that this suggests some sort of intelligent design, it is a valid scientific question. If the complexity is such that the probability of life emerging arbitrarily is so small then could there be nonrandom factors involved that favor life?
I’ve heard Evolutionists insist that the theory of Evolution is a fact and only the details are in debate, but evidently one of these details is the complete absence of any evidence for Evolution. There is plenty of evidence that life forms adapt to their environment, but very little evidence of a life form transforming into something else as a result of environmental pressures. Gradual adaptation is generally used in a hand-waving attempt to suggest that this transformation occurs, and that’s probably about as suggestive for Evolution as complexity is for Intelligent Design. But in my mind, neither one is particularly strong.
-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
There is plenty of evidence that life forms adapt to their environment, but very little evidence of a life form transforming into something else as a result of environmental pressures.
Hmmm... I don't think I've ever heard this argument put forward. There's tons of evidence. I'm a little confused by what you meant though. How does adapting to their environment differ from transforming due to environmental pressures?
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'll let Finn explain what he means, but on a related comment, "species" is not a totally clear-cut concept since exceptions occur no matter which definition you choose. For example, tigers/lions and porposies/ orcas have been know to interbreed and produce fertile offspring. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
There is plenty of evidence that life forms adapt to their environment, but very little evidence of a life form transforming into something else as a result of environmental pressures.
Quote:Directly contradicted by computer simulations that "create" whole ecosystems given certain basic parameters. There are other more complete disussions available but they require subscription, so here is one example: www.cs.utoronto.ca/~adyecker/download/Tierra.ppt adaptation is generally used in a hand-waving attempt to suggest that this transformation occurs
There is mathematics that suggests that the probability of life occurring with the complexity that we observe is astronomically small.
Actually, "punctuated equilibrium" is one of the current models of evolution currently being debated. The model suggests that species evolve relatively quickly in isolated areas subject to enormous environmental pressure. www.answers.com/topic/punctuated-equilibrium I agree that the exact characteristics of evolution haven't been entirely worked out (Was it fast or slow? Isolated or broad-based?) but both fossil records AND subsequent investigation of DNA (with highly conserved areas common among many species) point to a process in which life forms change over time and eventually produce new species. Virology provides a real-time example of evolution.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME