Jump to content

Symmetry and Asymmetry of the Universe: of Divine Origin?


Recommended Posts

It seems clearly that there is never a unit of nature, whether natural or "supernatural," that is perfectly symmetric, and that every unit of nature is perfectly asymmetric.  Earth is a semi-symmetrical unit.  Earth, moon and sun are a common unit.  Earth, moon, "planets," sun and stars are another natural unit.  Everything lacks perfect symmetry, and mandates perfect asymmetry.  Regions of the seas appear at times to be ungoverned, but are clearly of one surface with the rivers and water tables, modulated by the ebb and flow of those rivers, and by the water tables under the earth, and by the winds and by vaporization and condensation.  The passing of seasons on earth appear to be symmetric, but then they seem out of step with the moon's wax and wane.  The passing of the earth's evenings and mornings seems perfectly uniform, yet no perfect number of days fits precisely within the bounds of seasons and moons.  It would seem then, that necessarily, there is an eternal Creator, and that He fashioned the worlds by a perfect art, a discipline far weightier than science.

Moreover, those of a common faith with the Bible, would require that Genesis chapter 1 is perfectly uniform with nature.  Those of a contrary view from the Bible, would require that nature is irrational and that asymmetry is dominant in the universe since it's symmetry is purely coincidental.

Since this discussion will probably evoke resentment in some,  I thank any persons now, who participate, in case it is ever censored.  The question at hand then, is this: Who made the universe?  I say Jesus of Nazareth made the universe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, toolsoftrust said:

Since this discussion will probably evoke resentment in some,  I thank any persons now, who participate, in case it is ever censored.  The question at hand then, is this: Who made the universe?  I say Jesus of Nazareth made the universe.

Firstly, personally I resent nothing you say, (afterall why would I: what you say has no effect on me)  but I do question what you say.

The Universe can be explained scientifically via empirical scientific means up to 10-43 seconds after the BB. (there is no evidence at all that there is any ID aspect behind the existence of the universe)    

Before that, anything that science claims is speculation, but in many cases speculation based on reasonable current scientific knowledge. eg: https://www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-nothing/

In actual fact the universe and everything in it, appears to be one gigantic accident and that includes us. This rather cold, uncaring, lack of purpose, upsets many people and they see the need to invent that purpose, or to explain via magic that which they don't understand, but which has already been explained by science. But hey! whatever floats your boat. :) 

Just one question...It has occurred to me many times.Why do so many people of "faith" of whatever persuasion, see the need to come to a science forum, and search for conflict?        I mean I'm dropping my Mrs off to church in an hour or so, (yes my wife is religious but also tolerant and does not push her beliefs on a science forum) but I would never follow her into church, walk up to the pulpit and start explaining how science has near eliminated any need for any deity. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, toolsoftrust said:

It seems clearly that there is never a unit of nature, whether natural or "supernatural," that is perfectly symmetric, and that every unit of nature is perfectly asymmetric.  Earth is a semi-symmetrical unit.  Earth, moon and sun are a common unit.  Earth, moon, "planets," sun and stars are another natural unit.  Everything lacks perfect symmetry, and mandates perfect asymmetry.  Regions of the seas appear at times to be ungoverned, but are clearly of one surface with the rivers and water tables, modulated by the ebb and flow of those rivers, and by the water tables under the earth, and by the winds and by vaporization and condensation.  The passing of seasons on earth appear to be symmetric, but then they seem out of step with the moon's wax and wane.  The passing of the earth's evenings and mornings seems perfectly uniform, yet no perfect number of days fits precisely within the bounds of seasons and moons.  It would seem then, that necessarily, there is an eternal Creator, and that He fashioned the worlds by a perfect art, a discipline far weightier than science.

This doesn't make much sense. You are saying that nothing in the universe is perfect and this is evidence of perfect creation?

Surely if a perfect creator had created the world by a perfect art, then the result would be perfect.

Quote

Moreover, those of a common faith with the Bible, would require that Genesis chapter 1 is perfectly uniform with nature.  

You are saying it isn't perfectly uniform. Therefore you don't accept Genesis, correct?

Quote

Those of a contrary view from the Bible, would require that nature is irrational and that asymmetry is dominant in the universe since it's symmetry is purely coincidental.

So you disagree with the bible and that nature is irrational?

Quote

The question at hand then, is this: Who made the universe?  I say Jesus of Nazareth made the universe.

That contradicts what you have said above (where you deny creation).

It is also impossible because Jesus didn't exist when the universe was created.

Quote

Since this discussion will probably evoke resentment in some

Not resentment. I am just baffled that anyone can write such incoherent nonsense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, beecee said:
Quote

 

Firstly, personally I resent nothing you say, (afterall why would I: what you say has no effect on me)  but I do question what you say.

The Universe can be explained scientifically via empirical scientific means up to 10-43 seconds after the BB. (there is no evidence at all that there is any ID aspect behind the existence of the universe)    

Before that, anything that science claims is speculation, but in many cases speculation based on reasonable current scientific knowledge. eg: https://www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-nothing/

 

Science cannot even prove that the speed of light (the measure of time) is constant from beginning to end.  Every scientific observation is based on 2 time-clocks: the span of a human-being's scientific experience, and the written accounts.  Yet you only accept the written accounts of scientific decisions.  That's what they are--decisions.  If this isn't so, then tell me how you know the speed of light from it's origin to the present time and place.

Quote

In actual fact the universe and everything in it, appears

Nonsense.  To any reasonable person.  Fact, by definition, is proven, not apparent.

Quote

 

to be one gigantic accident and that includes us. This rather cold, uncaring, lack of purpose, upsets many people and they see the need to invent that purpose, or to explain via magic that which they don't understand, but which has already been explained by science. But hey! whatever floats your boat. :) 

Just one question...It has occurred to me many times.Why do so many people of "faith" of whatever persuasion, see the need to come to a science forum, and search for conflict?        I mean I'm dropping my Mrs off to church in an hour or so, (yes my wife is religious but also tolerant and does not push her beliefs on a science forum) but I would never follow her into church, walk up to the pulpit and start explaining how science has near eliminated any need for any deity. 

 

This is a public forum for discussion, not for conflict.  I wouldn't follow someone into a lab or an environmental study and start preaching to my adversaries.  You choose adversity.  I come in friendship.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, toolsoftrust said:

 I wouldn't follow someone into a lab or an environmental study and start preaching to my adversaries.  

You appear to have done exactly that by preaching your religious beliefs on a science forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, toolsoftrust said:

This is a public forum for discussion, not for conflict.  I wouldn't follow someone into a lab or an environmental study and start preaching to my adversaries.  You choose adversity.  I come in friendship.

Yes it is...a public forum open to any Tom, Dick and Harry and a variety of assorted nuts.

While you say you come in friendship, you also appear to come in ignorance of scientific fact and methodology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.