You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #33: Going through those, [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Kelly Rupert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-25-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Going through those,
Edited on Tue Sep-25-07 01:44 PM by Kelly Rupert
You didn't, and I didn't say you did. You misunderstand the point; I was showing a non-relationship between complexity and design. An amoeba being unable to design a human is not caused by their relative complexities--it has to do with the amoeba's absolute complexity. You stated that complexity exceeding the design is a precondition for that design, which is simply false. Complexity is a precondition for processing ability, and sequential processing ability is a precondition for design of any sort. Storage capacity is the single limiting factor for complexity of design, and that is unlimited thanks to storage media.

Fractals are infinitely complex by definition.

Conceivably does indeed equal can. Pigs could not sprout wings and fly; simply because you can imagine it happening does not mean it is a possibility. They have not and will not sprout wings and fly. People can design things more complex than them. "Have not yet" and "cannot" are different things--and given the exponential rate at which computer processing power is rising, I would say that "have not" and "cannot" will both be false statements within our lifetimes.

No theologian I'm aware of would ever claim God exists in time, unless they have an idiosyncratic definition of God, time, or existence. No theologian would claim that God exists inside the universe--you yourself suggests he is more complex, and therefore outside it; by definition nothing can be more complex than the set to which it belongs. No physicist post-Einstein would claim time is not a dimension, and the universe is all dimensions. To say "dimensions stretch out past the universe" is nonsense, for they are bounded by the Universe.

Anyway, take some upper-level math and physics courses, or read up on the fields. Have a few discussions with theologians; many professors of theology would by more than happy to respond to an email from someone wishing to discuss their field, and would happily take your questions. Be respectful and ask if you can have a few minutes of their time first; all academics usually ignore outright challenges from amateurs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC