Can we/you number the amount of quantum particles in the universe...?

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
What makes you think it doesn't? All the patterns, all the order we see, is just due to pure randomness and chance then?
All physical things have properties, and the interactions (often at random) of these properties can give rise to order. Often, selective influences on the results of randomness or chance are involved.

Order can come about fairly directly through the properties of a single uniform material, for example, if you disturb the surface of a liquid, you'll get an orderly sequence or pattern of waves; if you cool down certain liquids to their freezing point the molecules will order themselves into ordered crystals. Ordered atmospheric weather patterns, such as tornadoes and thunderstorms, arise from random air movements influenced by thermal effects - hot air rises, cool air sinks, creating circulations that spiral into orderly vortices. A gas trapped in a liquid will adopt a minimal energy configuration as an orderly round bubble. Pouring dry sand into a heap will form an orderly cone, and fine sand will form an ordered series of dunes or sandbars under the influence of wind or waves.

But more obvious randomness can also produce order - consider the effect of waves sorting the size of sand grains on the beach - from sand at the water's edge to pebbles at the head. A similar effect causes the larger pieces in a box of muesli to rise to the top (despite being heavier than the smaller bits) as the box is shaken during transport and its contents become ordered vertically by size.

There are countless examples of order without design, in my opinion.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
All physical things have properties, and the interactions (often at random) of these properties can give rise to order. Often, selective influences on the results of randomness or chance are involved.

Order can come about fairly directly through the properties of a single uniform material, for example, if you disturb the surface of a liquid, you'll get an orderly sequence or pattern of waves; if you cool down certain liquids to their freezing point the molecules will order themselves into ordered crystals. Ordered atmospheric weather patterns, such as tornadoes and thunderstorms, arise from random air movements influenced by thermal effects - hot air rises, cool air sinks, creating circulations that spiral into orderly vortices. A gas trapped in a liquid will adopt a minimal energy configuration as an orderly round bubble. Pouring dry sand into a heap will form an orderly cone, and fine sand will form an ordered series of dunes or sandbars under the influence of wind or waves.

But more obvious randomness can also produce order - consider the effect of waves sorting the size of sand grains on the beach - from sand at the water's edge to pebbles at the head. A similar effect causes the larger pieces in a box of muesli to rise to the top (despite being heavier than the smaller bits) as the box is shaken during transport and its contents become ordered vertically by size.

There are countless examples of order without design, in my opinion.
Your talking to someone who believes nothing is truly random, but, regardless, you are talking about a few things that "appear to be random, or were or are caused by supposedly random occurrences, that are leaving patterns behind, which is why I say supposedly, because they supposedly and not are part of a program, or programs or codes, by a designer...

Anyhow, your talking about a few instances, and I'm talking about "everything else" where we see patterns and codes "everywhere", and order and symmetry everywhere, and, or that suggests "design", whether they created it long ago, and interfere with it little, and just let the programs run, or whether their hands are in it all the time, ect, IDK...?

Either way, how does nature, like plants for example, why so much symmetry in a simple plants, like a plant leaf for example, so much math and mathematical symmetry in that simple leaf alone, and you can see it well in a simple leaf, only because that program is one of the simplest, but it's everywhere and in everything...

And to unravel all the math involved in one simple leaf, would take volumes and a long time, but it's there, or the math is there, all a set of codes and patterns within patterns, (and orders within orders, that behave the way they do due to math and mathematical constructs), so much contained within that leaf and there is so much to just that simple leaf, or at least it seems that way to us, but not God cause He made it all, He the master programmer of all of "this", and Chief architect and designer as well...

It screams "design" to me...

And let's not get into just how amazing some other things are that scream design, and suggest and intelligent designer or designers also...

God Bless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,956
✟174,730.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
... Either way, how does nature, like plants for example, why so much symmetry in a simple plants, like a plant leaf for example, so much math and mathematical symmetry in that simple leaf alone, and you can see it well in a simple leaf, only because that program is one of the simplest, but it's everywhere and in everything...

