From: george murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 22:23:22 EDT
Debbie Mann wrote:
> The existence of many subatomic particles was predicted before discovery. Experiments were devised to find the particle after its existence had been predicted, in some cases, in others the natural course of events led to discovery by one scientist some time after another had made the prediction.
>
> A friend of mine is a pure mathematician. He said he find physicists very annoying because they always found a use for neat mathematical trick the mathematicians could devise. His wish was to find math that existed for its own sake - and not for the sake of science. Certainly Einstein pulled in some pretty abstract concepts that seemed to be math at its most pure.
>
> I think this does make a strong case for intelligent design. In a random universe, how can all mathematical discoveries lead to a physical reality? The existence of every subatomic particle conceived by the mind of man is less convincing to me, but still of merit.
Physicists have found use for almost all the broad areas of math but that doesn't mean that every possible math system is embodied in the physical world. All math discoveries do NOT lead to physical reality - & if the Christian doctrine of creation is true, they shouldn't. God created freely, choosing one math pattern for the world rather than another. & this means that the universe is contingent - not all possible patterns are represented. Far less does every subatomic particle that has been conceived by theorists exist.
Shalom,
George
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 22:24:29 EDT