Notices
Results 1 to 76 of 76

Thread: fractal geometry

  1. #1 fractal geometry 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Fractal geometry is abundant in nature (from snowflakes to forests and mountains) and in organisms (from cells to bodily organs such as the brain). These patterns seem difficult to create with precision by hand that it takes computers for artists, mathematicians, and scientists to create them. How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,918
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahXI...JdqTkk6IH4XCqZ


    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    that's two dimensional art
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,918
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    that's two dimensional art
    You said fractals and nature. There's some gaskets in the second video.
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by GiantEvil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    that's two dimensional art
    You said fractals and nature. There's some gaskets in the second video.
    Gotcha. But do you have an opinion on the subject? My point being how things came into existence considering everything around us are made with intricate patterns (look at your fingerprints) that can be measured. Is this evidence that everything is created by design? If so, why would science reject it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Do you really want a mathematical proof for creation?
    I don't think you will find it in fractal geometry or in chaos theory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?
    There is no reason to think that they were designed.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    My point being how things came into existence considering everything around us are made with intricate patterns (look at your fingerprints) that can be measured.
    Do you think there is 'someone' creating each and every snowflake?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Is this evidence that everything is created by design?
    Are you suggesting that "intricate patterns" have to be designed?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?
    There is no reason to think that they were designed.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    My point being how things came into existence considering everything around us are made with intricate patterns (look at your fingerprints) that can be measured.
    Do you think there is 'someone' creating each and every snowflake?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Is this evidence that everything is created by design?
    Are you suggesting that "intricate patterns" have to be designed?
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything. How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers? How about the technology we use? We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything. How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers? How about the technology we use? We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    So you are a religious believer.
    I am not.
    Your argument for design amounts to nothing more than an unfounded assertion.

    I have no reason to think the universe was designed. It could just as easily be a great big accident.
    From my POV it looks much more like an accident than anything intelligently assembled.
    Last edited by John Galt; September 20th, 2014 at 07:19 AM. Reason: Correct quote tags.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything.
    That is your claim - but you have yet to show it is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers?
    How do we build trees and planets?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    Nature isn't solely driven by us.
    For example: how much influence do you think we have had on Jupiter?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything. How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers? How about the technology we use? We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    So you are a religious believer.
    I am not.
    Your argument for design amounts to nothing more than an unfounded assertion.

    I have no reason to think the universe was designed. It could just as easily be a great big accident.
    From my POV it looks much more like an accident than anything intelligently assembled.
    If you believe it's just one big accident, that's your own misconception. Who says anything about religion??? Are you also suggesting that Science rejects evidence for ART?
    Last edited by John Galt; September 20th, 2014 at 07:19 AM. Reason: Correct quote tags.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post

    So you are a religious believer.
    Nope. I'm an ARTIST.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything.
    That is your claim - but you have yet to show it is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers?
    How do we build trees and planets?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    Nature isn't solely driven by us.
    For example: how much influence do you think we have had on Jupiter?
    To answer all of your questions, perhaps by natural art.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything.
    That is your claim - but you have yet to show it is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers?
    How do we build trees and planets?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    Nature isn't solely driven by us.
    For example: how much influence do you think we have had on Jupiter?
    To answer all of your questions, perhaps by natural art.
    That doesn't answer any of my questions.

    Do we build trees and planets using "natural art"?
    No. We don't build trees or planets.

    I have asked 5 questions and you haven't answered any of them.
    Your claim that everything is designed is (so far) just an unsupported assertion.

    “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    I like Brad Hill's photographs, but I think he only uses the words natural and art together as a metaphor.
    Natural Art Images: The Photography of Brad Hill: Home
    Other than that use I think putting them together is a contradiction in terms.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    I like Brad Hill's photographs, but I think he only uses the words natural and art together as a metaphor.
    Natural Art Images: The Photography of Brad Hill: Home
    Other than that use I think putting them together is a contradiction in terms.
    As an artist myself, I am curious as how design can be studied by science so we can understand why nature works the way it does, even if metaphorically speaking.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Whether you like to admit it or not, there is design in everything.
    That is your claim - but you have yet to show it is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How do we build homes, roads, and skyscrapers?
    How do we build trees and planets?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?
    Nature isn't solely driven by us.
    For example: how much influence do you think we have had on Jupiter?
    To answer all of your questions, perhaps by natural art.
    That doesn't answer any of my questions.

    Do we build trees and planets using "natural art"?
    No. We don't build trees or planets.

    I have asked 5 questions and you haven't answered any of them.
    Your claim that everything is designed is (so far) just an unsupported assertion.

    “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
    Excuse me? You're not even logical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Excuse me? You're not even logical.
    ...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,918
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    I like Brad Hill's photographs, but I think he only uses the words natural and art together as a metaphor.
    Natural Art Images: The Photography of Brad Hill: Home
    Other than that use I think putting them together is a contradiction in terms.
    As an artist myself, I am curious as how design can be studied by science so we can understand why nature works the way it does, even if metaphorically speaking.
    If it's metaphorical then it isn't science. But that being said, there are many intersections between art and science. Try this one; M. C. Escher - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Also, in science language tends to be used much more rigorously than in common parlance. Such that the word "creation" and its various morphs almost always reference some theology.
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Excuse me? You're not even logical.
    ...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed.
    and you think it's just one BIG accident? You must think everything is just freak of nature
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by GiantEvil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    I like Brad Hill's photographs, but I think he only uses the words natural and art together as a metaphor.
    Natural Art Images: The Photography of Brad Hill: Home
    Other than that use I think putting them together is a contradiction in terms.
    As an artist myself, I am curious as how design can be studied by science so we can understand why nature works the way it does, even if metaphorically speaking.
    If it's metaphorical then it isn't science. But that being said, there are many intersections between art and science. Try this one; M. C. Escher - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Also, in science language tends to be used much more rigorously than in common parlance. Such that the word "creation" and its various morphs almost always reference some theology.
    Well, how can you say "natural art" as a metaphor isn't science when science try to explain the natural world? Through science we have acquired knowledge about the natural world, but rejecting design in the natural world is just intellectual dishonesty. btw, thanks for sharing Escher's work.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Excuse me? You're not even logical.
    ...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed.
    and you think it's just one BIG accident?
    Your fallacious argument from incredulity is fallacious.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    You must think everything is just freak of nature
    Why would Jupiter be a freak of nature?
    It is neither unusual nor unexpected.

    You claimed everything is designed.
    You are unable to support your claim.
    Since you are unable to provide anything to support your claim, there is nothing more to address.

    If you expect people on a science forum to unquestioningly applaud your baseless assertion then you are mistaken.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,918
    Also generally in science the word "design" outside of a rigorous context is a bit like saying a dirty word. To say that nature is "designed" is an unwarranted hubris. The simple undeniable fact is that the stuff that is there is, well, there! If you mean to say that "nature has a discernible and ordered structure" then I would agree with you.
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Excuse me? You're not even logical.
    ...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed.
    and you think it's just one BIG accident?
    Your fallacious argument from incredulity is fallacious.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    You must think everything is just freak of nature
    Why would Jupiter be a freak of nature?
    It is neither unusual nor unexpected.

    You claimed everything is designed.
    You are unable to support your claim.
    Since you are unable to provide anything to support your claim, there is nothing more to address.

    If you expect people on a science forum to unquestioningly applaud your baseless assertion, then you are mistaken.
    I'm used to being insulted by stupid people so I don't care if scientists don't agree with me. I DON'T CARE. If you have nothing else to offer, that is your problem not mine. You have already made up your mind so there is no reason for me to explain anything to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I'm used to being insulted by stupid people so I don't care if scientists don't agree with me.
    You have not been insulted in this thread.
    Instead, you have taken criticism of your claim as criticism of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I DON'T CARE.
    Well, then why start a thread and then repeatedly post replies?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    If you have nothing else to offer, that is your problem not mine.
    I never said I had nothing else to offer.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    You have already made up your mind so there is no reason for me to explain anything to you.
    That is a lovely piece of rationalization.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I'm used to being insulted by stupid people so I don't care if scientists don't agree with me.
    You have not been insulted in this thread.
    Instead, you have taken criticism of your claim as criticism of you.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I DON'T CARE.
    Well, then why start a thread and then repeatedly post replies?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    If you have nothing else to offer, that is your problem not mine.
    I never said I had nothing else to offer.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    You have already made up your mind so there is no reason for me to explain anything to you.
    That is a lovely piece of rationalization.
    Look, we both want answers. And that is why I started this thread. But the flaw in your logic doesn't help. By me acknowledging there is design in nature is the first step in analyzing those patterns to understand how nature came to be. By your claim that there is no design, how will you come up with a an analysis that posits that there is no order or design, things just pop into existence with no accord? Haven't you heard of the term "grand scheme of things?" It's a metaphor but it can also provide facts. Are you being dishonest?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    @#11
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    ..... Who says anything about religion??? ....
    You did in a roundabout way. To claim something is designed implies a designer. In other words it is an argument for a god of some sort existing.
    It is an argument that actually begs the question of gods existing.
    The fallacy is called petitio principii in Latin.

