On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 15:30:45 -0400 george murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
writes:
> "D. F. Siemens, Jr." wrote:
>
> > George,
> > If I restrict myself to your exclusion of temporal considerations,
> the
> > answer is "Yes." But this is like the infamous "Have you quit
> beating
> > your wife yet?" I contend that a proper view of the deity
> recognizes that
> > the Creator is never surprised, indeed, cannot be surprised,
> whether by
> > what is being studied in complexity theory or by the free choices
> of
> > human beings. My question was posed to show that mathematics is a
> human
> > activity, a task taken on by a subcreator.
>
> If we assume for the sake of argument that God is indeed
> immutable &
> is never surprised then the God who was aware of the work of Bolyai
> and
> Lobachevsky ~1820 is identical in all respects with the God who
> spoke with
> Moses ~1000 years before Euclid. & while speaking with Moses, God
> knew
> non-Euclidean geometry. & I don't think that he got that knowledge
> simply by
> foreknowing what B & L would do.
> My question was, you will realize, posed in a somewhat
> whimsical
> way. What I would say more substantively is that math pattern is a
> fundamental aspect of the world that science discovers, and if we
> believe
> that the world is God's creation, that pattern is God's creation. &
> since
> God created the world freely, God could have (& maybe did) create
> worlds with
> other math patterns.
>
> Shalom,
>
> George
>
>
I think two distinct matters are here conflated. First, every
mathematical calculus is true in all possible worlds. This, of course,
requires that it be understood within its given axioms, postulates and
definitions. These may be changed to produce different calculi. Thus the
Riemannian plane geometry that can be mapped onto the surface of a sphere
requires that there be no parallel lines. Taking this provision out of
its context, and the Euclidean proof (original) or postulate (current)
out of its context, no parallel lines and one parallel line contradict
each other. In empirical practice, none of our vernier protractors can
measure accurately enough to establish which multidimensional geometry
holds in our universe. Second, which mathematical system "fits" the
universe does not have to be the same if there are more than one. I
understand that a non-theistic view argues that ours is only one of an
infinite number of "bubbles" that produced alternate universes. But they
are inaccessible to us, as I presume an alternate created universe would
be, at least apart from divine intervention, and so do not affect our
science. If I understand the situation correctly, even wormholes won't
connect us.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 05 2001 - 01:00:45 EDT