Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin

From: A. Carlson (amcarls_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 12/06/04 

Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:39:19 +0000 (UTC)

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:02:52 +0000 (UTC), "George Hammond"
<nowhere@nomailspam.net> wrote:

>George Hammond, Hyannis, Cape Cod MA
>ghammond31415@hotmail.com
>December 5, 2004
>
> The COUNTERBALANCE FOUNDATION FORUM
> c/o Professor Chris Isham
> Professor William Dembski
>
> http://www.counterbalance.org/bio/index-frame.html
>
>By email to:
>
>Chris Isham William Dembski Stephen Unwin
>Sandra Faber Owen Gingerich Richard Arnowitt
>Alan Guth John F. Haught Edward Kolb
>David Latham Joel Primack Bob Russell
>Seth Shostak Trinh Xuan Thuan Neil Turok
>Steven Weinberg John Polkinhorne John Barrow
>George Coyne Bruno Guiderdoni Wm. Stoeger
>Richard Amoroso Phil Hefner Lee Smolin
>
>also posted to: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics,
> alt.sci.physics, alt.sci.physics.new-theories
> alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
> alt.philosophy, alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian
>________________________________________________________
>
>
>
> God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin
>
>
> Professors Chris Isham and William Dembski are
>COUNTERBALANCE members. Physicist Dr. Stephen Unwin is
>author of _The Probability of God_ (see SCIAM July 2004,
>p. 46 for a review by Michael Shermer).
>
> All three have written opinions on my discovery that
>God=G_uv and I wish to rebut their remarks in this
>letter to the Counterbalance Forum.
>
> Physicists are not experts in Theology nor are
>Theologians expert in Physics.

Generally speaking perhaps, but can you preclude the possibility of
someone being an expert at both theology AND physics, or at least well
versed in both?

> It is just as doubtful that Isaac Newton understood
>God is as it is doubtful that Mary Baker Eddy understood
>the Principle of Least Action.

And what is this assumption based on? Isaac Newton in fact wrote
extensively about biblical matters. I'd be willing to bet that he
wrote far more about religion than Mary Baker Eddy wrote about
physics.

According to Stephen J. Gould, Isaac Newton wrote more extensively on
religion than he did on Physics. Scientist & Science Fiction writer
Isaac Asimov also appears to have studied and written extensively
about both science and religion. I'm sure that with a little effort
one can find several other exceptions to your assertion that negate it
as a blanket statement.

> HENCE: If a scientific proof
> of God is discovered we can be
> certain that FEW will understand it!

That strikes me as being false on its face:

1. It does not follow that because one is an expert in science or
religion, one is automatically not well versed in the other.

2. If you truly have 'proof' in the scientific sense, then the
theological question should be immaterial to that proof.

3. If your answer is truly beyond the comprehension of others then
perhaps the solution lies in the possibility that you haven't made the
discovery that you are claiming.

And are you claiming expertise in both these disciplines as well? If
that is also a fundamental problem with the understanding of your
theory then why not initially seek experts who are well versed in both
religion and theology instead of just complaining about those who are
not? (or perhaps just assuming they're not!)

> Such is the case with God=G_uv
>
> BECAUSE OF THIS FACT, I have received very pejorative
>commentaries from Drs. Isham and Dembski. They have
>even suggested God=G_uv is incompetent. Therefore I
>feel obliged to inform the Sci-Rel community of the error
>of their opinions and of the high handed carelessness
>with which they have received this remarkable discovery.

<Clip>

Alex

Relevant Pages

  • Re: online religion test - do you believe in God?
    ... manager of research, including vice-president for science. ... H. Parker Sharp Professor of Theology and Ethics at Pittsburgh Theological ... having been for most of his life Professor of Physics at the ... Firestone Professor of Religion at the University of Southern California ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: God=G_uv Comments of Isham Dembski Unwin
    ... >> someone being an expert at both theology AND physics, ... >> wrote far more about religion than Mary Baker Eddy wrote about ... point that he does share with Mary Baker Eddy. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • God --> Retroactive Teleogical Causation
    ... book The Physics of Immortality, which is available ... the universe is spatially closed (has finite spatial size and has ... should be identified with God. ... My theology is defended by Professor Wolfhart Pannenberg, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... > But poorly done and interpreted, it spawns religion, e.g materialism and ... Science (especially physics) is progressive. ... > Instrumentalism in the design of theories is a great evil, ... > I encountered a similar phenomenon in programming, ...
    (sci.cognitive)
  • Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
    ... > But poorly done and interpreted, it spawns religion, e.g materialism and ... Science (especially physics) is progressive. ... > Instrumentalism in the design of theories is a great evil, ... > I encountered a similar phenomenon in programming, ...
    (sci.physics)