Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Maybe Not

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on May 20, 2003 16:30:56 UTC

Hi Dick,

Internet funds are low, but let me respond...:

***The fact is that my fundamental equation makes no constraints at all on what can exist.***

Sure it does. It assumes that certain mathematical axioms are 'true' (otherwise you couldn't assume to use mathematics), and therefore the constraints on reality are directly related with our experiences (i.e., what we have experienced so far).

***It constitutes a "natural law" under your definition as I know about it. Since it constrains the universe in no way, there exists nothing which can violate it so your "supernatural law" recedes into nothingness.***

A supernatural law might be those laws that are beyond the means of science to currently know about, and without this knowledge we might consider their effect to be 'supernatural'. For example, there might be a 'law' that humans who pray can receive intervention. This would certainly be a 'supernatural law', but nothing in science or nothing in your model prevent such a law from existing.


Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins