Invisible Designer
In the first part of your post you mention that it would be impossible to see a Designer, and that is why some people have trouble believing. But you actually kind of refute that argument with your next few lines. You mentioned that we use tools (the electron microscope) and inference to try and understand the things we can't see directly. In fact you used the quote about most of the universe being "dark" as an example, but that very information is, of course, inferred from data and testing (which you did qualify.) It would not take visible proof of a Designer to make people believe, other results through the scientific method would suffice. Just as we "know" about quarks and dark energy, if there were experiements, tests or evidence pointing more directly towards a Designer that would at least help move people along the path. (Yes, there are certianly people that will never believe in any God, even if they were struck with boils and locusts in his very presence, but fanatics on either side should be cut from any rational discussions.)
As for the rest of your post, that is a very interesting idea. Your explanation of 3 and 4 dimensional objects is excellent, and is a great way for us to try and grasp the idea, which is so far outside experience as to be nearly impossible to wrap our heads around. I must admit I don't know enough about the subject to be sure, but I wonder if such a being would actually be able to see both forward and backwards in time as well. If one or more of the "other" dimensions is wrapped around or intersects with time, it might be possible to have not just a view of everything but of every time as well. Certianly an idea worth further thought :)
As a note this is my first post, but I did read some of the other articles and forum posts, and felt that this was actually a place that might be able to entertain discussions rather than the kind of stuff you find on so many other sites. As you may be able to tell, I do not believe in any specific God, nor am I positive that there is or is not a God at all. I do like to think that I'm open to the idea either way. I am also currently...how to put it best...pro-evolution. In that I mean that I believe that the currently understood theory of evolution is the best description we have right now for explaining life on the earth. Just thought I'd go ahead and get that info out there in plain text, so that there is no issue or misunderstanding as to where I am coming from :)
I think one of the main problems reasons why materialists can't accept Intelligent Design is because they can't see the designer. Of course, there are limitations to human sight. We can't see beyond certain wavelengths of light, and anything finer than the space between visible wavelengths cannot be seen. Optical aids like scanning electron microscpes are needed to see very small particles, but I think that that's currently our limit. (we also infer the existance of very small particles from their bubble chamber signatures but we don't actually see them)
Apparently according to standard cosmological theory the universe is 73% dark energy, 23% dark matter and 4% atoms. Which means that we can't see 96% of the universe anyway, (if the underlying assumptions of standard cosmological theory are correct) so the possibility of the existance of an invisible designer isn't really that implausible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
One interesting hypothesis I found about the nature of the designer (assumed to be God) is that he is hyperdimensional. The existance of multiple dimensions is predicted by superstring theory. (which I don't understand) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstring And in general using dimensional analogies the designer is capable of amazing feats such as seemingly god-like powers:
"For example, in Edwin Abbott Abbott's book Flatland, he writes about a square that lives in a two-dimensional world, like the surface of a piece of paper. A three-dimensional being has seemingly god-like powers from the perspective of this square: such as being able to remove objects from a safe without breaking it open (by moving them across the third dimension), see everything that from the two-dimensional perspective is enclosed behind walls, and remaining completely invisible by standing a few inches away in the third dimension. By applying dimensional analogy, one can infer that a four-dimensional being would be capable of similar feats from our three-dimensional perspective. Rudy Rucker demonstrates this in his novel Spaceland, in which the protagonist encounters four-dimensional beings who demonstrate such powers." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_dimension
Of being able to appear and disappear in 3d space, as well as the ability to move things in and out of 3d space. Furthermore:
"Likewise the concept of shadows can help us better understand the theory of four dimensions. If you were to shine a light on three dimensional object, it would cast a two dimensional shadow. Therefore light on a two-dimensional object would cast a one-dimensional shadow (in a two-dimensional world), and light on a one-dimensional object in a one-dimensional world would cast a zero-dimensional shadow, that is, a point of non-light. This idea can be used in the other direction; light on a four-dimensional object would cast a three-dimensional shadow.
As an example of this, imagine that light is shone down through a wireframe cube onto a flat surface. The shadow that results is that of a square within a square with each of the corners connected. Similarly, if a four-dimensional cube were lit "from above", its shadow would be that of a three-dimensional cube within another three-dimensional cube.
Being three-dimensional we are only able to see the world with our eyes in two dimensions; a four-dimensional being would see the world in three. Thus it would be able, for example, to see all six sides of an opaque box simultaneously. Not only so; it would also be able to see what was inside the box at the same time, just like in Flatland, where the sphere sees objects in the two-dimensional world and everything inside them simultaneously. Analogously, a four-dimensional viewer would see all points in our 3-dimensional space simultaneously, including the inner structure of solid objects and things obscured from our three-dimensional viewpoint." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_dimension
The hyperdimensional being would be able to see us in 3 dimensions simultaneously, an attribute that could be described as omniscience. http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/~banchoff/Flatland/ This site also speculates about this possiblity: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/xdimgod.html
Any comments?
login or register to post comments | 0 points