|
|
Post by dlectronic on May 30, 2010 17:58:23 GMT -5
"My goal in life is to find an equation, an equation perhaps no more than one inch long, which will summarize everything we know about the physical universe; an equation one inch long which eluded Einstein, which will allow us to understand where the big bang came from, where the galaxies and the super novas come from, where life comes from, where DNA comes from, where humans fit in to this larger puzzle, maybe even eventually solving the puzzle of love itself." I don't know about you all, but this ultimate equation that links everything together and creates sense out of the universe seems like it could be realized with a being we know as God! Later in the video Kaku describes the "two different types of God" but interestingly, I don't think the two types he describes are really all that different. Anybody else have thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 30, 2010 20:02:34 GMT -5
Interesting. I'm going to watch more of his videos.
"Biologists think they are biochemists, Biochemists think they are Physical Chemists, Physical Chemists think they are Physicists, Physicists think they are Gods, And God thinks he is a Mathematician."
|
|
runny
New Member
I am cool or something.
Posts: 11
|
Post by runny on May 30, 2010 22:29:37 GMT -5
of course "a" god exists
|
|
|
|
Post by Jacob on May 30, 2010 23:14:14 GMT -5
I'm not gonna bother getting into this discussion but I can't seem to stop watching this guy's videos.They are amazing.
|
|
|
|
Post by radar on May 31, 2010 0:02:40 GMT -5
If God was the "ultimate scientific equation," wouldn't that be limiting him to the natural realm? I don't see anything supernatural about a god that could be completely explained with science.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on May 31, 2010 0:13:16 GMT -5
I'm not sure about an equation defining God but I do think it is possible for there to be an equation which points to the existence of God.
(or maybe I would just like there to be)
|
|
|
|
Post by Radiant Magnificence Alastair on May 31, 2010 2:04:48 GMT -5
42
|
|
|
|
Post by dlectronic on May 31, 2010 14:49:47 GMT -5
^ no, but thats funny. It's not even an equation  . If God was the "ultimate scientific equation," wouldn't that be limiting him to the natural realm? I don't see anything supernatural about a god that could be completely explained with science. Indeed that is true. It would be like making God tangible and we would have no free will whether or not to choose to love Him. Perhaps I have been corrected. Maybe this equation would simply point us to God. With the way he describes this "potential" equation he seeks, it really seems like He's talking about God, ha. Regarding the "of course "a" god exists" comment. That is NOT what the atheist thinks. Quite the opposite actually. However Kaku seeks more than "a god," rather "THE God." Of course he (in other videos) says he doesn't believe in the personal God of the Bible, but.. Ah! SO many good topics to discuss. I have been watching his vids too haha. |
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on May 31, 2010 17:35:25 GMT -5
I'm sure free will could be modeled at least very approximately by a mathematical/statistical equation(s). Kaku seems to not be talking about an equation that describes God, but one that describes how everything came into being: the one that "God" used to create the Universe.
|
|
|
|
Post by radar on Jun 2, 2010 0:06:58 GMT -5
I'm sure free will could be modeled at least very approximately by a mathematical/statistical equation(s). Kaku seems to not be talking about an equation that describes God, but one that describes how everything came into being: the one that "God" used to create the Universe. Hmmm...it sounds like you're assuming that God used an equation that already existed? ("the one that 'God' used to create the Universe") I guess that depends a lot on how you believe the universe was created. If you believe that the universe was created ex nihilo ("out of nothing"), then God created the universe without being bound to any sorts of limitations. Equations were derived later to describe the physical process; equations didn't necessarily dictate the process. |
|
|
|
Post by Azrael on Jun 2, 2010 0:32:14 GMT -5
The more I learn, the more I find that humans, of all things in this universe, are the only unpredictable facet of existence. Humans are the only x factor. Humans are the only living forms that act not out of self-preservation in some instances. Only humans have free will. The story of humans and our interaction with God is the true testament to our image of the father: our ability to defy pattern.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on Jun 2, 2010 1:04:56 GMT -5
I'm sure free will could be modeled at least very approximately by a mathematical/statistical equation(s). Kaku seems to not be talking about an equation that describes God, but one that describes how everything came into being: the one that "God" used to create the Universe. Hmmm...it sounds like you're assuming that God used an equation that already existed? ("the one that 'God' used to create the Universe") I guess that depends a lot on how you believe the universe was created. If you believe that the universe was created ex nihilo ("out of nothing"), then God created the universe without being bound to any sorts of limitations. Equations were derived later to describe the physical process; equations didn't necessarily dictate the process. As I am semi-close to a Fundamentalist Christian, I believe that the Lord did create the Universe out of nothing by only his words. I also believe that He isn't bound to any natural laws other than those of His own character and also of the covenants and promises He has made with people throughout history. God is above the mathematical laws he used to define nature. I also believe that the Lord ingrained mathematical laws into nature because they are things discovered, not invented. God had to be the inventor of mathematics, and we are its discoverers. These laws that describe nature simply are. The more we uncover these laws, the more we learn about nature. I believe the Lord may have "programmed" mathematical (physical) laws into nature, and this is why we can only discover them, and not really invent them. |
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jun 2, 2010 1:17:30 GMT -5
our ability to defy pattern. Very true. |
|
|
|
Post by Radiant Magnificence Alastair on Jun 2, 2010 3:08:32 GMT -5
I knew you would say that, it's part of your pattern.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maarten on Jun 2, 2010 10:53:16 GMT -5
I knew you would say that, it's part of your pattern.
|
|
.
