tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post4509949872068207961..comments2021-07-29T19:23:53.439-05:00Comments on Dr Michael G Strauss: A Transcendent God: Part 1Michael G Strausshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11580842374977938870noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-39944041285936735842021-02-14T21:36:39.213-06:002021-02-14T21:36:39.213-06:00When I talk about 2 or 3 dimensions I mean 2 or 3 ...When I talk about 2 or 3 dimensions I mean 2 or 3 space dimensions. Both flatland and spaceland have the same concept and dimension of time.Michael G Strausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11580842374977938870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-55953718553641422722021-02-14T17:28:42.265-06:002021-02-14T17:28:42.265-06:00Um ... to paraphrase the sphere example using onl...Um ... to paraphrase the sphere example using only some of your words, but the general idea of it in the flatland example, you say that as a sphere enters flatland, it first appears as a circle and then the circle becomes larger, then smaller, then a point, then disappears again. "First," "begins,"then," "disappears." All of those words suggest time. They suggest a being in a 2 dimensional space understands time and you try to explain three dimensions by describing how a sphere would pass through. No two dimensional being could understand the third dimension by way of the fourth dimension. In fact, a two dimensional "being" wouldn't understand anything as any sense of understanding an comprehension requires an appreciation of time passing and that demands a minimum of four dimensions or at least the appreciation of time as one of the dimensions you comprehend. Without time, there's no such thing as "comprehendING."Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10800317267768138614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-79858843010288851652018-04-22T04:05:07.806-05:002018-04-22T04:05:07.806-05:00The lack of inderstanding of the concept of divine...The lack of inderstanding of the concept of divine transcendence is why certain atheists think they're parodying religious belief by comparing God to a flying plate of spaghetti. Pastafarians amuse me because they fail to realize that they're actually parodying their own ignorance.Phredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01309569506696312069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-78733901045137769852017-12-09T17:28:47.354-06:002017-12-09T17:28:47.354-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Stetson Familyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12697583852025293333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-26660039636380020892017-12-09T08:16:30.173-06:002017-12-09T08:16:30.173-06:00God wants to have a relationship with people. Sinc...God wants to have a relationship with people. Since we are confined to this universe he must step into the universe to have a relationship with us. In the Flatland analogy if the 3-d person wants a relationship with the 2-d person, she must try to show and describe herself in 2-d. God's intersection with our universe is not necessarily to keep it working since as you say a good clock can work on its own. His intersection is so he can have a relationship with us finite beings.Michael G Strausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11580842374977938870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-82792382513272236872017-12-08T20:05:02.345-06:002017-12-08T20:05:02.345-06:00I should have read this before I commented on your...I should have read this before I commented on your last post. Still, if God set the universe in motion like a clock and it is so finely tuned (and I should say I follow you on that...it makes sense), why would it need to intervene? It sets the gears in motion then lets it go. Time means nothing to it or at least it experiences time differently. I'm not sure I understand why God would feel the need to show himself at all unless He was like a human. I totally agree that I cannot understand God and I follow you on the fourth demension thing I think. But it's like we have to attribute human characteristics to God to understand God on a personal level. So isnt that kind of a contradiction? Makes my brain cramp up ;-)Stetson Familyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12697583852025293333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-38711531639931754102017-12-04T07:25:40.122-06:002017-12-04T07:25:40.122-06:00Wigner's text is a classic in the world of sci...Wigner's text is a classic in the world of science and math. <br /><br />Yes, space and time are in some sense interchangeable and Minkowski space does describe our four-dimensional space-time universe. For practical purposes and purposes of understanding transcendence, it is much simpler to just consider the three dimensions of Euclidean space.<br /><br />Thanks for your comments. Michael G Strausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11580842374977938870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-37192854083156271822017-11-30T06:02:33.709-06:002017-11-30T06:02:33.709-06:00This following recent video is also of related int...This following recent video is also of related interest to 'higher dimensions':<br /><br /> Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity, General Relativity and Christianity - video<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKggH8jO0pk <br />Paper:<br />https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nRZECqs8Iqeqv0GzP5lV6et_K9_rYrz06Tchoa4U0Rw/edit <br /><br />notes from preceding video and paper:<br /><br />The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences – Eugene Wigner – 1960<br />Excerpt: We now have, in physics, two theories of great power and interest: the theory of quantum phenomena and the theory of relativity.,,, The two theories operate with different mathematical concepts: the four dimensional Riemann space and the infinite dimensional Hilbert space,<br />http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html<br /><br />Here is an interesting quote about the infinite dimensional Hilbert Spaces in quantum mechanics:<br /><br />The Applicability of Mathematics as a Philosophical Problem - Mark Steiner - (page 44)<br />Excerpt: The role of Hilbert spaces in quantum mechanics.. is much more profound than the descriptive role of a single concept. An entire formalism-the Hilbert space formalism-is matched with nature. Information about nature is being "read off" the details of the formalism. (Imagine reading off details about elementary particles from the rules of chess-castling. en passant-a la Lewis Carro;; in Through the Looking Glass.) No physicist today understands why this is possible..<br />https://books.google.com/books?id=GKBwKCma1HsC&pg=PA44<br /><br />And here is an interesting piece of trivia about Einstein's 4-dimensional space-time<br /><br />Spacetime<br />Excerpt: In 1908, Hermann Minkowski—once one of the math professors of a young Einstein in Zurich—presented a geometric interpretation of special relativity that fused time and the three spatial dimensions of space into a single four-dimensional continuum now known as Minkowski space. A key feature of this interpretation is the definition of a spacetime interval that combines distance and time. Although measurements of distance and time between events differ for measurements made in different reference frames, the spacetime interval is independent of the inertial frame of reference in which they are recorded.<br />Minkowski's geometric interpretation of relativity was to prove vital to Einstein's development of his 1915 general theory of relativity, wherein he showed that spacetime becomes curved in the presence of mass or energy.,,,<br />Einstein, for his part, was initially dismissive of Minkowski's geometric interpretation of special relativity, regarding it as überflüssige Gelehrsamkeit (superfluous learnedness). However, in order to complete his search for general relativity that started in 1907, the geometric interpretation of relativity proved to be vital, and in 1916, Einstein fully acknowledged his indebtedness to Minkowski, whose interpretation greatly facilitated the transition to general relativity.[10]:151–152 Since there are other types of spacetime, such as the curved spacetime of general relativity, the spacetime of special relativity is today known as Minkowski spacetime.<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime<br />bornagain77https://www.blogger.com/profile/16666666037080692370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1580378912972065231.post-31945474761701949132017-11-30T05:08:26.115-06:002017-11-30T05:08:26.115-06:00Dr. Strauss, It might interest you to know that we...Dr. Strauss, It might interest you to know that we ourselves are 4-dimensional beings in a 3-dimensional world. Or as I like to say, spiritual beings in a material world:<br /><br />Post-Darwinist - Denyse O'Leary - Dec. 2010<br />Excerpt: They quote West et al. (1999),<br />“Although living things occupy a three-dimensional space, their internal physiology and anatomy operate as if they were four-dimensional. Quarter-power scaling laws are perhaps as universal and as uniquely biological as the biochemical pathways of metabolism, the structure and function of the genetic code and the process of natural selection." <br />They comment,<br />"In the words of these authors, natural selection has exploited variations on this fractal theme to produce the incredible variety of biological form and function', but there were severe geometric and physical constraints on metabolic processes."<br />"The conclusion here is inescapable, that the driving force for these invariant scaling laws cannot have been natural selection. It's inconceivable that so many different organisms, spanning different kingdoms and phyla, may have blindly 'tried' all sorts of power laws and that only those that have by chance 'discovered' the one-quarter power law reproduced and thrived." <br />Quotations from Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, What Darwin Got Wrong (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 78-79. <br />http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-much-of-body-plans-of-organisms-can.html#links <br /><br />The predominance of quarter-power (4-D) scaling in biology<br />Excerpt: Many fundamental characteristics of organisms scale<br />with body size as power laws of the form:<br />Y = Yo M^b,<br />where Y is some characteristic such as metabolic rate, stride length or life span, Yo is a normalization constant, M is body mass and b is the allometric scaling exponent.<br />A longstanding puzzle in biology is why the exponent b is usually some simple multiple of 1/4 (4-Dimensional scaling) rather than a multiple of 1/3, as would be expected from Euclidean (3-Dimensional) scaling.<br />http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~drewa/pubs/savage_v_2004_f18_257.pdf<br /><br />The second part of this following video, at the 10:08 minute mark, also covers quarter power scaling<br /><br />The abject failure of Natural Selection on two levels of physical reality – video (2016) (princess and the pea paradox & quarter power scaling)<br />https://youtu.be/ISu-09yq2Gc?t=609 bornagain77https://www.blogger.com/profile/16666666037080692370noreply@blogger.com