And to unravel all the math involved in one simple leaf, would take volumes and a long time, but it's there, or the math is there, all a set of codes and patterns within patterns, (and orders within orders, that behave the way they do due to math and mathematical constructs), so much contained within that leaf and there is so much to just that simple leaf, or at least it seems that way to us, but not God cause He made it all, He the master programmer of all of "this", and Chief architect and designer as well...
The Barnsley fern leaf pattern (for eg) is simply replicated by running a fairly simple algorithm on a computer. The Python script for it is here.
Real-life leaves don't have 'math constructs contained within them'. What goes on at the biological cell level is an iterative replication process (analogously the same as how algorithms run on a computer). The iterative process can be modelled by humans (using math syntax) and then translated into the algorithm shown above.

There's no real mystery about any of this. No miraculous programmer of the universe is required at all .. just environmentally (and genetically) constrained iterative self-replication ... just like every other life form on Earth.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
The Barnsley fern leaf pattern (for eg) is simply replicated by running a fairly simple algorithm on a computer. The Python script for it is here.
Real-life leaves don't have 'math constructs contained within them'. What goes on at the biological cell level is an iterative replication process (analogously the same as how algorithms run on a computer). The iterative process can be modelled by humans (using math syntax) and then translated into the algorithm shown above.

There's no real mystery about any of this. No miraculous programmer of the universe is required at all .. just environmentally (and genetically) constrained iterative self-replication ... just like every other life form on Earth.
Evidence of a program with no programmer...?

Or design with no designer...?

The leaf has cells, then the cells have atoms, then the atoms have quantum particles, ect, all governed by; everything is governed by math... very complex right now to us math, unknowable right now to us math, ect...

How does that happen without intelligence behind it or them...?

Evidence of program without a programmer...?

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
Your talking to someone who believes nothing is truly random, but, regardless, you are talking about a few things that "appear to be random, or were or are caused by supposedly random occurrences, that are leaving patterns behind, which is why I say supposedly, because they supposedly and not are part of a program, or programs or codes, by a designer...
Anyhow, your talking about a few instances, and I'm talking about "everything else" where we see patterns and codes "everywhere", and order and symmetry everywhere, and, or that suggests "design", whether they created it long ago, and interfere with it little, and just let the programs run, or whether their hands are in it all the time, ect, IDK...?
Yes, I myself am dubious about 'true' randomness. What I meant was something like unpredictable external influences causally unrelated to the phenomena in question. I use a simple few examples that I thought it would be difficult to interpret in terms of design.

However, if you want to claim that those examples are part of a program by a designer, then it's rather ambiguous. There's a difference between a designer designing a system that generates a wide variety of phenomena and each phenomenon being explicitly designed.

So if you're saying that a designer could have set up the universe with the correct parameters at the big bang to allow the emergence of complexity, and that, in that sense, everything is designed, I would accept that it would be consistent with what we observe, but it's a stretch of the meaning of 'design' for individual phenomena. OTOH if you're saying that you think every ordered phenomenon is explicitly designed, I would say that the evidence suggests that is not necessary - complexity and order arise out of the underlying rules of the system (the physics), so explicit design is a redundant claim - Occam's Razor applies - as Laplace said (apocryphally) about his omission of God from his work on celestial mechanics, "I had no need of that hypothesis".

Either way, how does nature, like plants for example, why so much symmetry in a simple plants, like a plant leaf for example, so much math and mathematical symmetry in that simple leaf alone, and you can see it well in a simple leaf, only because that program is one of the simplest, but it's everywhere and in everything...

And to unravel all the math involved in one simple leaf, would take volumes and a long time, but it's there, or the math is there, all a set of codes and patterns within patterns, (and orders within orders, that behave the way they do due to math and mathematical constructs), so much contained within that leaf and there is so much to just that simple leaf, or at least it seems that way to us, but not God cause He made it all, He the master programmer of all of "this", and Chief architect and designer as well...

It screams "design" to me...
Those patterns are present typically because they represent simple and efficient solutions for survival in the environment. Large parts of most plants and leaves are pseudo-fractal, i.e. self-similar with scale invariance; they're constructed of the same simple structure repeated at different growth scales (see Fractal Ferns for a mathematical equivalent). Sunflower heads pack their seeds according to the Golden Ratio, not because they know it's a mathematical construct, but because that's the most efficient way to pack the seeds without leaving gaps; sunflowers that pack more seeds will tend to have more offspring, so natural selection favours Golden Ratio packing.

The results may appear to 'scream design' to you, but that's a common cognitive bias - we naturally tend to ascribe sentient agency to ordered systems with satisfying aesthetics; but once you understand the natural processes that give rise to them, you realise that sentient design is not necessary, iterative processes like evolution can produce such 'designs' unaided.
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes, I myself am dubious about 'true' randomness. What I meant was something like unpredictable external influences causally unrelated to the phenomena in question. I use a simple few examples that I thought it would be difficult to interpret in terms of design.

