Arcesious Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 My math teacher has been an athiest for a long time. In my math class today, my teacher brought up the Fibonacci algorithm, which, at the moment is beyond my understanding, but he mentioned it in math class today, saying that after having many questions about God's existence, he believes that there is a God now after he thought about the Fibonacci algorithm. This was completely new to me, but as a believer in Christianity who seeks scientific proof of his beliefs wherever he can, I looked this up on the internet. Apparently, intelligent design is proved by Fibonacci numbers. The measurements of all living creatures and a whole ton of other things in many different aspects are all identically related in the Fibonacci sequence, including the universe. Apparently, the Fibonacci numbers when used in measuring the mathematics of the universe correspond together perfectly, showing the the universe is not a random occurence with random factors, but actually a very, very, complex, organized system. That's as far as i can grasp it, so don't expect me to know why, as I've only just heard of this. I thought i shoudl emntion it... Heres wiki on all the technical stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number I don't understand even half of what all those crazy numbers mean, but I thought this was pretty cool and i thought I'd mention it. If anyone has any conflictign evidence to this or something I don't want to debate it myself, because I'm no expert on math or physics. All that I know is that the Fibonacci seqence has turned by stubborn old math teacher who always agreed with everything my athiest science teacher taught is now arguing with my science teacher about this on the side that he thinks God exists now, and that's good enough to make me believe that this Fibonacci thing is strong evidence for God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ctrl Alt Del Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Hehe, don't understand Fibonacci? Don't worry, you soon will, it's easy (And that comes from a guy who isn't really a math appreciator). The matrix will make your day on classes. Well, I can't really say what the hell he did saw of holy on Fibonacci Sequence. Perhaps, as a math teacher, he is one of those guys who thinks that only a Intelligent Designer could have made something so perfect and infallible... But most of math can be faced that way. We should wait for Teekay and his math expertise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentScope001 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 We religious people must be desperate if we're looking at random Number patterns---- WAIT A SECOND! I actually scrolled down on wiki and read this: Fibonacci sequences appear in biological settings,[16] such as branching in trees, the fruitlets of a pineapple,[17] an uncurling fern and the arrangement of a pine cone.[18]. In addition, numerous poorly substantiated claims of Fibonacci numbers or golden sections in nature are found in popular sources, e.g. relating to the breeding of rabbits, the spirals of shells, and the curve of waves[citation needed]. Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz advanced the idea that real instances can be in part understood as the expression of certain algebraic constraints on free groups, specifically as certain Lindenmayer grammars.[19] There. That was the reason your teacher was squiriming over a bunch of silly number patterns. Because they reoccur in nature. Eh. Major concidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 The Fibonacci sequence is hardly worth being concerned about - it is a naturally occurring pattern that can be translated into flashy mathematics. You'd be shocked to know how many animals have legs in multiples of 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev7 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Very interesting. I have never dealt with equations like that, but I will. I have no idea how to answer the topic question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 You'd be shocked to know how many animals have legs in multiples of 2. Probably less shocked than finding out how many animals had legs NOT in multiples of 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 You can see paterns everywhere if you look hard enough, I would be more surprised if nobody could find one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 Think about it though: The Fibonacci numbers pretty much disprove randomness of the universe and the life in it. Since the Fibonacci seqence seems to show this, and everything is organized, that points majorly to intelligent design actually being what really happened... And things that don't apply to the Fibonacci numbers coudl easily apply to anothr form of organized mathematics. After all, I don't think God would make the universe so simple as to use only one universal mathematical orgarization equation. Experts on science and physics, do you agree that you've found an organized equation for everything known already? If so, then why do you still argue that there was a random big bang and no intelligent designer when all these researches and breakthroughs in physics and math are pointing towards the universe beign a very complex, organized system and not a random from some big bang that you don't even have an explanation to waht made the big bang? Why use the 'Then what created God' thing, when in fact thre is no other evidence anymore since the universe is orgnaized, and we do exist? Wha does it matter how Go came into being when the biggest proof is that the universe exists and our research shows that it is organized, and not a chaotic system, as it seems on the surface only because of it's immensity? What abotu stars? There are billions and trillions of them. Physics proves that a star can't actually form, because heat is stronger than gravity... What else except for god coudl have made allt hose stars, really, a big bang? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 I'll answer more fully when I get home from school. And things that don't apply to the Fibonacci numbers coudl easily apply to anothr form of organized mathematics. Agreed, as I said, look long enough for a pattern and you will find one. If so, then why do you still argue that there was a random big bang and no intelligent designer when all these researches and breakthroughs in physics and math are pointing towards the universe beign a very complex, organized system and not a random from some big bang Because, the fact that there is a patern dosen't mean that there is a god. To use sabrez example: look at all the animals who have legs in multiples of 2. you don't even have an explanation to waht made the big bang? [sarcasm]Goddiddit is as we all know a proven scientifc theory[sarcasm] Why use the 'Then what created God' thing, when in fact thre is no other evidence anymore since the universe is orgnaized, and we do exist? Wha does it matter how Go came into being when the biggest proof is that the universe exists and our research shows that it is organized So the universe is organized because of a recuring patern, interesting. And I don't see why I shouldn't ask the "what created God question". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Ehh. Quinquae viae>Fibonacci sequence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMaster12 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Think about it though: The Fibonacci numbers pretty much disprove randomness of the universe and the life in it. Since the Fibonacci seqence seems to show this, and everything is organized, that points majorly to intelligent design actually being what really happened... And things that don't apply to the Fibonacci numbers coudl easily apply to anothr form of organized mathematics. Well if you really think about it there is no such thing a random, at least in the world of mathematics. Things that appear random are not because there is pattern. There always is. Fibonacci numbers I learned about some years ago and did some research that did NOT come from wikipedia. (wikipedia not very accurate or credible source) What is interesting is the concept of the Golden Ratio (1.618) which can actually be achieved by the Fabonacci sequence. Better known as the number Phi, it does occur in nature but the reason people get hyped over it is because of the FREQUENCY of occurance. When something occurs this much in nature it usually is not coincidence. You want a practical example take a look at your own body. I am going to say it but DaVinci's Vitruvian Man makes a good visual representation of the proportions of the human body which by the way come out to the Golden Ratio. Early Christians labeled the Golden Ratio as the Divine Proportion. It was the idea that there was a number considered perfect that God creted the world by or some notion like that. Given the frequent occurence of the number in nature they believed they found it and called it such. Maybe it is and maybe it isn't a means that God left his signature on the world. The fact of the matter is that it exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted February 5, 2008 Author Share Posted February 5, 2008 Mur'Phon, let me try to put it more clearly. Everything in the universe that we currently know of has a mathematical explanation, and all seems to work in an organized system. It appaers to be a Chaotic system because of it's immensity and because of all the differing equations, but in truth, all those equatiosn onyl compliment each other, and unite together as one, single, uber-complex, yet organized, system. A system that by which the chances of occuring from a random big bang are impossible. Makign odds for how possible it is for a big bang to make thsese conditions is irrelevent data in the equation, because the universe must continue to exist forever, no matter hwat state it is put in, and the longer it exists and becomes more complex yet still organized, the more the odds of a big bang havign created the universe are less and less. Of course, theoretically, God could create and corridinate a 'big bang', so i don't fully deny the big bang theory, onylt he fact that it coudln't happen without God. just how impossible do the odds have to get until you think a big bang couldn't create a perfectly organized universe that continues to expand and become more and more complex? The fact of the matter is that the universe will continue to get more organized from it's constant explansion, as i have pretty ymuch repeated five times in this post so that I get my point accross fully. Input: X * N = Big Bang. Big bang = perfectly organized Universe. What is X? What is N? X = God. N = Nothing. You ask: What created 'X' then? How can X, which nothing created, make N? New Data: We, and the universe, exist. Therfore, something had to create soemthing to make us exist. Now, even though nothing created X, we exist. The fact that we and the universe exist proves that something had to make us. Then we coem up with the big bang. Something had to create the big bang. Alternate data: We created ourselves by traveling back in tiem to create ourselves, formign an infinite time loop. Logic Correction: Time is a constant, it cannot go bakcwards, only forwards. time cannot alter or be changed after soemthign has already happened, because time is an unbreakable constant. Therfore, nothing but God coudl create the universe, and there can be no 'time loop'. The universe cannto restart itself. it must go on forever and ever. It must exist because it does already exist. What mad eit to exist coudl onyl be soemthing that is beyond time. soemthing beyond mathematics. An intelligent designer. God must be beyond time in order to create the universe. But time cannot be bent. Therfore, God is a beign that is speerate from space and time, from this dimension/perception of the universe. That is how God can exist, and his beign outside of the universe allows him to create it. Thing of the universe and it's imaginary 'boundaries' as an elastic hamster ball, or a bottle. Everything outside the 'universe in a ball/bottle' has no bounds, it is infinite. Time does not exist outside of the ball/bottle. But time is an absolute in the ball/bottle. God creates himself outside of the ball/bottle, in the infinite expanse that there is. There is no tiem in this area, so he can create time, and bend it. He makes a time loop, and creates the conditions for himself to come into being. When he comes into beign in the past, he destroys the time loop, and he is the only thing left. there are no aboslutes as to what can create him, because he created himself with the power to bend time, and do anything else. God is a being, so he must have a mind. it is logical for a god of immense power to be intlligent. and it is intelligent to be a good God with good intentions. He decides to make a bottle. His power is infinitly renewable. He makes a universe that continues to expand in the elastic bottle, withint he infinite boudnaries outside of the bottle. To us, our universe has no bounds, but that is only because it is constantly expanding, an d the farther we can see to it's boudnaries, the bigger it gets, and it seems to have no boundaries in our perception. Meanwhile, God is keepignt he universe organized with his immense power, tinkering with his 'universe in a bottle' ever so carefully, fixing any problems ever-so delicately. At the moment i'm still brainstorming hwat God's ultimate purpose for us that believe in him and the universe is after theoretical heaven. I'll have to think about that one. But this thread is only about how intelligent design is possible, not the reason why God created the universe. Please tell me you see my point now... Summarazing this wallotext, basically my poitn is that the existence of the universe proves that soemthing intelligent had to create it, because it exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediMaster12 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Now I pose this: How do you know it exists? True that the numbers could be proven but can that be given proof that things here exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentScope001 Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 Everything in the universe that we currently know of has a mathematical explanation, and all seems to work in an organized system. It appaers to be a Chaotic system because of it's immensity and because of all the differing equations, but in truth, all those equatiosn onyl compliment each other, and unite together as one, single, uber-complex, yet organized, system. A system that by which the chances of occuring from a random big bang are impossible. Nothing is impossible. And, in the theory of the multiverse, everything is possible. But, in the long term, if everything is a mathematical equation, then we have no free will, as we are fufilling whatever the math equation spits out. And if there is an element of randomness that does allow us to do whatever we will, such randomness may point to the nonexistence of a God. All the atheist has to do is point out: "There is no evidence God HAS to exist." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ctrl Alt Del Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 This isn't about Fibonacci anymore. It's Descartes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 I'll change the title then... We are an exception. Everything else is a mathetmatical equation. Yes, Nature is an equation in my opinion of this. We however, are sentient, and obviously God's purpose for us requires us to have free will. Just because we coudl be an equation doesn't mean we can't do a certain thing. Obivously, God gave our life an equation, a complex plan, but a plan that we all have free will in. In the ned it will turn out the way he plans no matter what we do, his plan shoudl be something we all look forward to being completed. Everything that we do not effect is an equation. Nature changes because of us. it is all a perfectly organized plan. God knows everything that will happen, but that isn't stoppig his elaborate plan from allowing you to be a believer in him and what he has done for us. I can prove things here exist because our minds exist. we can feel our enviroment. our souls can think. we exist, we can touch and understand the universe. Scientifically everything exists. How can we not exist? Science can't fully disprove God because of our existence. We know that we exist because we and th euniverse are here, right now. Therfore, God does have to exist, or else we wouldn't be here would be? All there would be would be without something to create everything an empty expanse, a nothing, a nothing that in itself it nothingness, that isn't even it or nothing. Remember the Scientific Method? I will prove we exist right now. *touches computer, sees computer, sees it's existence as a form of matter.* There ya go, the universe exists. Therefore God must exist. Perhaps God even uses the multiverse theory as a real template for the universe. Maybe he as more thna one 'universe in a bottle'... Who knows? the fact that there coudl be a muliverse system changes nothing in the matter of disprovign the existence of an intelligent designer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igos Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Everything in the universe that we currently know of has a mathematical explanation, and all seems to work in an organized system. Can you support this assertion? I find the idea that "everything has a mathematical explanation" to be unfounded at best, completely false at worst. A system that by which the chances of occuring from a random big bang are impossible If I was to pick a random person on Earth to be a superhero, and you somehow got picked, would you deny that you were picked randomly because you only had one chance out of 6 billion to be picked? No - no matter how unlikely an event is, many, many, many other events are just as unlikely, if not more. The odds that we get ONE of them are in fact equal, or close to 100%. In this case, I have 100% chance to pick a person, and no matter what person I pick, it has one chance out of 6 billion to be picked randomly. This is a case where there is 100% chance that an unlikely event occurs. In other words, even if we had 1/10^10000 chance of coming here, I can give you a near infinity of alternatives that are even less likely than that (while being possible). And if you compute all of them, the odds of an universe in which no ridiculously unlikely events ever occur is itself ridiculously unlikely. Kind of like a world where nobody would ever get a royal flush. Maybe there's 1/10^10000 chance of leprechauns existing, or dragons existing, or vulcans existing, or Bush not screwing up, but there are so many that one of them is bound to happen - and no matter which one happens, you'll say that it can't be random, because it only had a 1/10^10000 chance of happening. Right. New Data: We, and the universe, exist. Therfore, something had to create soemthing to make us exist. No, that's a horrible case of "begging the question". There is no tiem in this area, so he can create time, and bend it What does it mean to create without time? You have to keep in mind that the very concept of "operating" refers to time. Without time, you cannot change, you cannot work, you cannot operate anything. Therefore, even if God transcended our timeline, he would still need his own timeline to operate within. As a side note, you need to give an operational definition of "organized". You consistently say the universe is organized. However, from my point of view, it really isn't. I guess a common base would help to clear out doubts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcesious Posted February 6, 2008 Author Share Posted February 6, 2008 Hmm... i see your point abotu randomness possibilities... Still, my point still stands that the universe cannot exist without something to create it. Here's an orgnaized system: The entire universe, and all of it's galaxies all conform (orbit) around a central gravitational point. Whereas, in rnadomness of a big bang, there coudl be multiple gravitational cnters. But we humans and our telescopes have been alogn roudn enough to see that everthing only orbits one central point. Don't forget what i said about stars being impossible to form because heat is stronger thna gravity too... Can you support this assertion? I find the idea that "everything has a mathematical explanation" to be unfounded at best, completely false at worst. The mathematical explanation being physics and the scientific method. we cannot test the past to see what happened, but in physics what is happening now can be seen as an equation. Okay, X is what happened bfore, Y is what is happenign now. We're tryign to find X. We examine Y, whtever it's value may be, and use physics to figure out what X was. There may be no 'aboslute equation, but there is after all things like the Fibonacci Equation, and physics itself withoutmath applied to it, but still being an equation. An equation doesn't need to be shown by numbers, afterall. Hmm... after thinkign about it, I think an intelligent designer could even use both a chaotic and orgnaized system at the same time... No, that's a horrible case of "begging the question". Exactly my intention. I seem to see your point about God's existence needing time, and tiem not being able to be created without time. That is a flaw in my argument. help me out here other God-believing people... After all in my first post