Opus 2023-150: Symbolism

My mental tangent was chasing some of the recent things I had been reading about science and the Bible.  I had also been reading Psalms about God sending snow storms and such and reflecting on the different places it points out that He is holding the universe together.

That took me to thinking God could never be fit into a math formula.

Then I thought that might actually be the answer.  Physicists were known to make up symbols for their math.  Einstein came up with a triangle that had a value that worked.  He didn’t know what the value was, but it worked.  Why not have one for God.  It might be the compromise that the materialists could work with.

Actually it would not work with them.  Their basic foundation is that there is no God and just because their systems don’t work is no reason to consider something that conflicts with their priorities.  An example I came across was provided by some researchers trying to prove that something called “nonshared environmental variability” was key to differences in educational development.  When coming up with results that did not support the desired result the analysis they wrote, “Rather, we believe that the appropriate conclusion is that the causal mechanism underlying nonshared environmental variability is outcome remain unknown.” p. 259

Wouldn’t that be fun having a math symbol that represented the action of God?  You and I would not notice because they have so many symbols that are nonsense to the uninitiated but it would drive them crazy.

We might as well make math and science fun.  

Murray, Charles.  Human Diversity.  New York:  Twelve, 2020.

homo unius libri