However, if you want to claim that those examples are part of a program by a designer, then it's rather ambiguous. There's a difference between a designer designing a system that generates a wide variety of phenomena and each phenomenon being explicitly designed.

So if you're saying that a designer could have set up the universe with the correct parameters at the big bang to allow the emergence of complexity, and that, in that sense, everything is designed, I would accept that it would be consistent with what we observe, but it's a stretch of the meaning of 'design' for individual phenomena. OTOH if you're saying that you think every ordered phenomenon is explicitly designed, I would say that the evidence suggests that is not necessary - complexity and order arise out of the underlying rules of the system (the physics), so explicit design is a redundant claim - Occam's Razor applies - as Laplace said (apocryphally) about his omission of God from his work on celestial mechanics, "I had no need of that hypothesis".

Those patterns are present typically because they represent simple and efficient solutions for survival in the environment. Large parts of most plants and leaves are pseudo-fractal, i.e. self-similar with scale invariance; they're constructed of the same simple structure repeated at different growth scales (see Fractal Ferns for a mathematical equivalent). Sunflower heads pack their seeds according to the Golden Ratio, not because they know it's a mathematical construct, but because that's the most efficient way to pack the seeds without leaving gaps; sunflowers that pack more seeds will tend to have more offspring, so natural selection favours Golden Ratio packing.

The results may appear to 'scream design' to you, but that's a common cognitive bias - we naturally tend to ascribe sentient agency to ordered systems with satisfying aesthetics; but once you understand the natural processes that give rise to them, you realise that sentient design is not necessary, iterative processes like evolution can produce such 'designs' unaided.
Was it all "un-caused" from the beginning...? un-designed, yet we see a system and systems to it all, that follow certain rules, or orders, and "order", yet, "no designer", or order orderer, or programmer, or maker of those things or systems, and/or source and/or cause of it or those things, ect...?

IDK, It seems all pretty well designed to me, but that may be just me... It has order and structure, that point to an orderer or structure maker (or builder or designer or programmer, or whatever)...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes, I myself am dubious about 'true' randomness. What I meant was something like unpredictable external influences causally unrelated to the phenomena in question. I use a simple few examples that I thought it would be difficult to interpret in terms of design.

However, if you want to claim that those examples are part of a program by a designer, then it's rather ambiguous. There's a difference between a designer designing a system that generates a wide variety of phenomena and each phenomenon being explicitly designed.

So if you're saying that a designer could have set up the universe with the correct parameters at the big bang to allow the emergence of complexity, and that, in that sense, everything is designed, I would accept that it would be consistent with what we observe, but it's a stretch of the meaning of 'design' for individual phenomena. OTOH if you're saying that you think every ordered phenomenon is explicitly designed, I would say that the evidence suggests that is not necessary - complexity and order arise out of the underlying rules of the system (the physics), so explicit design is a redundant claim - Occam's Razor applies - as Laplace said (apocryphally) about his omission of God from his work on celestial mechanics, "I had no need of that hypothesis".

Those patterns are present typically because they represent simple and efficient solutions for survival in the environment. Large parts of most plants and leaves are pseudo-fractal, i.e. self-similar with scale invariance; they're constructed of the same simple structure repeated at different growth scales (see Fractal Ferns for a mathematical equivalent). Sunflower heads pack their seeds according to the Golden Ratio, not because they know it's a mathematical construct, but because that's the most efficient way to pack the seeds without leaving gaps; sunflowers that pack more seeds will tend to have more offspring, so natural selection favours Golden Ratio packing.

The results may appear to 'scream design' to you, but that's a common cognitive bias - we naturally tend to ascribe sentient agency to ordered systems with satisfying aesthetics; but once you understand the natural processes that give rise to them, you realise that sentient design is not necessary, iterative processes like evolution can produce such 'designs' unaided.
Not one sparrow falls to the ground without the/your Father's knowledge... nor does and "supposed natural" and/or natural processes occurring, or how they will change or affect things, or what they will do and where every atom or particle will be at any given moment, ect... None of that goes, nor ever happens, or ever has happened, without His knowing, and knowing it all, and His knowledge, cause He made it all and designed it all, and created it all and gave it all "life" that way...