    Begging the question - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Begging the question means "assuming the conclusion (of an argument)", a type of circular reasoning. This is an informal fallacy where the conclusion that one is attempting to prove is included in the initial premises of an argument, often in an indirect way that conceals this fact.[1]
    Last edited by dan hunter; September 19th, 2014 at 11:05 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Look, we both want answers.
    Unfortunately, you are unable to provide any to my questions.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    And that is why I started this thread.
    Your initial question is flawed.
    It is based on the assumption that everything is designed.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    But the flaw in your logic doesn't help.
    You have not identified any flaw in my logic.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    By me acknowledging there is design in nature is the first step in analyzing those patterns to understand how nature came to be.
    There is no design in nature.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    By your claim that there is no design, how will you come up with a an analysis that posits that there is no order or design, things just pop into existence with no accord?
    Planets do not just pop into existence, do they.
    And they are not designed.
    Instead, they form from core accretion.
    That is just the normal behaviour of matter in space.

    Trees do not just pop into existence either.
    And they are not designed.
    Trees evolved from earlier life forms.
    That is just the normal behaviour of life on Earth.

    Design is "Purpose or planning that exists behind an action, fact, or object".
    There is no purpose or planning behind the existence of planets or trees.
    "there is design in everything." is clearly incorrect.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Haven't you heard of the term "grand scheme of things?" It's a metaphor but it can also provide facts.
    What facts does it provide?


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Are you being dishonest?
    No.
    What makes you think that I am?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    whether it's design by a god or a demon, it doesn't matter. I'm not here to argue the existence of any of them. I'm here to learn nature's art design because it is a fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post


    You have not identified any flaw in my logic.
    Here is your logic:

    "There is no design in nature."

    You don't call fractal patterns a design? Then what are they?


    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post


    Planets do not just pop into existence, do they.
    And they are not designed.
    Instead, they form from core accretion.
    That is just the normal behaviour of matter in space.

    Trees do not just pop into existence either.
    And they are not designed.
    Trees evolved from earlier life forms.
    That is just the normal behaviour of life on Earth.

    Design is "Purpose or planning that exists behind an action, fact, or object".
    There is no purpose or planning behind the existence of planets or trees.
    "there is design in everything." is clearly incorrect."
    So you're able to make rationalizations and logical statements and yet you, as an agent of that conscious effort have no purpose or any order in doing so. That's why your logic doesn't make sense.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    On that note, why do we need to use intelligence to describe the natural world that doesn't have any kind of order? It's just seems useless to me. We live in a universe with no design in any way, shape, or form?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Here is your logic:
    "There is no design in nature."
    That is not logic.
    That is just a statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    You don't call fractal patterns a design? Then what are they?
    You are switching between two different meanings.
    You should avoid such equivocation.

    The word you used there is: Design - meaning "a decorative pattern".
    So, yes - I would say that fractal patterns are a design.

    But that is not the same as: Design - meaning "Purpose or planning that exists behind an action, fact, or object"
    The fractal patterns we see in nature are not designed.


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    So you're able to make rationalizations and logical statements
    Yes, I am.
    But are you able to understand them?


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    and yet you, as an agent of that conscious effort have no purpose or any order in doing so.
    Please rephrase. That sentence doesn't parse.

    (It is also unclear what my ability to make logical statements has to do with the creation of things such as planets and trees.)

    -

    Back to the subject of the thread:
    Design is "Purpose or planning that exists behind an action, fact, or object".
    There is no evidence of any purpose or any planning behind the existence of planets, trees or anything not man-made.
    "there is design in everything." is simply a baseless assertion.


    But perhaps you have some evidence that there is purpose or planning behind the creation of planets and trees?
    If so, what is it?
    For example: what is the purpose of Jupiter?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    On that note, why do we need to use intelligence to describe the natural world that doesn't have any kind of order?
    Who said that the natural world doesn't have any kind of order?
    Are you now confusing the word "designed" with the word "ordered"?


    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    We live in a universe with no design in any way, shape, or form?
    Humans design things all the time.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    RedPanda, that name you picked was designed by your own thinking. And you are a product of nature, so yes, there was purpose and planning that exists behind your existence. Would you rather be a real panda? And why are you obsessed with Jupiter?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    RedPanda, that name you picked was designed by your own thinking.
    And?
    Humans design things all the time.
    What is your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    And you are a product of nature, so yes, there was purpose and planning that exists behind your existence.
    Well, with such insight, you should be able to easily answer my question: what is the purpose of Jupiter?

    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    And why are you obsessed with Jupiter?
    Again - you refuse to address any of the points I raised.
    Why is that?

    Are you being dishonest?
    Because it is definitely looking that way to me.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,745
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    so yes, there was purpose and planning that exists behind your existence
    Unsupported assumption.
    Tell me again about "intellectual dishonesty".
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Bachelors Degree GoldenRatio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    415
    Throw a handful of sand down on your floor. Then clean up & repeat the process. No matter how many times you do it, you will never recreate the original pattern.

    You might see some divine intervention, creation, intellectual design, or flatout claim god. I just see a dirty floor.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?
    I am pretty disgusted by the knee jerk reactions of the regular forum members on this thread.
    1. Accept a broad, colloquial definition of the word design.
    2. Understand that someone using it in that sense is not automatically a creationist.
    3. Tone down the automatic design>creationist>kill sequence.
    4. Answer the question. Why are fractal patterns so common in nature?

    It doesn't matter if the OP is a creationist or not. A sensible, scientific answer to the question would have been beneficial to the many lurkers who read these threads. Instead your hostility will probably have pushed a couple of them over to the "dark side". Well done.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,877
    [QUOTE=psyience pupil;594159][QUOTE=GiantEvil;594148]
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    ? My point being how things came into existence considering everything around us are made with intricate patterns (look at your fingerprints) that can be measured. Is this evidence that everything is created by design? If so, why would science reject it?
    I would say that psyience does seem to be arguing that or questioning whether things like fractals are evidence for a "designer" of some sort .

    My own viewpoint is that we humans would probably attribute powers of creation to ourselves. I then add that we are formed from the universe and ,putting 2 and 2 together I assume that the universe itself has powers of creation.

    But I don't need to posit a "designer" except in as much as everything is "design" (and everything falling apart also seems to be built into the hardware -or software -of existence) .

    To answer JG 's 4th point I don't myself know why fractal patterns are common in nature but I would be interested to find out.-and also to know what applications they might have since we seem to learn so much these days by copying the animal world.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    4. Answer the question. Why are fractal patterns so common in nature?

    It doesn't matter if the OP is a creationist or not. A sensible, scientific answer to the question would have been beneficial to the many lurkers who read these threads. Instead your hostility will probably have pushed a couple of them over to the "dark side". Well done.
    Fair enough.
    I would say the main reason fractals are so common in nature is that fractals are the result of nonlinear equations and most of the real universe behaves in ways that are nonlinear. Nature also tends to follow the Fibonnacci numbers or Phi ratio for growth patterns, so you see fractal forms in population growth, mollusc shell chambers, and plant branching. Even sand piling up displays a nonlinear pattern.

    Another reason is that we have pattern seeking brains and once we see a pattern we tend to see it everywhere, even in places where it does not exist, and I might point out that the link I pasted into the thread on my first post shows a lot of design on the part of the artist, but not much actual designing by nature itself.

    I was trying to get what the OP was posting about because the choice of words is a bit open to interpretation, as RedPanda points out in post 32.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Another interesting example of "natural design" are Lichtenberg figures.
    Lichtenberg figure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    I am pretty disgusted by the knee jerk reactions of the regular forum members on this thread.
    I posted nothing that was "knee jerk".

    I posted sensible questions hoping that they would expand on their position.
    But they ignored the questions and continued making baseless assertions.

    I know that you get angry at other posters not answering questions.
    What makes psyience pupil any different?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Thanks, John.

    I did find a source where I can learn more about this subject.

    "Design in Nature: How the Constructal Law Governs Evolution in Biology, Physics, Technology, and Social Organization."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Another interesting example of "natural design" are Lichtenberg figures.
    Lichtenberg figure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That looks like patterns caused by electrical energy like our nerves and synapses in the brain. We can also observe this in lightning and carbonized high-voltage discharge according to that source. Do you think energy or some kind of electric discharge in nature causes these fractal patterns?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    I am pretty disgusted by the knee jerk reactions of the regular forum members on this thread.
    I posted nothing that was "knee jerk".

    I posted sensible questions hoping that they would expand on their position.
    But they ignored the questions and continued making baseless assertions.
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread. Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist". Now, if we want this forum to be primarily for creationist bashing , just let me know. But if you want it to be about science then focus on the science and let the fools suffocate in our indifference.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,918
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt
    along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread
    Ahem... Posts #2, #4, and #19.
    Of course I must credit your influence for at least a fraction of my behavior.
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread.
    I answered the question that was asked.
    I answered it politely.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist".
    Could you point to where I did that?
    (As far as I am aware, psyience pupil is not even religious.)

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    But if you want it to be about science then focus on the science and let the fools suffocate in our indifference.
    I answered the question that was asked.
    If you want me to answer questions that were not asked, then you will have to explain how.

    This isn't me goading you - it is me not understanding what I did wrong.
    Last edited by RedPanda; September 20th, 2014 at 03:23 PM.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    so yes, there was purpose and planning that exists behind your existence
    Unsupported assumption.
    Tell me again about "intellectual dishonesty".
    I'm sure his mother who gave birth to him and raised him had a purpose and plan for her decision to have a child
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I'm sure his mother who gave birth to him and raised him had a purpose and plan for her decision to have a child
    I was man-made.
    We already know that man-made objects often have a purpose.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    I'm sure his mother who gave birth to him and raised him had a purpose and plan for her decision to have a child
    I was man-made.
    We already know that man-made objects often have a purpose.
    So you have a purpose and a tree doesn't? let me know when oxygen is no longer needed. lol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    I am pretty disgusted by the knee jerk reactions of the regular forum members on this thread.
    I posted nothing that was "knee jerk".

    I posted sensible questions hoping that they would expand on their position.
    But they ignored the questions and continued making baseless assertions.
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread. Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist". Now, if we want this forum to be primarily for creationist bashing , just let me know. But if you want it to be about science then focus on the science and let the fools suffocate in our indifference.
    Now there is an interesting idea. Didn't I read that you wanted to bash a creationist when you first got back from your break? So maybe we are all guilty. But what you are asking now is the better way. I was trying to respond to the thread but it seems that our language and reaction to the words used makes us on edge.

    There is an apparent design in natural biological systems, so what drives that design? It is reward. The ones that get the best design get the reward. What is the reward? It is being selected, being fruitful and multiplying. The "go forth and multiply" "instruction" that the ancients noted right back at the beginning.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    So you have a purpose and a tree doesn't? let me know when oxygen is no longer needed. lol
    Trees create oxygen when they convert CO2 to glucose.
    They do not create oxygen for us - it is a by-product of their growth.
    Creating oxygen is not their purpose.

    And I you still can't explain the purpose of Jupiter either, correct?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    So you have a purpose and a tree doesn't? let me know when oxygen is no longer needed. lol
    Trees create oxygen when they convert CO2 to glucose.
    They do not create oxygen for us - it is a by-product of their growth.
    Creating oxygen is not their purpose.

    And I you still can't explain the purpose of Jupiter either, correct?
    why do by-products have benefits? why do trees bear fruits?

    and why are you interested in Jupiter?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    So you have a purpose and a tree doesn't? let me know when oxygen is no longer needed. lol
    Trees create oxygen when they convert CO2 to glucose.
    They do not create oxygen for us - it is a by-product of their growth.
    Creating oxygen is not their purpose.

    And I you still can't explain the purpose of Jupiter either, correct?
    We definitely need oxygen. So part of our purpose is to look after our environment. Far too much emphasis is placed on wealth. But it isn't fixed just by moaning about it. We need to redesign our focus. Wealth is part of the sexual selection process so the design has a flaw in it!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Bachelors Degree GoldenRatio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    So you have a purpose and a tree doesn't? let me know when oxygen is no longer needed. lol
    Trees create oxygen when they convert CO2 to glucose.
    They do not create oxygen for us - it is a by-product of their growth.
    Creating oxygen is not their purpose.

    And I you still can't explain the purpose of Jupiter either, correct?
    Jupiter is good for help keeping big asteroids from going into the inner solar system, thus helping prevent collisions with earth.

    Though, if you want to get down to basic purpose. Our entire universe could have not came into existence & purpose would of been equal. Guess it all depends how you look at things.

    but there you go for jupiter purpose, or atleast a beneficial reason for having it for us earthlings.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread.
    I answered the question that was asked.
    I answered it politely.
    No, you did not. The question was as to why fractal patterns occur in nature. So far all we have had is a partial answer, after I raised the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Panda
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist".
    Could you point to where I did that?
    (As far as I am aware, psyience pupil is not even religious.)
    You said ..."...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed." The overtones and implications are quite disparaging.

    I answered the question that was asked.
    If you want me to answer questions that were not asked, then you will have to explain how.
    You did not answer the question that was asked. You zeroed in what you thought design meant to you and did not consider what it might mean to the writer. And that is what I mean by a knee jerk reaction. I get the distinct impression you approached this with the mindset that this was yet another ignorant peasant who thought that ID might have some validity, or worse. It's an easy trap. Many of us fall into to it daily. I'm seeking to remove its presence from this forum. I'd welcome your help.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread.
    I answered the question that was asked.
    I answered it politely.
    No, you did not. The question was as to why fractal patterns occur in nature. So far all we have had is a partial answer, after I raised the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Panda
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist".
    Could you point to where I did that?
    (As far as I am aware, psyience pupil is not even religious.)
    You said ..."...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed." The overtones and implications are quite disparaging.

    I answered the question that was asked.
    If you want me to answer questions that were not asked, then you will have to explain how.
    You did not answer the question that was asked. You zeroed in what you thought design meant to you and did not consider what it might mean to the writer. And that is what I mean by a knee jerk reaction. I get the distinct impression you approached this with the mindset that this was yet another ignorant peasant who thought that ID might have some validity, or worse. It's an easy trap. Many of us fall into to it daily. I'm seeking to remove its presence from this forum. I'd welcome your help.
    So when a person who expresses an ID idea are you suggesting they just get ignored? Won't this be like a red rag to a bull! But it will certainly make this forum a better place.
    Last edited by Robittybob1; September 20th, 2014 at 07:23 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    The question was as to why fractal patterns occur in nature.
    Incorrect.
    The question was:
    "How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?"
    And my polite answer was:
    "There is no reason to think that they were designed."

    According to the dictionary, "by design" means "as a result of a plan; intentionally." - so I am not sure what I am misunderstanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You said ..."...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed." The overtones and implications are quite disparaging.
    Which was a response to "Excuse me? You're not even logical."
    That was not "creationist bashing" - that was a snide response to a direct insult.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You did not answer the question that was asked. You zeroed in what you thought design meant to you and did not consider what it might mean to the writer.
    Well, he could have corrected my misunderstanding but instead he said "We apply ART and Science in everything that we create. So what makes you think that nature isn't driven by design?"
    And any further remarks I made were either ignored or answered with nonsense like "To answer all of your questions, perhaps by natural art." or "I'm used to being insulted by stupid people so I don't care if scientists don't agree with me."
    Maybe you can find something of merit in those replies, but I cannot.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    And that is what I mean by a knee jerk reaction. I get the distinct impression you approached this with the mindset that this was yet another ignorant peasant who thought that ID might have some validity, or worse.
    Your distinct impression was completely wrong.
    I initially thought he was anthropomorphising natural processes.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenRatio View Post
    Jupiter is good for help keeping big asteroids from going into the inner solar system, thus helping prevent collisions with earth.
    Though, if you want to get down to basic purpose. Our entire universe could have not came into existence & purpose would of been equal. Guess it all depends how you look at things.
    but there you go for jupiter purpose, or atleast a beneficial reason for having it for us earthlings.
    I agree it has proved to be beneficial - keeping asteroids away from Earth - but I see no evidence that it was created for the purpose of keeping asteroids away from Earth.
    Purpose is not the word to use when describing the usefulness of Jupiter; it assumes an intention that is unevidenced.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,877
    Am I just being too fussy but I cannot understand the English of the opening post?

    Here it is :
    "Fractal geometry is abundant in nature (from snowflakes to forests and mountains) and in organisms (from cells to bodily organs such as the brain). These patterns seem difficult to create with precision by hand that it takes computers for artists, mathematicians, and scientists to create them. How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?"

    Those 4 words there. Should it read? :

    "These patterns seem so difficult to create with precision by hand that it takes computers for artists, mathematicians, and scientists to create them. How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?"

    I know everyone makes mistakes and typos but shouldn't a thread opener try to be written in correct unambiguous English?

    When I was on the philosophyforums.com down the days they used to break my balls if I so much as missed a full stop.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    I know everyone makes mistakes and typos but shouldn't a thread opener try to be written in correct unambiguous English?
    I think we should make allowances for people that have never started a thread before and/or don't speak English as their first language.
    (But they should be willing to explain what they actually mean if people misunderstand.)

    But I don't make the rules, so that's just a personal opinion.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,877
    Oh I apologise if English wasn't his or her first language.I did consider that but I felt that he seemed like a native English speaker.

    I don't want to be uncouth!

    ps Did I interpret that sentence correctly then?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Another interesting example of "natural design" are Lichtenberg figures.
    Lichtenberg figure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That looks like patterns caused by electrical energy like our nerves and synapses in the brain. We can also observe this in lightning and carbonized high-voltage discharge according to that source. Do you think energy or some kind of electric discharge in nature causes these fractal patterns?
    Not just electricity, but I doubt if you and I would mean the same thing by the word energy.
    Anyhow in my thoughts it has more to do with repetition (iteration) than energy as such.
    Logistic map - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Mandelbrot set - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    These two things I just gave links to Wikipedia articles about are related to each other and to the selfsimilarity over different scales.

    They are also related to this
    Fractal Brownian Islands exhibit - Fractional Brownian Motion - fractals and coastline
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenRatio View Post
    Jupiter is good for help keeping big asteroids from going into the inner solar system, thus helping prevent collisions with earth.
    Though, if you want to get down to basic purpose. Our entire universe could have not came into existence & purpose would of been equal. Guess it all depends how you look at things.
    but there you go for jupiter purpose, or atleast a beneficial reason for having it for us earthlings.
    I agree it has proved to be beneficial - keeping asteroids away from Earth - but I see no evidence that it was created for the purpose of keeping asteroids away from Earth.
    Purpose is not the word to use when describing the usefulness of Jupiter; it assumes an intention that is unevidenced.
    There is another heavily loaded word used there. "Created"
    created => creation => creator.
    Damn, our language really is a bloody minefield!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    Fractal geometry is abundant in nature (from snowflakes to forests and mountains) and in organisms (from cells to bodily organs such as the brain). These patterns seem difficult to create with precision by hand that it takes computers for artists, mathematicians, and scientists to create them. How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?
    It is the Hand of Nature that does it. The Sun shines on the land and heats the air a breeze is created and the water evaporates and makes clouds form .... and on and on for billions of years till the mountains are sculptured.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Oh I apologise if English wasn't his or her first language.I did consider that but I felt that he seemed like a native English speaker.
    Ah, sorry - I appear to have been unclear.
    My response was of a more general nature.
    I have no idea if psyience pupil is a native English speaker or not (but it is his first thread).

    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    ps Did I interpret that sentence correctly then?
    Yes, I think so.
    Inserting the word "so" makes that sentence parse correctly.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    There is another heavily loaded word used there. "Created"
    created => creation => creator.
    Maybe 'formed' would be a better word.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    There is another heavily loaded word used there. "Created"
    created => creation => creator.
    Maybe 'formed' would be a better word.
    Formed => formation => formatter Is it really better?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Bachelors Degree GoldenRatio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenRatio View Post
    Jupiter is good for help keeping big asteroids from going into the inner solar system, thus helping prevent collisions with earth.
    Though, if you want to get down to basic purpose. Our entire universe could have not came into existence & purpose would of been equal. Guess it all depends how you look at things.
    but there you go for jupiter purpose, or atleast a beneficial reason for having it for us earthlings.
    I agree it has proved to be beneficial - keeping asteroids away from Earth - but I see no evidence that it was created for the purpose of keeping asteroids away from Earth.
    Purpose is not the word to use when describing the usefulness of Jupiter; it assumes an intention that is unevidenced.
    Never said nor meant to imply that Jupiter was purposefully created for us, simply the fact that it being there does serve a need for us humans. I am with you, "the creator" is simply an idiotic work around for claiming god without actually having to declare "god did it" Its the same song & dance in a new form.

    However, jupiter does have a purpose for us. If you wanted to ask question of what does not benifit us, pretty much everything outside out solar system could disappear from the sky & we would be in no way affected except for not having anything pretty to look at. Technically, you could ditch everything except earth, our moon & sun. if we had those & everything else was gone life would go on just fine for this planet.

    Thus if there is a "creator" & everything was made for our benefit. There was a great elaborate wastefulness of resources that we as humans do not need. Guess god isnt a slacker.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    There is another heavily loaded word used there. "Created"
    created => creation => creator.
    Maybe 'formed' would be a better word.
    Formed => formation => formatter Is it really better?
    IMO, yes - it excludes a lot of the religious connotations.
    (Not many people refer to their deity as "The All Powerful Formatter". )
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    There is another heavily loaded word used there. "Created"
    created => creation => creator.
    Maybe 'formed' would be a better word.
    Formed => formation => formatter Is it really better?
    IMO, yes - it excludes a lot of the religious connotations.
    (Not many people refer to their deity as "The All Powerful Formatter". )
    They might if it is shown we are just living in a simulation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    I know everyone makes mistakes and typos but shouldn't a thread opener try to be written in correct unambiguous English?
    I think we should make allowances for people that have never started a thread before and/or don't speak English as their first language.
    (But they should be willing to explain what they actually mean if people misunderstand.)