i didn't intend to debate this. But here I am... Maybe i just couldn't resist the bait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Hmm... i see your point abotu randomness possibilities... Still, my point still stands that the universe cannot exist without something to create it.Just because you can't wrap your mind around something doesn't mean it doesn't exist/occur. My thoughts are that humans invented a language to describe the world around them - we call it mathematics. It seems only natural that something invented to describe the world around us in a logical way would have ties to the world around us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weiser_Cain Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I fell down and hit my head, there is no god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igos Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Still, my point still stands that the universe cannot exist without something to create it. Here's an orgnaized system: The entire universe, and all of it's galaxies all conform (orbit) around a central gravitational point. Whereas, in rnadomness of a big bang, there coudl be multiple gravitational cnters. Indeed there could, but there aren't. That was the whole point of my post: The universe we live in is a possibility among infinite others, and does not account as a testament to any higher being. Don't forget what i said about stars being impossible to form because heat is stronger thna gravity too... Stars are not "impossible to form". We've seen and studied its formation; I have no idea where you get this from. There may be no 'aboslute equation' This contradicts your previous statement: Everything in the universe that we currently know of has a mathematical explanation Perhaps you could rephrase your argument - I'm a bit confused at your position right now. Exactly my intention. I wasn't aware that your intention was to sprout fallacies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Indeed there could, but there aren't. That was the whole point of my post: The universe we live in is a possibility among infinite others, and does not account as a testament to any higher being. Actually, all we have evidence for is this universe that we exist in. The possibility of an infinite number of other universes is nothing more than a metaphysical concept with absolutely no basis in science, and in fact it is a more complex (and thus less likely) answer to our existence than the idea of a single Creator. Answering another point--a Creator of 'time' lives and functions outside of the limits of the dimension of time. He/she/it would not need to function within a 'timeline'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igos Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Actually, all we have evidence for is this universe that we exist in. The possibility of an infinite number of other universes is nothing more than a metaphysical concept with absolutely no basis in science, and in fact it is a more complex (and thus less likely) answer to our existence than the idea of a single Creator. I never said other universes existed simultaneously with ours. I said that at the moment of the big bang / creation of the universe, other variables could have affected its development, and we'd be living in a different universe now. a Creator of 'time' lives and functions outside of the limits of the dimension of time. He/she/it would not need to function within a 'timeline'. That seems impossible, since creation requires time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 I never said other universes existed simultaneously with ours. I said that at the moment of the big bang / creation of the universe, other variables could have affected its development, and we'd be living in a different universe now. Regardless of whether other universes exist simultaneously or not with ours, there is still not a shred of physical evidence for any universe outside our own. The concept of other universes is still a metaphysical concept with no basis in our reality. That seems impossible, since creation requires time. Why is that impossible for an infinite being? Time and space were created at the Big Bang. Whoever or whatever initiated the Big bang had to exist outside of the space-time continuum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igos Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 Regardless of whether other universes exist simultaneously or not with ours, there is still not a shred of physical evidence for any universe outside our own. I repeat: I am not saying that another universe exists at the same time with ours. I am saying our universe could be different, had something changed at the time of the Big bang. Why is that impossible for an infinite being? Because creating X implies that X did not exist, and then exists. How is that possible without time? Short answer: it isn't. That process requires a chronological sequence. Therefore, time. Time and space were created at the Big Bang. Since the time of the Big bang is the first moment of time, there is no before. Therefore, it would be logically inconsistent to say that time didn't exist before the Big bang because it would require previous states to exist, and there exist none. Time started with the Big bang. It cannot be created because creation requires time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.