I have been a scientist for decades. This is why I scoff when people say science disproves religion. When you see these things, you will become a believer in Him, a disbeliever in science, or realize science points to Him.
@@philhart4849 fallacy ? great word, but I see this is the only language you non believers know. I see in your own language. I see you all use words that make you fell smart and try to use them to prove nothing. We all see through it. I read many Atheist's books all full of words to confuse people that sound smart. But all conclude to nothing in any argument. I never once in my life found a Athests Dna book. Ever.
"There IS NO ATHIEST EXPLANATION for this amazing thing I'm about to show you." They always say before talking about a mixture of stuff a 4th grader could explain and just meaningless gibberish
The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is at all comprehensible -Albert Einstein When I consider the heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him? The son of man, that you should visit him? Psalm 8:3,4
@@youaresomeone3413 perhaps you can surmise that interpretation as acknowledgement of it having dual meaning, but your comment neglects the actual meaning of the reference, and you are absolute incorrect in that claim. Son of Man is a direct reference to Christ.
As a kid, I remember being endlessly interested in fractals and I told my whole family about it. Last year or maybe 2 years earlier, I discovered an app that lets you endlessly explore the Mandelbrot set, it kept me entertained for a long time.
I'm 81 years old and I have no questions that need to be answered for I know how the world is going to be and why it has been like it has been. Man is searching for life and Destiny why am I here and what the future hold for me. So life has really many questions and it seems that no answers can be found but I found all the answers and I know where I am bound.
I would much rather have answers that can’t be questioned…. Are you crazy? You would honestly rather believe that god exists rather then KNOW for sure that god unquestionably exists?
As a visual artist, I'm mesmerized by the beauty of these forms.It's interesting that humans have used these forms and shapes throughout time, in their jewelry, pottery, textiles, buildings, etc.They seem to be innate in our imaginations.
Human beings are the only thing in the known universe that can see beauty in creation and appeciate it's likeness reflected by us in art. This is proof we are made in God's image I believe.
Nature ends up using these forms as well, but science rejects the observation as coincidence. Yet they have no issue in stating that 97% of our universe is an unexplained unicorn force called dark energy.
Math over the years has caused me to shed many tears, all in frustration! This is the first time math has caused me to shed tears of awe and appreciation for the beauty of God! Thank you for sharing this
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
This is literally like the written Word of God. Same Word, but the more you go to it and hear from Him and receive of Him from it, the more you get and the more you get and the more you get. ❤
Fractal geometry exists, it's beautiful, and useful. That is what we see in it. But how is it God gets credit? His fingerprints are nowhere on it, because he has no fingers, no hands, no arms, no existence. You BELIEVE he exists. But Belief occurs in the absence of evidence, the absence of proof. 85% of mathematicians are atheists. Benoit Mandelbrot himself was an atheist.
@@richardgregory3684 Don't remember my ancestors ever coming from apes because our genetics don't show that we ever reproduced through apes since you can't change the genetic code after conception. So when did the first ape give birth to a human being then? Because reproduction pretty much contradicts this theory you're telling us
This is a great example of “the God of the gaps”…in other words, if we haven’t yet found the answer to a question, it must be God. Over the years, we’ve found answers to many questions that were once thought to be unanswerable. The Bible is a beautiful book, but was written by ancient people a long time ago. I don’t believe it is meant to be taken literally and is certainly not meant to be a science textbook. This is my belief, but I respect your right to believe what you want to as well.
There is an infinite amount of answers. Science attempts to catalogue irreducible complexity and then use human thinking to interpret what those facts mean. I would say the most ignorant people are scientists because they think they have awareness that they do not. At the end of the day it is the human mind and not the scientific method that gives us all of our insights. Data can only serve to trigger the mind it literally means nothing on its own without our interpretation.
Pure math major here. Let's break this down. 5:00 "...a collection of elements with a common defined property" Not necessarily. Some sets contain elements which have a common property, some don't. The only assured common property of all elements in an arbitrary set S is that they are all contained in S. 5:15 "In most sets, some numbers are included while others are excluded" I am being pedantic here (admittedly) but it doesn't make sense to say "most sets". There are an infinite number of sets. You can't have "most of" infinity. 6:26 "...remains small..." Again, being pedantic, but it's the set of complex numbers which don't diverge under that formula, beginning with zero. "Remaining small" is sort of subjective. 16:52 "...the main part of the Mandelbrot Set is a perfect cardioid" Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained. 18:05 This pattern of number sequences also isn't a mystery to mathematicians. 20:10 "...and it doesn't lose complexity, it actually gains it..." And? This is how all fractals work. 20:21 "...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks" How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all? 20:32 "...God is responsible for numbers" Nope. Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena. 20:33 "...and so it makes sense, in a Christian worldview..." Why not any other theistic worldview? Why not a Muslim worldview or a Hindu worldview or a Nordic worldview or an ancient Greek worldview? Hell, you haven't shown why this doesn't make sense in a SECULAR worldview. 20:36 "...that when we explore and study numbers, we find intelligence." How is this intelligence? Do you consider all patterns "intelligence"? Furthermore, again, numbers are a human invention. Of course, when we create a structure by infinitely iterating a PATTERN, we will expect PATTERNS to emerge. 20:44 "...not only intelligence, but infinite intelligence, 'cause this thing repeats infinitely." But... we iterated the function infinitely. What's your point? How is this evidence of any intelligence besides human intelligence? 21:44 "...that exists in the mind of God..." Source? Even if Christianity is true, do you have any sort of demonstration that this shape exists in the mind of God, or is it just something you feel would make sense? This is laughably lacking in rigor. 26:35 "Who would've imagined that such beauty would be built into numbers?" You realize beauty is subjective, right? This is not an argument. 29:55 "...is there something special about that formula?" No. There are infinitely many fractals and Julia sets. The Mandelbrot Set is simply the set of all complex numbers for which the Julia set for z^2 + c is path-connected. If you want more information, research it yourself. 34:44 "What causes the beauty in fractals?" Subjective human opinion? 34:54 "What causes the complexity in fractals?" We iterated INFINITELY. Why are you so surprised that complex structures emerge from infinitely iterated functions? 35:00 "The complexity increases as you zoom in..." No it doesn't. The fractal is the fractal. It is infinitely complex everywhere. 37:33 This whole section on "beauty" is completely meaningless and demonstrates nothing. 39:04 "The complexity is 'built' into math" Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction. 39:17 "Mathematics is the study of the relationship between numbers" This is extremely reductive and mostly wrong. 39:28 "...some of these things that are very basic are hard to define, aren't they? Like consciousness..." What? Consciousness is very basic?? 39:50 "Numbers are a concept of quantity" Still a shaky definition. It depends on how you define "quantity". 40:54 "...the concept, that's not something we created" Not entirely true. Sure we may not have created the quantities of physical objects in nature, but 'quantity' as a concept is a result of human perception, intuition, and classification. 41:16 "Where do laws of math come from?" Laws of logic, derived from philosophy (which have been amended over the years; see Godel's Incompleteness or the Turing Machine Halting Problem), coupled with a set of axioms that were (mostly subjectively) defined. Asking where the laws of logic come from is a much more fruitful question. Study epistemology. 41:29 "Did laws of math evolve?" If you're asking "did laws of math change over time?", then yes. 41:45 "Will that work for math?" Why does it matter? Math is not a physical object (as you yourself said), subject to its environment, under threat of death. 41:47 "Did 7 used to be 3 but it evolved?" Again, completely irrelevant. Evolution is a process that applies to living beings in a physical world. In terms of numerals, 7 used to be VII and was changed. In terms of the concept of the number itself, sometimes 7 IS equal to 3 (for example, in the set of integers modulo 4). Lastly, the concept of equivalence is also subject to a set of axioms which mathematicians defined. Nothing is true in math or philosophy or any medium, except under a set of axioms.
