Answers in Genesis and fractals

[excreationist]

Fractals

Did you know that amazing, beautiful shapes have been built into numbers? Believe it or not, numbers contain a “secret code”—a hidden beauty embedded in them.

answersingenesis.org

Numbers have existed from the beginning of creation, yet researchers have only recently discovered the hidden shapes that the Lord placed within them. Such beauty defies a secular explanation but confirms biblical creation.

....

God alone can take credit for mathematical truths, such as fractals. Such transcendent truths are a reflection of God’s thoughts. Therefore when we discover mathematical truths we are, in the words of the astronomer Johannes Kepler, “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.” The shapes shown in the figures have been built into mathematics by the Creator of mathematics. We could have chosen different color schemes for the graphs, but we cannot alter the shape—it is set by God and His nature.

....

Evolution cannot account for fractals. These shapes have existed since creation and cannot have evolved, since numbers cannot change—the number 7 will never be anything but 7. But fractals are perfectly consistent with biblical creation. The Christian understands that there are transcendent truths because the Bible states many of them. A biblical creationist expects to find beauty and order in the universe, not only in the physical universe, but in the abstract realm of mathematics as well. This order and beauty is possible because there is a logical God who has imparted order and beauty into His universe.

This would be yet another reason why creationists would have their faith strengthened by assuming these are good reasons to believe.

Also:


55:12

...there is no answer from the bankrupt evolutionary atheistic camp as to why the physical universe obeys mathematical laws but it is exactly what the Christian would expect....

55:34

....numbers are abstract conceptions of quantity - concepts require a mind - numbers are a reflection of the way God thinks. The secular worldview cannot account for the existence and properties of numbers or mathematical truths....

 

[Daisy]

Evolution cannot account for fractals.

I have to agree with this!

 

[Jarhyn]

Fractals

Did you know that amazing, beautiful shapes have been built into numbers? Believe it or not, numbers contain a “secret code”—a hidden beauty embedded in them.

answersingenesis.org

Numbers have existed from the beginning of creation, yet researchers have only recently discovered the hidden shapes that the Lord placed within them. Such beauty defies a secular explanation but confirms biblical creation.

....

God alone can take credit for mathematical truths, such as fractals. Such transcendent truths are a reflection of God’s thoughts. Therefore when we discover mathematical truths we are, in the words of the astronomer Johannes Kepler, “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.” The shapes shown in the figures have been built into mathematics by the Creator of mathematics. We could have chosen different color schemes for the graphs, but we cannot alter the shape—it is set by God and His nature.

....

Evolution cannot account for fractals. These shapes have existed since creation and cannot have evolved, since numbers cannot change—the number 7 will never be anything but 7. But fractals are perfectly consistent with biblical creation. The Christian understands that there are transcendent truths because the Bible states many of them. A biblical creationist expects to find beauty and order in the universe, not only in the physical universe, but in the abstract realm of mathematics as well. This order and beauty is possible because there is a logical God who has imparted order and beauty into His universe.

This would be yet another reason why creationists would have their faith strengthened by assuming these are good reasons to believe.

Also:


55:12

...there is no answer from the bankrupt evolutionary atheistic camp as to why the physical universe obeys mathematical laws but it is exactly what the Christian would expect....

55:34

....numbers are abstract conceptions of quantity - concepts require a mind - numbers are a reflection of the way God thinks. The secular worldview cannot account for the existence and properties of numbers or mathematical truths....

Ugh... This is so wrong it hurts. Numerical systems absolutely extend and interact in increasingly complicated ways as a product of variances in their structures.

Fractals are literally just what you get when you operate a complex system with a fractional exponent.

Minds don't make math happen, math just is. If you want to worship Math or Langland's Philosophy as "god" though, that is not meaningful or useful: Math doesn't think.

Thinking merely is an implementation, an operation of and within math. Or, more accurately, the only way math thinks is as a mind in a reification of stuff within that mathematical system.

The objects of the large scale universe, however, do not have the necessary structural influence on each other in the right ways to be "a mind". Their relationship is chaotic, and does not operate meaningfully in organized weighted switching structures in a way that usefully influenced outcomes towards an organized goal, and even if it was on some vast scale holding various such processes, there is still no guarantee that it would be intelligent or kind or any such thing: minds are always born in what must be assumed by the mind as ignorance.

In many ways this equates to the reality behind "original sin", albeit a far different reality from what it was either originated as in it's conception or perverted to since.

 

[steve_bank]

Mathematics including fractals are human abstractions we superimpose over reality.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Fractals

Did you know that amazing, beautiful shapes have been built into numbers? Believe it or not, numbers contain a “secret code”—a hidden beauty embedded in them.

answersingenesis.org

Numbers have existed from the beginning of creation, yet researchers have only recently discovered the hidden shapes that the Lord placed within them. Such beauty defies a secular explanation but confirms biblical creation.

This would be yet another reason why creationists would have their faith strengthened by assuming these are good reasons to believe.

Also:

God's mind looks like a butt. *hee hee*

Is AiG still a thing?

....numbers are abstract conceptions of quantity - concepts require a mind - numbers are a reflection of the way God thinks. The secular worldview cannot account for the existence and properties of numbers or mathematical truths....

Numbers don't exist. Numbers are tools we use to quantize the world we live in. They seem to say as much, but then manage to go on and hook god up to it.

This just reads like an Intelligent Design derivative.

Hmmm... let me try something.

....inches are abstract conceptions of distance - concepts require a mind - inches are a reflection of the way God thinks. The secular worldview cannot account for the existence and properties of inches or geometry....

*turning pages*

I'm also not seeing fractals in the Book of Genesis.

 

[excreationist]

I'm also not seeing fractals in the Book of Genesis.

At about 49:30 it talks about romanesco broccolli

and at 51:30 it talks about the Barnsley fern:

It is saying fractals appear in both math and the physical world....

 

[Swammerdami]

[off-topic?]

excreationist mentioned Michael Barnsley. I don't know if his fractal method of image compression ever became widely used^* but it has AMAZING elegance. (* - Microsoft used it in at least one product; do they still?)

Use of a "code-book" is one method of image compression. Each block in the image to be compressed is compared with code-book entries; if the block matches, say, code-book entry #59 the compressed file need contain only "59" (although parameters will be added to allow hue-changes, rotations, etc.) If you want to use a code-book optimized for the particular image, you may prepend the code-book to the compressed-image file, though this will consume space.

So "code-book" coding is so straightforward as to be trivial and boring. Barnsley's compression method is based on a code-book; what is so amazing about it?

In Barnsley's method, the image (scaled down) is its own code-book! Decompression requires iteration as image and code-book are gradually resolved together. (They're the same!)

​

 

[Swammerdami]

Very interesting and impressive, excreationist! Thanks for the link.

To be clear, I was NOT touting Barnsley's IFS as necessarily a useful or productive method. I just think the idea of encoding an image using ITSELF as the codebook is a delicious idea!

 

[excreationist]

BTW I deleted my post but here is the video I had:

 

[SIB]

For me the issue is "belief in some thing more" vs "their set of traits they give their god"

yeah, there looks to be something more, the data shows that, but the claim in things like "It likes when we fear it" or "sent its son to save us" or "we are born evil" is just silliness.

As to genesis ... Its literal interpretations that fail. Yeah, maybe your god created us ... then say it looks like it did it through evolution. I mean from hydrogen to humans the way it looks like "your god" is showing us it did it is fine by me.

 

[steve_bank]

....numbers are abstract conceptions of quantity - concepts require a mind - numbers are a reflection of the way God thinks. The secular worldview cannot account for the existence and properties of numbers or mathematical truths....

Every time I get to thinking I can't get surprised by religion something like this pops up.

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

Something I read in the Oxford bible commentray. The translation for creation narrative is murky in some places. One way to translate it is to say out of chaos god brought order. Not god created everything.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm also not seeing fractals in the Book of Genesis.

At about 49:30 it talks about romanesco broccolli

and at 51:30 it talks about the Barnsley fern:

It is saying fractals appear in both math and the physical world....

The outdoors isn't "The Book of Genesis".

 

[Jarhyn]

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

It operates on the basis of Langland's Philosophy, obviously.

This is obviously a joke, but not entirely since all math seems to operate thusly.

 

[steve_bank]

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

It operates on the basis of Langland's Philosophy, obviously.

This is obviously a joke, but not entirely since all math seems to operate thusly.

Philosophy bakes no bread.
There is a philosophy to quote for any occasion.

Not a joke, obviously.

 

[Jarhyn]

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

It operates on the basis of Langland's Philosophy, obviously.

This is obviously a joke, but not entirely since all math seems to operate thusly.

Philosophy bakes no bread.
There is a philosophy to quote for any occasion.

Not a joke, obviously.

Read on what "Langland's Philosophy" is. It's also refered to as "Langland's Program". Your unawareness of this makes your post the butt of a joke you didn't see yourself walking into.

 

[steve_bank]

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

It operates on the basis of Langland's Philosophy, obviously.

This is obviously a joke, but not entirely since all math seems to operate thusly.

Philosophy bakes no bread.
There is a philosophy to quote for any occasion.

Not a joke, obviously.

Read on what "Langland's Philosophy" is. It's also refered to as "Langland's Program". Your unawareness of this makes your post the butt of a joke you didn't see yourself walking into.

I took a look at the wiki page. Superfluous.

Calculators work because the technology evolved over time the work of many people and many generations. The genesus for the first Intel processor was a contract to make a chip for a 4 function calculator. Calculators do the same math you do by hand digitally, base 2. That is all. Trig functions are done by series expansions.

Mechanical calculators go back thousand of years. Not the least of which was the log log slide rule replaced by the scientific calculator. At least in engineering a calculator that did arbitrary powers and roots was a big deal.

No engineer or scientist I worked wit ever reverenced a philosophy or had a philosophy reference on the shelf at work.

Maybe looking at it through philosophy instead of mathematics is why you had trouble with your control system.

You can start a thread on the practicality and usefulness of phi;philosophy in modern science and technology.

 

[Jarhyn]

Is god's calculator algebraic or RPN?

It operates on the basis of Langland's Philosophy, obviously.

This is obviously a joke, but not entirely since all math seems to operate thusly.

Philosophy bakes no bread.
There is a philosophy to quote for any occasion.

Not a joke, obviously.

Read on what "Langland's Philosophy" is. It's also refered to as "Langland's Program". Your unawareness of this makes your post the butt of a joke you didn't see yourself walking into.

I took a look at the wiki page. Superfluous.

Calculators work because the technology evolved over time the work of many people and many generations. The genesus for the first Intel processor was a contract to make a chip for a 4 function calculator. Calculators do the same math you do by hand digitally, base 2. That is all. Trig functions are done by series expansions.

Mechanical calculators go back thousand of years. Not the least of which was the log log slide rule replaced by the scientific calculator. At least in engineering a calculator that did arbitrary powers and roots was a big deal.

No engineer or scientist I worked wit ever reverenced a philosophy or had a philosophy reference on the shelf at work.

Maybe looking at it through philosophy instead of mathematics is why you had trouble with your control system.

You can start a thread on the practicality and usefulness of phi;philosophy in modern science and technology.

Well, you better call the Abel Prize commission and tell them to get their money back.

Please quit embarrassing yourself. Stop getting triggered by the word "philosophy", perhaps.

 

[excreationist]

I'm also not seeing fractals in the Book of Genesis.

At about 49:30 it talks about romanesco broccolli

and at 51:30 it talks about the Barnsley fern:

It is saying fractals appear in both math and the physical world....

The outdoors isn't "The Book of Genesis".

Genesis 1 and 2 basically said God created plants and some plants seem to have fractals.

 

[Jarhyn]

Also, I'll note that calculators work because silicon with transitional elements in it's crystal structure gate the flow of electrons when charge potentials are at certain thresholds and because when such structures are arranged in various ways they perform the basic logic of arithmetic.

It has nothing to do with evolving over time and everything to do with the object properties of the sum of it's parts in concert.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm also not seeing fractals in the Book of Genesis.

At about 49:30 it talks about romanesco broccolli

and at 51:30 it talks about the Barnsley fern:

It is saying fractals appear in both math and the physical world....

The outdoors isn't "The Book of Genesis".

Genesis 1 and 2 basically said God created plants and some plants seem to have fractals.

You pretty much can link anything to God if you reference Genesis 1 so nonsensically like that.