It's all (life) highly predictable and all fully knowable to Him, like a program...

Those "natural processes" are by design, He designed or built or made them all...

How much a of personal "hand" He has in it, or all of those or these things along the way, is what we can debate, but not whether they were designed or not, or were or are of, and/or by design or not... He could have set the limits and made the rules of all of it, or all the program or programs, that pretty much govern or run it all by itself, for the most part, or He could have much more of a personal hand or touch in it than that, so to speak... But either way, I think He knows all, and can predict all, as I think there is only way or course to it all... That He knows fully and knew fully from the very beginning...

But either way, created, made, designed and goes by and according to design, ect...

Is what I see anyway...

God Bless!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
When you look at all of it, or all that is out there, or here, and you see "rules, math, order", ect... Do you think that is all by random chance, or (by) design...?

Cause I see design...

Can I prove it to you "beyond that", probably not, but I have other evidence in my own personal life also, that many of you just wouldn't believe though, cause, in the end, you can have all the proof in the world and it won't be enough for some, cause in the end it takes some measure of "faith", and you either have it, or you don't I guess...

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
Not one sparrow falls to the ground without the/your Father's knowledge... nor does and "supposed natural" and/or natural processes occurring, or how they will change or affect things, or what they will do and where every atom or particle will be at any given moment, ect... None of that goes, nor ever happens, or ever has happened, without His knowing, and knowing it all, and His knowledge, cause He made it all and designed it all, and created it all and gave it all "life" that way...

It's all (life) highly predictable and all fully knowable to Him, like a program...

Those "natural processes" are by design, He designed or built or made them all...

How much a of personal "hand" He has in it, or all of those or these things along the way, is what we can debate, but not whether they were designed or not, or were or are of, and/or by design or not... He could have set the limits and made the rules of all of it, or all the program or programs, that pretty much govern or run it all by itself, for the most part, or He could have much more of a personal hand or touch in it than that, so to speak... But either way, I think He knows all, and can predict all, as I think there is only way or course to it all... That He knows fully and knew fully from the very beginning...

But either way, created, made, designed and goes by and according to design, ect...

Is what I see anyway...
Cool story, bro. Perhaps an eye test is in order ;)
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Does not order indicate design...?

God Bless!
No. Order alone is insufficient.

Please tell me exactly how you think order necessarily indicates design.

EDIT: I see you addressed this further above, sorry!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
....It screams "design" to me......
I appreciate the honesty.

You cant say how it is, or must be, designed. Basically it feels designed to you. Thats not good enough to support your positive claim tho.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
...The results may appear to 'scream design' to you, but that's a common cognitive bias - we naturally tend to ascribe sentient agency to ordered systems with satisfying aesthetics; but once you understand the natural processes that give rise to them, you realise that sentient design is not necessary, iterative processes like evolution can produce such 'designs' unaided.
This is good!
 
Upvote 0

Neogaia777

Old Soul
Supporter
Oct 10, 2011
23,277
5,237
45
Oregon
✟952,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
I appreciate the honesty.

You cant say how it is, or must be, designed. Basically it feels designed to you. Thats not good enough to support your positive claim tho.
Fair enough... Although it took much evidence and much proving to me, God, by God himself, and "I got mine" and that to, was, or is miracle in and of itself... And I'm guessing you haven't got yours yet...?

Well, then, "what would it take"...? And have you released or expressed that the "air " (atmosphere) around you so to speak, at all, or in any case...? You know, "just in case", kind of thing, or not...?

And if not, why not...? And I mean really, "why not", really and truly...?

God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,412
15,559
Colorado
✟428,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Fair enough... Although it took much evidence and much proving to me, God, by God himself, and "I got mine" and that to, was, or is miracle in and of itself... And I'm guessing you haven't got yours yet...?

Well, then, "what would it take"...? And have you released or expressed that the "air " (atmosphere) around you so to speak, at all, or in any case...? You know, "just in case", kind of thing, or not...?

And if not, why not...? And I mean really, "why not", really and truly...?

God Bless!
What would it take for nature to scream "design" to me? Gosh.... I suppose some evidence that either it has been designed, or reasoning that it must have been designed.

Or maybe there's some mystic moment that reaches around reasoning and hits you some where else? I suppose that could convince me. But thats a pretty vague answer, I realize.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neogaia777
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums