New astrophysical discoveries leave little to no room for Atheism, expert says

CNA ^ | 9/30/2009

[NYer]

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[numberonepal]

This is all well and good, but if you REALLY want to see evidence for the existence of God, check out the Mandelbrot Set.

Or any fractal set for that matter. Universal constants (especially e and c) peak my curiosity. The fact that the full moon and the sun are exactly the same size in the sky is something a lot of folks can get their noodle around too.

[onedoug]

I’m not sure God would like all this betting about.

[fhayek]

The Mandelbrot Set is located on the complex plane. That is simply a two dimensional graph with real numbers on one axis, and imaginary number on the other. (Imaginary numbers, you may remember from algebra are multiples of the square root of -1). In effect, this graph represents all of " God's numbers). By using a very simple formula which uses iteration (the answer is plugged back into the formula, the result is either bounded and therefore belongs to the set or it spirals off to infinity. The rate at which the result spirals to infinity will cause it to be assigned an arbitrary color. By plotting the results, you produce a geometric figure, a fractal, in fact. If you magnify the edge of the figure, you will always find new and unusual complications. The boundary of figure is, in fact, infinite. You could never measure it. Go to Youtube and type in "Mandelbrot Set". There are dozens of "magnifications" that will take you on a spectacular "journey" deeper into the set. You could never explore it all. You will even come across mini Mandelbrot sets embedded all over the place.

Not to wax too metaphysical, but this geometric figure has always existed. Its structure, its properties, have been around for billions of years waiting for us to discover it. I took the confluence of technology and mathematical insight to find it. To me, this was one of God's "Easter Eggs" planted for us to find. Plus it goes great with Pink Floyd music.

[tacticalogic]

That's all you need to know.

So far, everytime someone has told me that it's turned out that there was actually a lot more to it that they'd rather I didn't know about.

[M Kehoe]

You've simply restated Pascal's Wager.

Correct. The simplicity lies in the logical statement: It is, or it isn't. On or off. Binary mathematics. There are no refutations.

Thanks for playing.

5.56mm

[Bellflower]

ping

[Bellflower]

Interesting site. TY

[Brugmansian]

The (Big Bang) theory, developed by the Belgian Catholic priest and astronomer Georges Lemaître . . .

Lemaître said psychology, not astrophysics, is where he saw evidence of God.

[rae4palin]

Amen. The existence of God is self-evident & obvious.

[Kevmo]

Those are not refutations, they're merely criticisms. You fail to understand it, just like Voltaire. From your link: But Voltaire, like many other critics, misunderstood the Wager. Pascal did not offer the wager as a proof. [12] It is merely a conclusion to his arguments against certainty that relies on the notion that reason is untrustworthy and that discerning God's actual existence appears to be "a coin toss." If reason can be trusted on the question of God's existence, then the wager simply does not apply. re⋅fute  /rɪˈfyut/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-fyoot] Show IPA Use refute in a Sentence See web results for refute See images of refute –verb (used with object), -fut⋅ed, -fut⋅ing. 1. to prove to be false or erroneous, as an opinion or charge. 2. to prove (a person) to be in error. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Origin: 1505–15; < L refūtāre to check, suppress, refute, rebut, equiv. to re- re- + -fūtāre presumably, “to beat” (attested only with the prefixes con- and re-; cf. confute )

[Bellflower]

We know little about singularities. In fact some scientists believe that micro-singularities might temporarily exist throughout our own universe and even on the Earth itself.

This universe did not and could not create itself. This universe came into being as a product of a "singularity". We can know that the "singularity" must be utterly marvelous beyond our comprehension. Look around and look at our creation from the minute to the grand and know that God exist and that He is profoundly glorious beyond anything we can even begin to imagine.

[Kevmo]

Those are not refutations, they're merely criticisms. You fail to understand it, just like Voltaire.

From your link:
But Voltaire, like many other critics, misunderstood the Wager. Pascal did not offer the wager as a proof. [12] It is merely a conclusion to his arguments against certainty that relies on the notion that reason is untrustworthy and that discerning God's actual existence appears to be "a coin toss." If reason can be trusted on the question of God's existence, then the wager simply does not apply.


re⋅fute  /rɪˈfyut/
Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-fyoot] Show IPA

–verb (used with object), -fut⋅ed, -fut⋅ing.
1. to prove to be false or erroneous, as an opinion or charge.
2. to prove (a person) to be in error.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin: 1505–15; < L refūtāre to check, suppress, refute, rebut, equiv. to re- re- + -fūtāre presumably, “to beat” (attested only with the prefixes con- and re-; cf. confute )

[Candor7]

Thank you so much for your kind, inspired comment.

[Soothesayer9]

There was an interesting tidbit in a science journal where one of Carl Sagan’s friends (fellow ph.d) was walking with Sagan around campus and Sagan remarked to him how he couldn’t understand why he believes in God with all the evidence that discounts his existence, and the friend says “well I can say the same about you! Mountains of evidence and you turn a blind eye!”. I think his friend was a biochemist but can’t remember which journal this was in.

Now thats something I have never understood..how an atheist and Christian can remain steadfast friends in the face of such a volatile topic. But to each his own I guess.