# A Math Problem

182 replies to this topic

### #181 Zaccarias

Zaccarias

Member

• Veteran Member
• 147 posts
• Age: 33
• Christian
• Young Earth Creationist
• PH

Posted 14 July 2014 - 04:04 PM

Iche: These things are real, we can observe them occurring, just because we can invent a language to describe these processes is not evidence of a supernatural creator.

So who or what do you think created/started these "unchanging laws" that physical objects adhere to?  Are you saying that the "world" would have existed without these laws that we describe mathematically?

• Calypsis4 likes this

### #182 thistle

thistle

Banned

• Banned
• 264 posts
• Gender:Male
• Age: 43
• no affiliation
• Atheist
• UK

Posted 15 July 2014 - 02:04 AM

I think there is a fundamental disconnect, with what math is, going on here.

People are equating mathematical formulas with, I am actually not sure, recipes?... Computer programs?... I am not sure.

What math does is to attempt to define the natural world in a language that can be expressed systematically. The formulas that describe natural phenomena do not make the phenomena happen, they attempt to describe it in a way that is useful to us.

For example the area of a circle can be described as "pi multiplied by the radius of the circle, squared" . This is a formula that was developed by mathematicians to describe the area of a circle. Before there were mathematicians, there were circles. These circles had an area before we knew how to calculate it, circles did not just pop into being because some intelligent being came up with a formula to describe them. E=mc2 does not make energy and mass and light do anything, it just describes the relationship between them. If we did not have the formula, the relationship would be the same.

Just because we humans have developed math, science, and philosophy to describe what we observe in the natural world does not mean that math has to exist for the world to exist, math is a language used to describe what we know already exists, and to extrapolate what could possibly exist if we haven't observed it. If we had no English word for snow, would that mean that snow does not exist?

So, saying that just because we can create a language to describe what we observe in the natural world proves that there must be a supernatural being makes no sense. That is equivalent as saying the color blue did not exist until we created the word "blue", and because we can say that there is a color "blue", and other people understand when we describe something as "blue", there must be a supernatural creator that created blue. Or you could say that human's can detect certain frequencies of electromagnetic waves. Waves of a certain frequency we call blue. They would still exist no matter what we called them. No reason to invoke a creator. Now that we can describe "blue" it does not make it a mystical experience.

This is the same with everything we can observe in the natural world... Gravity, DNA, genetics, etc. These things are real, we can observe them occurring, just because we can invent a language to describe these processes is not evidence of a supernatural creator.

That's a great post.

### #183 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

Veteran Member

• Veteran Member
• 7,006 posts
• Gender:Male
• Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
• Age: 25
• (private)
• Creationist
• Australia

Posted 15 July 2014 - 02:05 PM

Iche: These things are real, we can observe them occurring, just because we can invent a language to describe these processes is not evidence of a supernatural creator.

Yet we didn't invent the language... We simply discovered what was already there... Therefore if the language of mathematics was already there then who created it?

#### 0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users