note: this discussion has turned for the better;read pgs/Where do the laws come from?

How do you know that isn't the case? Our observations of 'laws' may simply be our limited interpretation of that perfection.How could you tell the difference between God actively willing all electrons to behave in a certain way all the time to their physical properties causing them to behave in such a way?TTFN,WK

Take this as an example: people get drunk if they drink enough ethanol. That's a law of nature, i.e. an observable regularity in nature.Now this law is not a thing having causative power; it's a description of what happens which is always true. The reason it's always true is that all humans have similar biochemistry, and every ethanol molecule has the same chemical properties.

Thanks WK, thing is, that was the point i was going to make, in a sort of staggered flourish (Damn my sense of melodrama!)But i agree, Things are as we perceive them to be, regardless of whether or not God is invoked.(btw... always wanted to ask...TTFN?)

---

"The good Christian should beware the mathematician and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of hell." - St. Augustine

A very apt point. All sorts of errors come from treating as a thing or object something (arrgh, this language!) that is not a thing but a process or some such.The old phlogiston theory of heat was a good example. Heat was thought to be a substance; now we know it as motion of atoms.

That'll teach you to ask rhetorical questions.Ta Ta For Now,WK

Uh-huh. And when you attempt to answer these questions, exactly what are you doing? Are you gathering and weighing the evidence for both propositions; or are you merely choosing which conclusion you'd prefer to be true and jumping to it? What perfection? If it's so perfect, why are things so random? Wouldn't we expect the random universe we live in to be a product of randomness? So, sprituality for you means nothing more than calling atheists idiots? How enlightened.

Exactly....

Philosophizing like everyone else. As I stated in my post, but perhaps explained even better by Messenjah himself, the laws of the universe are just descriptions of what it is or how it behaves. That's the not the answer he's looking for. Large bodies of mass attract smaller bodies. That's the observation. But he wants to know things, (from what I can gather), why there is even an orbit at all. How are these rules initialized is what I think he's really asking. You'd have to ask him directly. Heh. Well, there is a flipside to that coin. If its so imperfect and things are so random, how have any laws been established and maintain the affairs of the universe with balance by any measure? It would be a mighty big coincidence that in 4.6 billion years that chaos would actually live up to its name and self-annihilate.

quote:

---

But whatever it is, for me, fortuitous is a word that I can no longer comprehend-- but oblation is. And I find myself reciting the words of King David. "The fool hath said in his heart, 'there is no God."

---

No, being foolish has nothing to do with intellect. It has more to do with pride than anything else.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Why would they have to be initialized? What universes exist where there's no gravity, or magnetism? What makes you think these "rules", these behaviors, don't simply exist because it's impossible for them not to exist? That question assumes your premise. Have we even established that laws are not inevitable, and would be inconsistent with randomness? The observable truth is that God plays dice with the universe. How is that inconsistent with predictable behaviors that we can encapsulate in law form? Nonetheless - I find it significant that you're unable to envision a sprituality that doesn't mandate assertions of your superiority to others; the inferiority of those who have reason to disagree with you. It really is about pride, isn't it? The breathtaking arrogance of the believer.

Suppose you start with stuff (could be particles, energy, whatever), and suppose that there are interactions within the stuff.Some of the stuff configurations (or arrangements) will be unstable, some might be highly stable, and some might be somewhat stable.The unstable configurations will break up, allowing the stuff in them to interact with other stuff. The highly stable configurations will tend to persist. The somewhat stable configurations will persist for a while, but might eventually break up.The effect will be some sort of self-organization of the stuff, just by virtue of the persistence of stable configurations and the breaking up of unstable configurations.Scientific laws are just human constructs that attempt to describe the resulting self-organized system.

---

Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber

The tendency even has a name: "reification", although unfortunately the word means lots of other things as well. I think you're confusing phogiston with caloric.

trust me, I got your questions. they were: there's nothing deep in any of these questions. I said what Dr.A said, he just said it better. Laws are just our way of describing what he see happening. They are what they are due to the emergent properties that they have.If you really, really want to know how it can be that the laws that govern how our universe operates can be, well, maybe you need to have a refresher in science. they are, simply, because they are. We have all of these emergent properties, that in our universe, lead to this one law, or that law, or whatnot. The way these properties came about have to deal with the very beginning of our universe and the events shortly thereafter. As someone said earlier, you're pretty much asking--why is a sphere spherical, and how can that be?

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

Not even a clue.How about you?I just emptied my pocket. There was seventy five cents in coins. Should I be perplexed?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Right, and that's the premise of the OP. Why is it a law? Why is it, as you say, impossible for them not to exist? I can't answer that question fully. All I can do is notice that they are certainties, and if this universe formed by accident, and is run by chaotic forces, why is there so much homogeneity? We have descriptions for how a law behaves, but the OP wants to know why and how it was instituted in the first place.

quote:

---

If its so imperfect and things are so random, how have any laws been established and maintain the affairs of the universe with balance by any measure?

---

Well, according to Einstein, he was convinved that God does not play dice. As for my assumptions, would you not agree that after examining the complexity of the variables that govern our solar system fit within a very narrow range that would allow for life to flourish on this planet? When considering just what it takes to achieve a few simple functions that sustain life, it begins to weigh in on the mind that happenstance doesn't sufficiently factor in to that. Mandate my superiority to others? How am I acting superior? There is no difference between you and I. How is it breathtaking arrogance for believers who think nothing of themselves or their own abilities and grants something other than themselves glory? I'm not understanding that. Can you explain that to me?

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt