Comparison and Contrast of two Theories

  • Introduction: Attempting to get a handle on some issues, I propose the following alternatives [assisted by my Bot Buddy]:
    1. A "Rational Universe Theory [RUT] states that the universe is governed by rational laws that can be understood through science, whether all those laws are known or not This theory is based on the belief that the universe is not a random or chaotic place, but rather a well-ordered system that can be explained by natural laws.
    2. An Intelligently Designed Universe Theory [IDUT] states that the universe was created by an intelligent being. This theory is based on the belief that the universe is too complex and orderly to have arisen by chance. Proponents of this theory point to the fine-tuning of the universe for life as evidence of intelligent design.
  • Here is a table that compares and contrasts the two theories:
Feature Rational Universe Theory Intelligently Designed Universe Theory
Beliefs The universe is governed by rational laws that can be understood through science. The universe was created by an intelligent being.
Evidence The order and complexity of the universe. The fine-tuning of the universe for life.
Scientific support Strong Weak
Religious implications None Can be used to support the existence of God.
  • It is important to note that the Rational Universe Theory is not incompatible with the existence of God. It is possible that God created the universe and then set it in motion according to rational laws. However, the Intelligently Designed Universe Theory does make a stronger claim about the nature of the universe. It asserts that the universe was created by an intelligent being with a specific purpose in mind.
  • Ultimately, the question of whether the universe is rational or intelligently designed is a matter of faith. There is no scientific evidence that can definitively prove or disprove either theory.

What about rational laws that are random and chaotic? For example, the laws of thermodynamics operate through are inherently chaotic processes. Stochastic processes can be rationally understood and scientifically studied.

The theories seem to be talking about two different things. RUT is talking about how the universe operates after it began while IDUT is talking about how the universe came about.

No such assertion is seen in your description of IDUT, and I’m not sure how one would determine what that purpose is from the fine tuning argument. The universe appears just as finely tuned for spectacular looking nebulae as it does for life on one planet in a galaxy with billions of planets in a universe with billions of galaxies.

I would fully agree that we can never 100% prove that our understanding of how the universe operates are true. The best we can do is say that our understanding is able to make accurate predictions of what we observe.

I guess I fall in camp one. Though I also think there is also chaos. Who knows how many times and for how long most of it has failed. Just given the size and time we ended up with what we have. It’s one of those things i only vaguely enjoy because it’s just outside of what we are even close to knowing at the moment. So since I know we don’t know, I don’t really spend to much time thinking about it.

  • That’s a very deep dive; so deep I had to ask for help to make sense of it.
    • Here’s what Bard told me: “A rational law that is random and chaotic is a contradiction in terms. A rational law is one that is based on reason and logic, and is therefore predictable. Randomness and chaos, on the other hand, are characterized by unpredictable behavior. It is therefore impossible for a law to be both rational and random or chaotic.”
  • Are you saying that the laws of thermodynamics are irrational and indeterministic, and therefore unpredictable? Why am I not surprised?

Why would you ask a chat bot about concepts in physics?

Think of it this way. The outcome of games like roulette and craps are random and chaotic. So how does the casino know that they will make money in the long term?

The laws of thermodynamics, like many processes in nature, are stochastic.

Stochastic: " randomly determined; having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically but may not be predicted precisely."

For example, the kinetic theory of gases proposes that molecules are randomly bumping into each other and going out in all directions. This is what causes air pressure. This same type of process also transmits heat through matter, hence the spreading out of heat described in thermodynamics. If nature wasn’t random and chaotic then the Earth wouldn’t be heated by the Sun. You couldn’t even be warmed by a nearby fire if nature wasn’t random and chaotic.

  • You must have missed my first sentence: “That’s a very deep dive; so deep I had to ask for help to make sense of it.”
  • Nah, I don’t think that way.
  • And then, of course, there is the Irrational Universe Theory [IUT], according to which the universe is not governed by any laws, or worse: It is and isn’t but never in the same place at the same time, in which case, universe is subject to random chance and chaos. There are no laws or principles that govern the universe, and everything that happens is simply a matter of chance.
1 Like

I wonder what casino would bet on an outcome they couldn’t control. Like a slot machine that on the odd chance would make the casino liable for a 100 trillion dollar payout.

1 Like

We use the laws of probability to predict genetic outcomes. And that’s what genetic counselor use to counsel their patients.

Is there a rational reason that natural laws (aka scientific laws) have to be stable, and fundamental physical constants invariable?

Christians and Jews have one:

This is what the LORD says: If I have not established my covenant with the day and the night and the fixed laws of heaven and earth…
Jeremiah 33:25

Conversely if you had to take a 1 in 50,000 chance of having a heart attack, how much money would you want to be paid to roll those dice?

I should have added “Christians and Jews with the exception of YECs…” :roll_eyes:

non sequitur

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.