    But I don't make the rules, so that's just a personal opinion.
    Those of us with scientific training also need to recognise that colloquial English, which many members will tend to use, lacks the precision of scientific English. To overcome this it is more productive to guide the poster towards precision, rather than to attack them from the outset. Persistent refusal to accept guidance may warrant attack, but this should remain polite.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Those of us with scientific training also need to recognise that colloquial English, which many members will tend to use, lacks the precision of scientific English. To overcome this it is more productive to guide the poster towards precision, rather than to attack them from the outset.
    Correct.
    (The classic example would be the use of the word 'Theory', which has 2 meanings - 2 meanings which are almost opposite.)

    And when they are using colloquial English, we should assume that they know what they are saying and we should (politely) point out their mistakes.
    (It would be silly to change their questions into something they didn't ask.)
    Last edited by RedPanda; September 21st, 2014 at 08:08 AM.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by psyience pupil View Post
    How were these patterns created by design in the natural world?
    I am pretty disgusted by the knee jerk reactions of the regular forum members on this thread.
    1. Accept a broad, colloquial definition of the word design.
    2. Understand that someone using it in that sense is not automatically a creationist.
    3. Tone down the automatic design>creationist>kill sequence.
    4. Answer the question. Why are fractal patterns so common in nature?

    It doesn't matter if the OP is a creationist or not. A sensible, scientific answer to the question would have been beneficial to the many lurkers who read these threads. Instead your hostility will probably have pushed a couple of them over to the "dark side". Well done.

    Well spoken indeed.

    Making no assumption in advance, just objectively trying to assess.


    Most things in nature are the way they are because that is the most functional shape, or characteristics, given the context were they occur.
    Would that be correct ? Or is it not all about maximum functionality ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,611
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    And you, along with everyone else, failed to answer the fundamental science question in the thread.
    I answered the question that was asked.
    I answered it politely.
    No, you did not. The question was as to why fractal patterns occur in nature. So far all we have had is a partial answer, after I raised the issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Panda
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Instead you jumped at the opportunity to "bash the creationist".
    Could you point to where I did that?
    (As far as I am aware, psyience pupil is not even religious.)
    You said ..."...says the person that thinks that Jupiter was designed." The overtones and implications are quite disparaging.

    I answered the question that was asked.
    If you want me to answer questions that were not asked, then you will have to explain how.
    You did not answer the question that was asked. You zeroed in what you thought design meant to you and did not consider what it might mean to the writer. And that is what I mean by a knee jerk reaction. I get the distinct impression you approached this with the mindset that this was yet another ignorant peasant who thought that ID might have some validity, or worse. It's an easy trap. Many of us fall into to it daily. I'm seeking to remove its presence from this forum. I'd welcome your help.
    Having only just come across this thread I am actually motivated to try answer the question. My knowledge of fractals is sketchy and very rusty, but my understanding is that fractal patterns arise from computer programs by virtue of an iterative algorithm. Natural processes, for example those of the growth of plants, have an iterative nature to them as well. So to me is not at all surprising that they arise in nature. And I am sure I have read explanations of how these growth processes mimic - or rather, are mimicked by - fractal computer algorithms.

    In fact, I would observe that the corollary to this is that we humans find fractal patterns beautiful PRECISELY BECAUSE they appear organic and natural. That is in fact the distinctive feature of fractal patterns.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    In fact, I would observe that the corollary to this is that we humans find fractal patterns beautiful PRECISELY BECAUSE they appear organic and natural. That is in fact the distinctive feature of fractal patterns.
    *nods*
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Of Fractal Mind
    By Jeremy Holt in forum Introductions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 13th, 2014, 12:48 PM
  2. Many universes and their relationship to fractal geometry
    By Jungle in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 20th, 2013, 11:09 AM
  3. Fractal-ish
    By JDC in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 16th, 2011, 05:36 PM
  4. static geometry VS. Infinite Geometry
    By The Mag Suit in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 25th, 2010, 12:12 AM
  5. The Real Fractal Universe
    By matanzoh0 in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 13th, 2008, 03:58 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •