Moorad Alexanian wrote:
> No scientist can prove that the sun will definitely rise tomorrow. Our laws
> describe more the regularity of the past than future actions. All
> scientific laws are generalizations of historical (past) propositions. The
> ability to make predications with the aid of our mathematical laws is a
> mystery, which can only be solved if we know the unknowable, how God
> interacts with nature?
It is an amazing and mysterious fact that we can predict quantitative
aspects of the future, & even qualitatively new phenomena, with a considerable
degree of success with mathematical laws: "The discrepancy between a movement
of atoms in an astronomer's cortex, and his understanding that there must be a
still unobserved planet beyond Uranus, is already so immense that the
Incarnation of God Himself is, in one sense, scarcely more startling" (C.S.
Lewis, _Miracles_). But it is a fact, & one which does not depend upon any
knowledge of how God interacts with the world. Certainly Steven Weinberg made
no appeal to divine action in developing electroweak unification which
predicted, among other things, a neutral partner to the charged W bosons.
Of course our predictions sometimes fail. Our laws are only
approximations to the full mathematical pattern of the universe, & we sometimes
need to improve them. But that doesn't change the fact that they're already
pretty good.
> The sovereignty of God cannot be lost by any
> pattern that man observes in nature. Thanks for your penetrating comments.
God's sovereignty includes God's ability to limit divine action to what is
in accord with the pattern
God has built into the universe.
Shalom,
George
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 24 2000 - 14:27:49 EDT