Since the question arises from the discussion of the big bang and the fact it "smacks of divine intervention," you are committing the logical fallacy of begging the question.
Some might say that you are committing the logical fallacy of the appeal to authority with "smacks of divine intervention" in quotation marks obviously referning to Hawking, again.
So committing a logical fallacy in the same sentance you are accusing another member of is not helping. Drop the whole appeal to authority thing you keep bringing into each thread that you have brought here from the get go and begin debating in your own words or no one is going to take you seriously.
I would love to just quote people smarter than me everytime I debate but we're here to debate not to just quote. No one is probably going to really be swayed (save a few) one way or the other so the enjoyment comes from actually debating not trying to convince the other side. Once you understand that it will be easier to stop appealing to authority.
Ok. I guess that's the question for a lot of things not just math. Is it a different debate than the one for god(s) or is this one a little more objectivly based? Well, obviously it is more objective but is it along those lines?
It's kind of like the tree in the forest analogy? If no one is around to observe it does math still exist? Or is it soley a human invention?
Would there still be a certain number that describes light years or is it something we came up with to better understand the universe. Or does the universe compel us to use math to try understand things about it. Without math would we be able to figure certain things out or is math a product of our environment.
I'm rambling now. Am I anywhere in the ballpark of what you guys are talking about?