How Can We Have Laws of Science Without Design?

[Montrovant]

The question is whether a cognitive set of descriptions that MODEL the universe' behavior (and thus referred to as laws) do not also show design.

I am not referring to just any crayon drawing by a six year old, but cognitive descriptions that model some behavior, like the law of gravity.

All systems of such cognitive expressions have design. Every single one.

So by induction, all such systems of cognitive description that models the universe's behavior possess design.

This is like saying 'All circles are round' or 'All flat two dimensional surfaces have planes.'

It is true by definition.

I also notice you failed to answer my question. Is there a single thing in all the observed universe that was not designed?

Your question is irrelevant since I am not contesting it.

Sure, a rock has no design.

The chemical relations that exist as concepts that bind that rock together do have a systemic design.

We're getting somewhere!

Since a rock has no design, can it not be described with cognitive expression?

 

[edthecynic]

What question are you referring to then?

I responded to your initial question here:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...of-science-without-design-10.html#post8834697

What have I missed?

If god is a first cause, in your opinion, why can't the universe itself be a "first" cause?

Because of the flow of time. Time must have a starting point, while an eternal object/being does not as it exists outside the flow of space-time.

Yeah, ENERGY!!!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Lol, retreating to using smilies now? lolol

What God is a red herring. There is only one Creator,

Another pontification without proof!

Why can't there be two or a team of 10s or billions of creators designing the laws of the universe. What law demands only one designer/creator?

That is a religious issue and I am not discussing it here other than to give my opinion of what the facts are.

And there is only one Creator that mankind has been stumbling through the centuries to try and understand.

but if you want to discuss that, why don't you start a new thread?

I'll start a new thread when YOU stop pontificating about there being only one creator.

 

[Dr Grump]

If there is a designer, who designed the designer?

 

[edthecynic]

Prove it.

If there was no Space-Time, then how could it have been *IN* our universe, idjit?

Because time exists ONLY in terms of motion. At T=0 all the energy of the universe is compressed into one point and there was no motion and therefore no time. This singularity is a very unstable condition and went BANG almost immediately.

You can visualize it like throwing a ball straight up, as it rises it slows down and at its highest point for a moment, a singularity, the ball is neither rising nor falling. This position is unstable and the ball falls back to Earth almost immediately. The ball always existed throughout the entire cycle just like energy always existed throughout the entire Big Bang, Big Crunch cycle.

A lot of talk around the point that there was no universe prior to t=0, and so there was no energy in it, because there was no universe for it.

You can duck the obvious by repeating that with no time there was no before to matter, but an observer from a parallel universe that has contact in some form would not have seen our universe, and it would be interesting to know what they would have recorded when our Big Bang took place.

There was a UNIVERSE of ENERGY compressed into a single point at the Big Bang. There was never no energy in our universe and there will never be no energy in our universe, but there was a SINGULAR moment when time did not exist.
Try again.

 

[edthecynic]

If there is a designer, who designed the designer?

The Super Designer, of course.

 

[Dr Grump]

If there is a designer, who designed the designer?

The Super Designer, of course.

Right. And how designed the super designer?

I feel a headache coming on....

 

[edthecynic]

If there is a designer, who designed the designer?

The Super Designer, of course.

Right. And how designed the super designer?

I feel a headache coming on....

You are right, the Super Duper Designer.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No. All systems of expression have design doesn't even mean what you think it does, it just means the systems of expression have design, not the things they are describing. So, the system of expressions used to describe the physical realities of our universe were (obviously) designed, but that does not in any way mean the physical realities themselves were designed.

Lol, who the hell do you think you are to tell me what I really mean, or that I am wrong like you are some kind of authority.

You are not. You are just another person posting on the internet.

You cant even repeat back to me what I have been saying.

You are a joke.

I'm not telling you what you really mean. I don't think anyone, including you, knows what you really mean.

I'm telling you what the things you are posting mean, which is not in line with the conclusions you are drawing.

So again. That humans have come up with descriptions for various processes of the universe does not prove of imply a creator for those processes. Our 'systems of cognitive description' as you insist on calling them prove only that we have designed a system of description for processes which we do not know the origins of.

There's nothing wrong with you believing a creator began the universe and put those processes in place. However, the fact of their existence is not objective proof there was such a creator.

Lol, I don't care if you think it OK, Miss Marples, but that you admit that this designed system of models we have for the universe, t hat accurately reflects the behavior of the universe but at the same time means NOTHING about the universe itself being designed is hilarious.

If I design a system of logical statements that interact in a logical and designed way to simulate almost perfectly the behavior of another system, then the system being modeled itself has design.

If that isn't apparent to you then you have a problem.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If there is a designer, who designed the designer?

The Super Designer, of course.

Right. And how designed the super designer?

I feel a headache coming on....

Lol, then it is a head ache of your own doing.

There is nothing prior to an object or person that is eternal, i.e. exists outside the flow of time.

Now if that gives you a head ache, maybe you shouldn't be playing with such dangerous things, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Because time exists ONLY in terms of motion. At T=0 all the energy of the universe is compressed into one point and there was no motion and therefore no time. This singularity is a very unstable condition and went BANG almost immediately.

You can visualize it like throwing a ball straight up, as it rises it slows down and at its highest point for a moment, a singularity, the ball is neither rising nor falling. This position is unstable and the ball falls back to Earth almost immediately. The ball always existed throughout the entire cycle just like energy always existed throughout the entire Big Bang, Big Crunch cycle.

A lot of talk around the point that there was no universe prior to t=0, and so there was no energy in it, because there was no universe for it.

You can duck the obvious by repeating that with no time there was no before to matter, but an observer from a parallel universe that has contact in some form would not have seen our universe, and it would be interesting to know what they would have recorded when our Big Bang took place.

There was a UNIVERSE of ENERGY compressed into a single point at the Big Bang. There was never no energy in our universe and there will never be no energy in our universe, but there was a SINGULAR moment when time did not exist.
Try again.

Except to an outside observer. A person in an external universe would see at what we call t=0 that at t=-1 there was no universe for all this energy. So it came from somewhere outside of it, or was conjured in a microsecond, take your pick.

You can try to hide behind the semantics of what the start of time in our universe means, but its paper thin and anyone can see though it.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Another pontification without proof!

Why can't there be two or a team of 10s or billions of creators designing the laws of the universe. What law demands only one designer/creator?

That is a religious issue and I am not discussing it here other than to give my opinion of what the facts are.

And there is only one Creator that mankind has been stumbling through the centuries to try and understand.

but if you want to discuss that, why don't you start a new thread?

I'll start a new thread when YOU stop pontificating about there being only one creator.

Lol, only to a libtard does giving a contrary opinion amount to PONTIFICATING, lol.

I said it was my opinion, and that has nothing to do with pontificating, you pedantic fraud.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If god is a first cause, in your opinion, why can't the universe itself be a "first" cause?

Because of the flow of time. Time must have a starting point, while an eternal object/being does not as it exists outside the flow of space-time.

Yeah, ENERGY!!!!!

Yes, but energy is only part of what exists outside the flow of time.

There is lots more, and thousands of pretty deep thinkers have long recognized that, all the while atheists and igtheists have clamored on about a 'steady state' universe, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I also notice you failed to answer my question. Is there a single thing in all the observed universe that was not designed?

Your question is irrelevant since I am not contesting it.

Sure, a rock has no design.

The chemical relations that exist as concepts that bind that rock together do have a systemic design.

We're getting somewhere!

Since a rock has no design, can it not be described with cognitive expression?

Yes, it can be, but not with cognitive expression that models the rocks behavior, except at a molecular level, but at that level we are not talking about a rock but something entirely different.

 

[edthecynic]

A lot of talk around the point that there was no universe prior to t=0, and so there was no energy in it, because there was no universe for it.

You can duck the obvious by repeating that with no time there was no before to matter, but an observer from a parallel universe that has contact in some form would not have seen our universe, and it would be interesting to know what they would have recorded when our Big Bang took place.

There was a UNIVERSE of ENERGY compressed into a single point at the Big Bang. There was never no energy in our universe and there will never be no energy in our universe, but there was a SINGULAR moment when time did not exist.
Try again.

Except to an outside observer. A person in an external universe would see at what we call t=0 that at t=-1 there was no universe for all this energy. So it came from somewhere outside of it, or was conjured in a microsecond, take your pick.

You can try to hide behind the semantics of what the start of time in our universe means, but its paper thin and anyone can see though it.

At T=-1 an outside observer would see our universe of energy contracting. At T=0 an outside observer would see our universe of energy neither expanding nor contracting. At T=1 an outside observer would see our universe of energy expanding. At no point would our universe of energy not exist.
Try again.

 

[orogenicman]

Your question is irrelevant since I am not contesting it.

Sure, a rock has no design.

The chemical relations that exist as concepts that bind that rock together do have a systemic design.

We're getting somewhere!

Since a rock has no design, can it not be described with cognitive expression?

Yes, it can be, but not with cognitive expression that models the rocks behavior, except at a molecular level, but at that level we are not talking about a rock but something entirely different.

As a geologist, I must say that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[hortysir]

You seem to think that there is some purpose or goal behind the evolution of life. Biologically, if not the only goal, at least the most important goal, in life is to reproduce, and thus perpetuate itself. It is the most conserved trait in all life forms. Everything else is just gravy. Conservatives don't get this.

"Reproduce", i.e. create life.
Life only comes from life.
Evolution does not explain original life

 

[Montrovant]

Lol, who the hell do you think you are to tell me what I really mean, or that I am wrong like you are some kind of authority.

You are not. You are just another person posting on the internet.

You cant even repeat back to me what I have been saying.

You are a joke.

I'm not telling you what you really mean. I don't think anyone, including you, knows what you really mean.

I'm telling you what the things you are posting mean, which is not in line with the conclusions you are drawing.

So again. That humans have come up with descriptions for various processes of the universe does not prove of imply a creator for those processes. Our 'systems of cognitive description' as you insist on calling them prove only that we have designed a system of description for processes which we do not know the origins of.

There's nothing wrong with you believing a creator began the universe and put those processes in place. However, the fact of their existence is not objective proof there was such a creator.

Lol, I don't care if you think it OK, Miss Marples, but that you admit that this designed system of models we have for the universe, t hat accurately reflects the behavior of the universe but at the same time means NOTHING about the universe itself being designed is hilarious.

If I design a system of logical statements that interact in a logical and designed way to simulate almost perfectly the behavior of another system, then the system being modeled itself has design.

If that isn't apparent to you then you have a problem.

So once again, your argument boils down to humanity being able to describe a system means the system being described was designed. At least it's a step up from any human description being evidence of design!

Is there a single system of behavior in the observed universe which was not designed?

 

[emilynghiem]

If god created the universe, who or what created god?

Lol, retreating to using smilies now? lolol

What God is a red herring. There is only one Creator,

Another pontification without proof!

Why can't there be two or a team of 10s or billions of creators designing the laws of the universe. What law demands only one designer/creator?

I think the point is we agree on the laws underlying each system as all-inclusive or universal.
We don't have to agree that the SYSTEMS of expressing laws are universal, because they aren't, but differ between people or situations or applications.

But in general the point is to have an agreement there ARE universal laws of
science, of human nature and governance, etc. that apply to ALL situations.

And most of our conflicts are about our perceptions, understanding or expression of these laws and relationships, and whether or not these align.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There was a UNIVERSE of ENERGY compressed into a single point at the Big Bang. There was never no energy in our universe and there will never be no energy in our universe, but there was a SINGULAR moment when time did not exist.
Try again.

Except to an outside observer. A person in an external universe would see at what we call t=0 that at t=-1 there was no universe for all this energy. So it came from somewhere outside of it, or was conjured in a microsecond, take your pick.

You can try to hide behind the semantics of what the start of time in our universe means, but its paper thin and anyone can see though it.

At T=-1 an outside observer would see our universe of energy contracting. At T=0 an outside observer would see our universe of energy neither expanding nor contracting. At T=1 an outside observer would see our universe of energy expanding. At no point would our universe of energy not exist.
Try again.

Bullshit.

At t=-1 there would be no universe.