hmm, this comment intrigues me. Hopefully you won't mind if I look at all your points and give my take on them? I might leave a partial comment and edit in the rest over time, I'm finding myself to do much research on this topic. You seem to be much more literate in math than me, so I'll skip / concede all points before 20:10. Apologies in advance if you feel like I'm "cherry picking" points. 20:10 your point, if I'm correct, seems to be that this fractal getting infinitely more complex doesn't matter because that's how all fractals work, and from my understanding you are correct. I would like to pose a question, however. How are fractals infinitely complex? How as in, what made them like that? Did a human design a fractal to look like that, or have they always looked like this? I can't remember a good timestamp but I believe he makes this point a lot of different ways in the video. 20:21 ok, here's where my low-quality understanding of the Bible is gonna haunt me. And yes, I know quoting "an old book that was probably made up" is a mortal sin on the internet, forgive me. I should also clear up that I've only seen this entire video through once. Honestly I saw your comment and just felt a burden to answer as much as I could, maybe spark a discussion. ANYWAYS, 20:21 . If I can be lazy and just copy what you wrote for a second... "...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks" "How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all?" This is an interesting one. I don't know if God has ever FULLY revealed himself to anyone, as I don't believe the human body / mind could withstand that. But we won't focus on that point, as to me it's not *quite* the point you're making. First off, I feel like you are jumping the gun a little bit. This is subjective, but "suggest to you.... tells us something" doesn't sound to me like an assertion. It sounds like a possibility that Dr. Jason is entertaining. As you somewhat said, I don't think anyone knows how God thinks or operates. what I can tell you, however, is that if we look at what we can confidently say is the Word of God (the Bible), we can get an idea of how God thinks actually. And, God has revealed Himself in some fashion to many people throughout the Bible. The easiest example I can point to, actually, is Jesus Christ. Jesus, being the Son of God and also being One with God, can probably give us some examples. Low and behold! There's Matthew, Mark, Luke and John! Four separate accounts of this Man. I think the parables Jesus speaks in can give us good insight, perhaps. All of his parables seem fairly simple on the surface, but "zooming in" if you will we find an infinite abundance of wisdom. On the surface, the parable of the seeds makes sense, right? If the seed lands in bad soil, or rocks, etc., they die. But if the seed falls in good soil, they live and produce a bunch more seeds. Yeah, that sounds like basic gardening to me. I played Stardew Valley and that's how it worked. But when you ask "what's the actual point to that?", it could mean an infinite number of things depending on perspective. It could literally just be speaking about seeds. It could be talking about Christians. It could be talking about Churches. It could be talking about businesses, animals, any living thing, even by definition of "living" (like with businesses). Jesus' speaking seems to be ambiguous, although one could argue there is a more "ideal" meaning to his words (perhaps, Christians in this example.) Now, let's connect. How does a 2000 year old dude that keeps being painted incorrectly in churches, that said some maybe interesting things here and there, have to do with the the question at hand? Well, it shows that if nothing else, Jesus' knowledge seemed to be infinite. Everything He predicted seems to have come true at least once, even the exact time day as things such as His death. That seems statistically unlikely, if I may. And, we know that Jesus is the Son of God, and that Jesus is God (in human form). TL;DR: We know something about God's understanding and how God thinks because of Jesus and the Bible. 20:32 Yes and no. Yes, God didn't "create" numbers. He didn't say 'this shall be one, and those things, two" and it was so. We decided numbers would be called numbers. We decided "one" would be a single thing. We decided "single" would mean "one" in most contexts. However, whatever you would have called them, and however you would have spaced them out, (assuming reasonableness) this specific graph would have been created somehow. Let me touch on the parentheses there. Dr. Jason says at one point that the universe operates in a specific way regardless of what humans make of it. Somewhere he gives an example of an architect trying to disobey these laws of math and numbers to build a structure, and how that would not work out very well for the architect. You can look at an your water bottle and call it whatever you want, however you want, write it down using whatever letter or number or symbol you want, but at the end of the day you have yourself "one" water bottle. So, Yes and no. God didn't "create" numbers. But there will only ever be "one" of yourself no matter how you want to write it down. I can't change how the universe works and now there is multiple of you. We can change word definitions all day long and go in a circle, but I'm rambling at this point. Reading that back, all that was more directed at the first half of the comment so I'll add this: Let's put aside if God is responsible for numbers or not. They were "created to describe perceived physical phenomena", in your words. And I ask you, how did that phenomena come into being? Did ancient Greece run a poll and they decided "yeah that exists"? Is our perceiving it making it up. Dr. Jason did an excellent job at dismantling this point, so I won't dive deep into it, but any way you frame it, something created it. Whether it was a God, a space jelly, or an explosion of stars, SOMETHING made it. Personally, the evidence points to a God with infinite understanding. 20:33 I notice you didn't explain how it DOES make sense in any other worldview. I would genuinely be interested to see if you can make sense of it in a reply, I'd love to hear it from a math major. Seriously. I love math and numbers, probability and statistics has been one of my favorite courses in college so far and I'm a PSYCHOLOGY major. Speaking of that psychology degree later.... 20:36 + 20:44 you somewhat left out the part where he says "patterns", I notice. You make the point of "again, numbers are a human invention", which I feel like I have answered previously. And to be completely honest, unless you ask further, I feel like my pervious paragraphs have answered both of your points. No matter how we define numbers, this set existed in some form before humans did. Therefore it's impossible for humans to have created such an intricate pattern. 21:44 read above 26:35 "beauty is subjective, right?" here comes that psychology major I talked about, Mr. William. Beauty is... somewhat subjective. Infact, I could even concede that MOST beauty is subjective. However, assuming a "normal" brain if I can call it that without offending a billion people... There is a baseline level of beauty that all humans share. For example, patterns. In some capacity, or at the very least in some form, patterns appeal to everyone. There is something in the brain that just likes it when things look nice and flow well. Do these particular patterns in some or even all areas of the Mandelbrot set appeal to everyone? *Probably* not. However I doubt that even you could say that nothing you have seen in this presentation wasn't at least in ONE aspect, beautiful. Even in grayscale, as Dr. Jason mentions later in the video. My comment is so long I need a part two! My goodness.
Alright, part two. 29:55 I mean, kind of. I concede this is "subjective", however I find it quite special how "well" this set seems to work in it's intricacy and beauty. You look at many other fractals and they just repeat themselves, like ferns and ice. But this set is the first fractal I've learned about that is THIS unique. How many patterns there are! It's not just a shape that repeats but what other fractal has seahorses and elephants among other things! And I'll raise the question, since you mention other fractals: What's not to say they aren't beautiful? What's to say there isn't another fractal even MORE beautiful and interesting and "intelligent" (weird word to use) than this? Or have humans just not created one yet, hmmmm? 34:54 read above 37:33 uh... ok, I guess. I'm sorry you got nothing from it. 39:04 "Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction." This is probably the only thing that I'm just going to straight up point to what you said and say "no, you are wrong". I can't even completely discern what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that "he said we created math, but complexity is part of math, and he's saying that the complexity existed before math", then I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say. I'll refer to earlier points. Actually, I'll refer to what you said earlier: "Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena." So in a sense math is man-made, but it's based off of the universe. The universe wasn't man made. Math, depending on how you look at is, is either man-made and / or made by the universe and it's just something we have to explain. If you're saying anything else, you're have to clarify for me please. 39:17 I'm not a math major, I have no comment. The definition Dr. Jason gave worked for me. 39:28 not sure what you mean, Listen to what he said directly following it, and / or please let me know in a reply what you mean. 39:50 Forgive me if this sounds rude, but this sounds like you're grasping at straws to be honest. Amidst some of your genuinely good questions and comments, this just seems silly to mention. You do you, though. 40:54 debatable. This comment is getting so long that my laptop has started to lag, so I'll leave this one. Apologies for leaving one unanswered. 41:16 interesting answer you have, honestly. It falls perfectly in line with the type of answer Dr. Jason predicted one would have. I find it humorous that some of your answers have ideas of what Dr. Jason should study to "enlighten" himself with. I didn't know you were an expert in those fields as well, Mr. William. Although, for all you tell him to study those works, it personally seems to me like you have done very little to study "his" field. That is, the Bible. Study Genesis ;) 41:29 No, that's not what he's asking. Evolving is different from changing, however they ARE similar. Either way, the laws have always been constant. Our UNDERSTANDING of the law has changed, however. Your last two points I will leave due both to the previously mentioned stuttering of my laptop and also because they don't make much sense to me, please elaborate in a reply. I have one last thing to note. 16:52 "Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained." I don't know if you were writing this comment mid video, but, whatever was "perfectly, and easily, explained", seems to have no explanation. Oh well. No hate, nor disrespect, Mr. William. As I stated in the very beginning, your comment intrigued me. I would love to hear a reply from you. And despite my formalities, I'm only 19, so don't worry. I'm not some old guy with nothing better to do than harrass someone in a comments section.
@@lightoftheworld6578 it seems youtube deleted my original reply. Although I would love to type another essay-length comment, I am consumed by laziness. Would you like to discuss this over a call? Discord maybe?
@@williamwilliam4944 over call is great! TH-cam deleted my reply as well, it doesn't like seeing discord profiles in the comments, even when you space it out. In any case, It's the same as my name. Six thousand eighty-nine. Let's see if that works. (And if I butchered writing the numbers as words, I apologize 😅)
As an agnostic, I found this video fascinating. He got one thing wrong in the very beginning though. The Mandelbrot set does not prove biblical creation. It simply does not disprove it.
I was an agnostics until I was 38 years old. People that accept Jesus very early on, say in a Church going Christian family, usually aren't grounded very well. Not one writer of the Old testament or new testament ever claimed "the Bible says". I remember rejecting the book of James, fully understanding that he did not preach the gospel of Christ and him crucified. He taught a works orientated belief system. 2 years later I found out that Luther also rejected the book of James for the same reason. Genesis 15:6 States that Abraham was justified by his faith in what God told him concerning having a great multitude of offspring. He had no children at that time and yet the book of James states that Abraham was justified when he did the works of offering up his son. In Acts 21 we see that the judaizers had no problem with James but they had a huge problem with paul. Paul taught me Grace by faith from the book of galatians. I was a little surprised when I found out that Luther was also taught Grace by Faith by Paul but his realization came from reading the book of romans. Same author! same concept. They washed in the blood believer does not need the ten commandments for the same reason that a driver of a Buick doesn't need a buggy whip. At any rate scriptures are plural and anyone who says that James is just balancing out Paul's teaching doesn't have a clue.
Wait he can't prove or disprove God? I thought some one finally was able to do it, and it was some one who believes the earth is a couple hundred thousand years old and evolution is wrong. Man wrote the Bible, edited it because some words of God were wrong, and God wrote the universe assuming it wasn't some cosmic coincidence.
What's cool to me is that this beauty exists in just a 2 dimensional plane. I'd like to see what happens when you add a 3rd plane and see what the set looks like in 3D.
The Mandelbrot set is inherently two dimensional, since the mathematical basis is simply whether or not each point in the complex plane (a two dimensional mathematical structure) converges to a specific value when it's used as a repeated input to a complex valued function. There isn't really a true three dimensional analog to the complex plane, though there is a four dimensional analog (the set of quaternions) and a three dimensional "slice" could be chosen from a similar processing of quaternion space and examined. Yes, if you don't know the math that's probably gibberish--can't really be helped. It's probably worth mentioning that the Mandelbrot set isn't the pretty part most people think of. The set is just the solid black region. All the fancy coloration is just programmers making artistic decisions about how to color the surroundings. Usually it's colored in bands based on how many iterations the program made before deciding that a particular point is not in the Mandelbrot set.
There are videos on this platform that show that the 2D Mandelbrot set (x, y) is a subset of a 3D set (x, y, z) set to z=0, and there are videos that address the fact that imaginary/inverse numbers are the effect of things existing in a 3D or greater space with ties to periodicity (repetition over time). Tying these two concepts together, the images generated are as fascinating as they are beautiful. I won't spam these comments with links, but if you search for these terms, you should find what you're seeking.
As an aspie, with an IQ that has me mostly working with atheists (Im sure most know what I mean here, no denigration of anyone is ok) this might help me talk more openly. We are commanded to share the word, which I have not been any good at-thank you for the help!
Yeah brain IQ has nothing to do with God which is experienced in the Heart. That's why the word Earth is a anagram for hEart. It's Heart. Hear t. He art. The Romans called it Terra. Terahertz is Trillions is Try is Triangle. Torah, Torus, Taurus, Tau Rho, Two. Plus none of you or most of you don't understand why the Greek alphabet is the Alpha and Omega and really all alphabets and numbered systems which are also originally gnostic symbols tied to whatever showed up and then those pyramids. Naw mean? Art bridges the gap between the material and the spiritual aka the 5D 6D Twilight zone.
The Christogram Chi Rho is pronounced exactly like Cairo the capital of Egypt. It's the X symbol that comes from the sign of the cross OR what we know call the Chladni Figures. Xmas? It's Ten. The One&zerO. The A and 0. Ask them where the ratio of the musical strings come from. This X comes from the 2:1 octave in the center or middle. Where'd all that go down? the center east? Anyways what else has a 2:1 ratio? Water H2O. Also the color violet has a 2:1 ratio. I realized this from an Epiphany hence the name epiphysis gland which is your Pineal gland. The name of the place Jacob saw was called Peniel meaning God face to face talking about your bodies center.
Tell them they hold blind faith in the big bang theory because of the effectiveness of the math model in natural science. They are indoctrinated into a theory. That got proven wrong when the James Webb looked and proved their math model is wrong. Big bang never happened.its ober. Big bang is just as a goofy religion as any other creationist theory from their own perspectives. Then tell them to go listen to Neil degrasse Tyson feed you bread crumbs about more dimensions and what a 3 dimensional creature looks like from the perspective of a 2d creature. Its the Rogan episode. I thought Tyson was a fraud until I realized 90% of the stuff he says is from the perspective of some high ranking quantum phycisist tasked with trying to teach a pre school shapes and colors. The Rogan episode he speaks midwit tier. I think the CIA is on board. is it religion? is it aliens? is it multi dimensional? is it time travelers? and the answer is nobody knows. We dont know.
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
Makes the term “Cardiologist” more memorable!❤️ I’m terrible at math and my brain shuts down when anyone starts talking about numbers, 😮so I don’t “get it” enough to take a test on it! However, when you showed the illustrations and explained that part with the shapes & repetition, and then the spiral & so on, I do at least get the concept! That’s more than I could have ever imagined before! Thank you for bringing this to us! Many blessings in Jesus name Amen 🙏 🇺🇸✝️
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
We KNOW how to explain this, atheists know how to explain this. And it's NOT a secret code, nor a code. And there is NO creation, it's not a "creation" of a god. Mandelbrot set is absolutely not a proof of the existence of god, it does not prove the existence of god at all. It has nothing to do with god it's off topic. God don't exist and jesus don't exist, sorry.
There's no better application of the expression, "It is what it is." It's not that the laws of mathematics require a mind to exist. But a mind is required to discover, comprehend, and appreciate them.
This is what visuals are like on psychedelics. This is kind of what thoughts are like as well when you’re in a thought loop. The understanding and emotional experience of the infinite becomes more tangible. Hard to describe typically with words but the fractals of this Mandelbrot set really help paint the picture!
People also report seeing 4 dimensional geometry which in a sober state the human mind cannot comprehend. Psychedelics truly are one of the greatest wonders of the world
@@Buf037 They might report it, but they would never be able to actually see 4 dimensional geometry. In fact even if they had the experience, they wouldn't be able to tell whether or not they saw 4 dimensional geometry, because no one knows what it looks like. Having said that, psychedelics certainly are incredible, and I've had many amazing experiences with them. And certainly I've seen indescribably complex and beautiful geometry, especially with DMT. It's absolutely mind-blowing. Psychedelics can potentially be so otherworldly that I'm not surprised some people might interpret their experience as having 4 dimensional geometry, but thinking about that in terms of physics and math, and the fact that we can't even imagine what 4 dimensional geometry would look like, I've never even considered it as a possibility that I could experience 4 dimensional geometry. I would rather say that closed eye visuals start feeling kinda 2 dimensional when you're on lower doses, and then as you increase the dose, you start adding depth, so that it becomes 3 dimensional, while at the same time, the visuals will also become more clear and complex. And when I say complex, I don't just mean in the sense that there might be more complex geometry or colors, but it also becomes much more complex in how you experience your visuals. In a sense, the visuals can become manifestations of our own thoughts and feelings. While I do think there is a danger in people sometimes being too fast to accept what they experience as being true while under psychedelics, I also don't have a doubt that psychedelics can greatly help us understand our own minds, and also consciousness and the brain in general.
@@NA-gd3sd Granted, all of you may be right you don't see dimensions (without the help of some LSD), But keep in mind we are still looking at fractals here in this video, and those you can see.
I love this. I’ve spent so much time trying to make sense of the world around me and my place in it. I’ve been agnostic, pessimistic, self centered and selfish in my thought process for years. It’s far easier to just have faith. Like a suffocating heavy blanket being lifted from my heart. Faith sets the mind free, free to experience joy in each moment as it passes. Thank you for your content doc. ❤
@@marius-9333Why don’t you do a TH-cam video showing why this is “ignorant or arrogant”? Because people disagree w your view on subjects, doesn’t make them either of those things. I’d love to see the opposite reaction of this video in such detail by a non-believer.
6:02 The Mandelbrot Set 14:00 Plotting the Mandelbrot set 14:50 Seeing the emerging patterns 16:20 Exploring the set 38:00 Discussion - Numbers, Concepts, Complexity and God 48:20 Fractals in the Universe and God
@@ethelredhardrede1838 You're a fool to believe that. People's intelligence prove God's existence. What humans and animals create are incredible, and these creations ironically has nothing to do with them. They've merely discovered what already exists.
@@sdays59 Matt. 5:22 Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire. The rest of your post is just fact free assertions in denial of evidence. I bet you think there was a Great Flood. When do you think that happened?
I have a mathematics degree and I consider myself a Christian. I love the beauty of math and science. Fractals like the Mandelbrot set appear in a branch of physics called dynamical systems and chaos theory. The strange attractors associated with the Lorenz system is another example of a fractal. Lorenz showed that convection in the atmosphere could be described by a set of non-linear differential equations, and when you plot these equations, you get the fractal pattern of strange attractors. Fractals appear all over the place in math and physics.
Here's the thing - it is a graphical representation of a mathematical set. There is nothing in there that requires God. This is another example of somebody who takes God as a given, and takes something that he sees in the world and uses that to justify that belief. Consider for a moment - early in the video he's counting the number of branches in tendrils coming off the buds, pointing to two tendrils near to one another and getting excited about how "the" bud in between them has a number of branches equal to the sum of the two to either side of it. But he plainly ignores other buds that were in between; by his own description, there are an infinite number of those buds. How many other mathematical formulas are out there that result in graphs with high levels of complexity, but which we don't perceive as "beautiful"? Does he get excited by any of those? I saw a comment in the live chat to the effect of "what we know about science can't explain how the universe came into being, so it follows that God did it". That is not the logical conclusion. Just because we don't understand how the Universe came into existence, it is does not automatically follow that God did it; it only means that we don't know. It's generally referred to as the "god of the gaps" fallacy. Consider - two thousand years ago, we didn't know what caused lightning, volcanoes, earthquakes and disease. Setting aside the insurance phrase "act of god", do we invoke God as the cause of those events? Another comment I saw was "you don't have to believe in the Bible for it to be true". But the converse is also true: just because you believe the Bible doesn't make it true.
Hi, no disrespect whatsoever but I do have some thoughts about your thoughts. Firstly, with regard to what you said about the buds he might not have said it that way but it was clear at least to me that he was talking size wise in the sense that the two “big”tendrils had their branch numbers adding up to the brand number of the smaller tendril between them and i’m pretty sure that this does go on infinitesimally given the fractal nature of the set. Him possibly not describing it the best or not doesn’t take away the fact that this exists. Secondly, beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder something i’ve come to learn the more i appreciate art. That doesn’t take away from the fact that what he’s saying about the Mendelbrot set is true. Truly there may be people out there who find the graphical representation of this set not beautiful at all and that’s their right however his excitement about this particular set doesn’t negate the complexity of other sets and in fact the complexity of other sets does in fact show that God’s complexity goes far beyond one dimension and can be seen in any way whatsoever. Similar to how beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder God’s complexity is seen in different ways at different levels by different people. I understand that you may not believe in God and to be honest that’s your right regardless of whether i agree or not and i doubt i’m answering or responding to everything you’ve said but just as you said just because we believe in the Bible doesn’t make it true. Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one? CS Lewis said something once about how we shouldn’t see our faith through the lenses of our world but to rather see the world through the lenses of our faith and i believe that’s what science is meant to do. I love math and science and I do believe they show God in the physical world the same way this set shows the underlying complexity in numbers that we may not see but looking at this set with the mindset that God ultimately governs the natural laws of our universe helps you to see the beauty in Him and in this and I understand you may not appreciate that. As for the fallacy you described I see the way by which mountains and volcanoes are formed to yes he acts of God. I did geography to an appreciable level and those collisions and tectonic movements are wonders and acts of grace through which God made/makes those mountains and valleys. Science showing us how something came to be doesn’t mean that God didn’t make said thing through that process. I’m sorry if you feel offended by anything i’ve said but just felt like i needed to say what I believed and felt
@@darylldufu9324 "Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one? " yes, it doesnt make him false. you cannot disprove him (yet). But that's not the standard i have for things i build my whole worldview on. And no, it wouldnt be safer. Because which god should you choose to believe in from the tousands that were already believed in?
@@darylldufu9324 in science, one part of the method is falsification. One can't falsify God. That makes it kinda impossible to take it serious in science. People tend to use God as the answer when things can't be explained. That's biased.
@@darylldufu9324 What you mention halfway through is Pascal's Wager I've always found it silly. Presumably God would know your thoughts and so know if you've just been doing mental lip service to get into heaven, conversely any good deed by an Atheist is not with the selfish intention of securing eternal paradise in heaven and so they might actually have a better chance of getting in if they live a good life without expecting anything in return. Eg. If a devout religious person gives his life to save another person he 'knows' he will not die and will life forever in heaven. If an atheist does it he 'knows' he faces total oblivion, that his one and only life will end forever. It's more of a perceived sacrifice.
The older I get, the more the Bible sounds perfect. I wish I could help more people, with my very limited ability. Have served the Lord best I can for 38 years. Creation is beyond astonishing. Oh Lord, our Lord, how excellent is Thy Name in all the earth.
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
This phenomenon was mentioned in 1917 by a French mathematician called Gaston Julia, he published them as the 'Julia Sets': although he could only guess at what they looked like, he never saw them, as modern computers were necessary. From here you could say they were moved fractally by Professor Mandelbrot.
@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 I found this very interesting. As an artist I utilize this all the time in less intricate ways. I was always poor at math. Imagine my shock when an adult Ed. Teacher observed that I had algebraic thinking in my designs. This floored me because I was merely told I was "hopeless" in grade school and they sort of gave up on me. I was never trained as an artist, but discovered I enjoyed early American puzzle purse paper designs , origami and scherrenschnitte...and Bible study.
@@birdsflowers2289 I was told the same, and God put me into a desire... directing me towards the sciences of outer space, latest discoveries, and music by the age of 2-3 years old and the Bible, witnessing the Hand of God through my life starting by the age of three. Then, from my birth 1940... so many miracles in my life... with me still pursuing my studies in all these areas, especially in music until 2005, where God had me write, "God's Creative Design on the Piano (Music, using the Spiritual application with God's number system, and God's color system). By then, knowing above PhD in music theory, adding the rest blew my mind, but all in the right direction... completing the picture. He is doing that with you, too. Currently God has me writing a fictional story, because it is real through my life called, "Sky Pilot Mystery Series or a Novel. I hope to finish it this year 2022. Thank for your message to me. God bless you!
@@DiffEQ You have a very pedestrian view of math. Math is the language of the universe. The Fibonacci spiral is proof of that. So yeah, you can take math to determine things but you also need math to understand things such as why your dna is a unique genetic code. It’s very good that you’re retired because I wouldn’t trust you to run a bath let alone build anything
@@DiffEQ Heres some maths for you Obstacles to the formation of life on primitive earth would have been extremely challenging. Even a simple protein molecule is so rich in information that the entire history of the universe since the Big Bang wouldn't give you the time you would need to generate that molecule by chance. Even if the first molecule had been much simpler than those today, there's a minimum structure that protein has to have for it to function. You don't get that structure in a protein unless you have at least seventy-five amino acids or so. First, you need the right bonds between the amino acids. Second, amino acids come in right-handed and left-handed versions, and you have to get the left-handed ones. Third, the amino acids must link up in a specified sequence, like letters in a sentence. Run the odds of these things falling into place on their own and you find out that the probabilities in forming a rather short functional protein at random would be one chance in a hundred trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. That is a ten with one-hundred and twenty-five zeros after it. And that would only be one protein molecule, a fairly simple cell would need between three-hundred and five-hundred protein molecules. When you look at those odds and evidence, you can see why, since the 1960's, scientist have abandoned the idea that chance played any significant role in the origin of DNA or proteins
@@DiffEQ and that's not taking into account that we need rna. Dna. And proteins all to exist at the same time perfectly coded for each other for one to exist. They are symbiotic.
I wonder if creation was not in a ‘fallen’ state…. Would we see more perfect fractals in nature?? When all is redeemed will we see nature in more perfect ‘infinite’ fractals??? Therefore no more decay or degeneration… only eternity. The beauty of it all is hard for me to express.
If nothing died, nothing would live. Decay and degeneration are necessary components of living. With our current birthrate, wed be shoulder to shoulder with everyone within like 3 or 4 generations. It would be utter chaos.
@@TheAngryAtheist … I understand your thinking… and yes… that’s exactly true in the world in which we now live. But if you saw through my eyes from my perspective you would see things so differently. Don’t close your mind to all possibilities. The more I learn the more I realize how shallow man’s understanding is. We see through a glass dimly… but not forever.
@@rphjacobs9197 oh no, my mind is open friend :) i just try not to consider everything thats possible, because theres only so much time in a day. I try not to consider things just on the basis that it feels better to me. Heck, id love to be able to fly at will, but humans cant fly, so i wouldnt waste time considering flying humans as a possibility, regardless of how open my mind is... whats the saying? Be open minded, but not so open that your brain falls out. Cheers!
@@TheAngryAtheist …. Gotcha! And humans can fly. And there was a day a man thought about flying…. Also, sometimes that ‘feels better to me’ is an intuitive confirmation. Sometimes not.. 😉 Blessings!
@@rphjacobs9197 well, humans can sit in machines they build that can fly lol. So yea you got me! But lets be real, i was talking about superman type flying. Yep, i cant disagree there. For me, its not good enough, but i understand why its good enough for others Cheers!
When I first found out about time dilation it freaked me out way more than finding out about fractals. This world is full of some very DEEP mysteries. No question about it.
@@iriskeniafernandez Another weird mathematical thing is it's super easy to find the area of an ellipse, and we have a nice easy simple closed-form formula for it. But finding the circumference of an ellipse is insanely difficult and we still don't really have a simple closed-form formula for it, even after centuries of searching.
42:03 "...laws of math have always been the way they are." False. 42:08 "Were laws of math created by people?" Yes. 42:15 "...because if we created them, we could've created them different." Yes, we could have, by choosing different axioms and rules of logic. However, that wouldn't be practical, since the math in that case might not reflect physical phenomena, which is, after all, why math was invented as a study in the first place. 42:48 "The planets, the way the planets orbit, they obey mathematical laws." No, they obey physical laws, described by mathematics. Furthermore, these physical laws were created to describe the motion of the planets, not the other way around. 43:20 "...the universe is constantly changing" So? Math can't arise from a dynamic system? Without change (movement, etc), we wouldn't have created math in the first place, since a thought itself is a physiological change. 43:45 "The universe has 3 dimensions of space..." False. Many physicists agree that the number of spatial dimensions is larger than 3. 44:26 "They stem from the mind of God" You're doing a lot of suggesting and not a lot of demonstrating. What is God? Please define God and provide evidence of his (its?) existence. Then, demonstrate that it is indeed your God, and it does have a mind. Next, demonstrate what it means for a concept to "stem" from a mind, and finally, demonstrate that the laws of math stem from the mind of God, whatever that means. 44:45 "Laws of mathematics are conceptual, universal, invariant, exceptionless entities." Which 'Laws' are you referring to? Are you referring to mathematical truths in general? In which case, you are wrong on 3 of the 4 counts. Mathematical truths are indeed conceptual. They are not universal, since they may not apply under different axioms. They are not invariant, since they DO change with time. They are not exceptionless either. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 under standard integer addition, but 2 + 2 = 1 under integer addition modulo 3. It also depends on how you define +, but that's another conversation. 44:52 "...characteristics make sense in the Christian worldview, where mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks..." I don't think this is even true. Where in the Bible does it state that mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks? Isn't God's thinking impossible to comprehend? 45:23 "God's thoughts are conceptual / God is omnipresent / God does not change with time / God is sovereign" Do you have evidence of these claims? How do you know the nature of God's thoughts? God does not change with time, but his morals do, since he once allowed slavery and now doesn't (Colossians 3:22-24, Ephesians 6:5-8, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Titus 2:9-10, etc), made the 10 commandments (twice) to revert his own old law, etc? Or perhaps this infinitely moral being still condones slavery? How do you know anything about God? Because a book told you, and you believe everything you read? 45:29 "None of those properties of laws of mathematics would make sense in a secular or naturalistic worldview" Why not? Surely something can exist conceptually in a secular worldview. 45:42 "...but how could you possibly know that?" It is derived from the axioms. No God needed. 45:59 "You assume the laws of physics are the same there, you assume the laws of mathematics are the same there." No, we KNOW the laws of physics are the same there. Not an assumption. And again, what do you mean by "laws of mathematics"? Like, the commutative law? 46:03 "How do they know that? Have they been there?" Do you need to go somewhere to know something about that place? If you see that your neighbor's house is on fire, do you need to enter the house to know that it's on fire? Does a detective need to be at a crime scene while the crime is happening to determine what happened? 46:06 "It's in the Christian worldview that God is sovereign over the entire universe..." How do YOU know THAT? Seems like special pleading. 46:14 "All mathematicians assume that the laws of mathematics are the same tomorrow as they were yesterday." What laws?? Plus, mathematical truths are derived, not assumed. There is no assumption needed, unlike Christianity. 46:30 "How can you know anything about a future you've never experienced from a secular worldview?" How can you know it from a Christian worldview? We both have axioms. If I throw a ball in the air, I can know with the same degree of certainty as you that it will fall back down. We create models which describe natural phenomena, withstand scrutiny, and have immense predictive power. Is the knowledge absolute? No! No knowledge is absolute. But it's the most reasonable method we have of determining truth. This is why physical laws change so often (contrary to what you believe); more accurate models are discovered. Einstein's relativity being used in place of Newton's model of gravity is a classic example of this. 46:38 "...because I know God" No, you don't. 46:40 "...and he's told me some things about the future." Like what? How do you know it was God? Were those things reliably accurate? Were they peer reviewed? Did they survive scrutiny? How do we determine which voice in which person's head is actually God? How do we know you aren't just making this up? Or delusional? Or confirmation biased? 47:12 "Laws of mathematics existed before people" No, they didn't. First of all, you're arguing for physical laws, not mathematical laws (which you still haven't defined, anyway). Secondly, physical laws were CREATED to describe things like planetary motion. The planets don't move the way they do because of these laws. The laws are the way they are because the planets move that way. 50:40 "Why do fractals occur in math and the physical world?" It's almost like.... math was created..... to describe the physical world..... 52:43 "The physical universe obeys mathematical laws" NO! Math DESCRIBES the physical universe! Not the other way around!
thanks for showing me this argument explained this way. i had similar feelings like something just isnt being explained right here and you explained it perfectly and cleared up my confusion. im also using this info to do further research for debating my chrisitian friends, so thanks again!
@@jigsawjason1984 you are clearly demonstrating your ignorance here. First of all, the statement "1+1=2" is not a mathematical law. Secondly, the statement "1+1=900" can be true, under different axioms, under different definitions of + or =, under different frameworks. For example, 1+1=900 under integer addition modulo 2. You are taking your measly high school math education and arguing as though you're a mathematician. Did you even bother to research the sources I presented?
@@williamwilliam4944 Dammit. Michael ran away after getting owned only one time. I was hoping for more amusement from him. Oh, well. Loved reading your thoughts. Very interesting. Thanks for sharing. Peace
As an atheist, I agree with the video title. No need to look at the video. There are lots of things that atheists can't explain. In fact, nobody else can explain them either but that doesn't mean that "God did it." It just means WE DON'T KNOW.
@@owen044 Well, I know enough about theology to realise that it's no more relevant than any other type of fairy tale. And frankly, the more I find out about it, the more ridiculous is appears. It has ZERO relevance in the 21st century. I don't know what religion or church you belong to, but you've been conned: "Our's is the one and only true religion and all the others are rubbish." Yeah right.
Right like wtf you really are just born into whatever religion im sure if he lived in Japan he would be all about the japan religion and never even question it lmaoooo
@@caviestcaveman8691 Many people are converts and definitely question their religion. You could also say many people just follow “modern day science” without ever questioning it and realizing experts could be wrong/there’s still more to learn and what’s “discovered” by them could be false.
I found this amazing pattern in 1990 when studying software programming (as well as the Julia Set) I used to run the program on my PC XT (10 MHz turbo speed) -- took several hours to appear Later, I found a program that ran automatically and on my PC AT-486 at 10 MHz (faster than the XT) The spiral also appears on a corn cob
In my College Abstract Mathematics Class in 1998, we explored the Mandlebrot among many others, we affectionately called Mandlebrot the Cauliflower Fractal because when flattened on a slide, the outside edge of the cauliflower looks a great deal like the edge of the mandlebrot. I couldn't get the whole way through this guy's presentation because he kept taking the achievements of man away from us in his explanation of the Mandlebrot trying to extend divinity upon it. Humans discovered Cardioids in mathematics and learns how to apply them, and numbers are a concept of Ratio that when numbers are whole can be used for counting as well. Cardioids are applied by humans and are observed throughout nature because any spiral shape of movement with one dominant opposing force will form cardioid patterns...kind of like because we came from a big bang and gravity exists, cardioidal motion is at the root of everything we find in the universe...
@@rebeccaw68 no matter the origin of something, be it divine or mundane be it fleeting or eternal, learning about it is ALWAYS discovery. Mathematical concepts are NOT signs of divinity, they are merely tools for analyzing patterns, creating better tools, and planning for the future. The cardioid has NO meaning outside of a cartesian diagram, and in every instance of a natural cardioid being discovered it is self evident that the atomic structures would make those shapes. When applied to social science analysis, cardioids and similar derivations are useful in normalizing data sets to discover the impacts of multivariate stimuli across socio-economic boundaries. It is even more disingenuous to behave like you can't just use the complex number set without context for each of those numbers being used. If one is looking at something designed, the patterns of each constituent part are perfectly engineered for their specific purpose, using the best materials locally available to its creator. The inconsistency of patterns observed in a designed item would be self evident from surface observation in most cases, and easily identifiable under more scrutiny. However when you observer the natural universe, the patterns maintain consistency throughout and have direct route of repeated physical processes from just after the Big Bang to Today...no magic, just Motion, Gravity, Light, and matter in a field of Extraplanar matter and energy not evidently, directly interactable....maybe your God still live in the anti-matter, but I wouldn't bet on it. Please stop looking for a benevolent sky daddy and use your book to discover what was truly fucked up about the people of the past and the people of the present and do your best to be a force for good...become your own sky daddy. Religion is a psychological coping mechanism created by man to deal with the enormity of thought. It allowed them to compartmentalize thoughts about what they have seen but do not understand. Without that compartmentalization they would probably have become very easy prey, as that kind of thought on its own generates dopamine. Eventually, these religious ides become campfire stories that are shared and in the sharing become collective instead of individual. Later, they are corrupted and used to command. This cycle of religiosity is a natural evolution of a mind of thought and dreams. One with time to contemplate and no distractions will create patterns where none actually exist in order to make their internal world view and what they see co-exist. We were eating all kinds of plants and fungi that could do all kinds of crap to our brains, we would then rationalize and contemplate those things...this process started before we could speak a true language, and potentially started around the time we began making cave drawings or began forming words. Add on top of that dreams and well, its not hard to see where the idea of God came from, why it was important for the establisment of civilization, and why it is also the source of so much conflict. If it were truly divine, would it not be even more self evident than the nose upon your face?
@@verigone2677 lol, you still believe something came from nothing, or chaos? Try this: just for once, be totally objective, try your best not to allow your mind to be in opposition and ask God to reveal Himself with as much sincerity as you can muster and see what happens. If God does not exist you'll get nothing, but if He does, you'll experience something that will be very different. You have nothing to lose, just try it.
@@rebeccaw68 why does it have to come from nothing to not be divine. We have no idea what the entire cycle of a universal expansion is. It is very likely that the nature of black holes and dimensional behaviors of Dark Matter and Energy serve as an never ending universal state cycle system. Just like all matter and energy changes state in the observable universe, it must also change state from existence to non-existence by an as of yet unknown physical phenomenon. Then again, any does it have to come from anything, your terrestrial existence and inablity to conceptualize 4th or 5th dimensional universalities prevents you from understanding the nested cyclical nature of matter and energy. Logically speaking there MUST be a period where the Universe exists and where it doesn't, interdimensional mathematics suggests that all possible configurations of the entire universe exist simultaneously. I had my revelation at the age of 17, and it pushed me away from worship of a God. The book so venerated for its divine love yet contains only contradictory paths for life that are supposed to be simultaneously good, yet both paths only lead to strife. Either be the sword of god and bring retribution to your oppressors, or allow yourself to be subjugated...there is no middle ground in Christianity where the working class rise to a position of self determination in the law. Instead they demand you maintain your lesser station, because that way you get all your rewards in heaven... Do you know why that is? If you don't question your worth here, where it really matters, you aren't competing with those who hold unequal power. If all of the poor rise up against the rich, the rich lose everytime...EVERY TIME. Every single Abrahamic faith is equal parts exploration of mystery, and subjugation of the working class to the abject slavery and serfdom.
In the mid 1980s I attended a lecture at a university that was given by Dr Richard Voss from IBM. He approached the explanation of fractals in an interesting way. First he discussed brownian motion and stochastic systems then talked about fractals and specifically fractal geometry and its relation to nature. What came out of it was how fractals are perfect for describing nature. We think in 3 dimensions but the fractal dimension of nature is something like 2.3 if I recall. His examples were fascinating but the one in particular that was amazing is the nile river. For thousands of years, the egyptians have recorded the flood stage of the nile river. He took these measurements and assigned them to musical notes. When you listen to these played on a piano, you are certain you are hearing a composed song yet there is a "random" nature to it. I doubt he is Christian but he was demonstrating this perfect tie in between nature and math. I've left out a ton of what he presented but if this isn't the creation of an extremely intelligent being I don't know what would be. There is so much more to fractals than what can be discussed in a reasonable time. Dr Lisle covers the Mandlebrot pretty well but there is soooooo much more and it all points to God. Truly amazing stuff. Back in that day he recommended a book called "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" by Peitgen and Saupe (stretching my memory here) but it was good. A little bit on the technical side to check it out of a library or something if you don't plan to write code to generate fractals.
@@NickFrom1228 Yes, but it's a stark reality that individuals with high IQs are often isolated, and it drives them to seek companionship. It's not that they are inherently drawn to religion, but rather, they find themselves in a world that often fails to understand or appreciate their intellect. This isolation can make them more susceptible to grasping for any source of connection, and religion is one of those avenues, though it may not truly resonate with them on a fundamental level. It's frustrating to see so many bright minds driven to this predicament by societal inadequacies.
@Joseph Stewart It takes true cognitive dissonance to believe any religion is true. Belief in god and religion is purely based on feelings. So believing something is true with no evidence is a solid definition of cognitive dissonance, especially when it comes to religion.
Christians: "you cannot comprehend God nor his actions" Also Christians: "this is God's brain seeeeeeeeeeeeee" hold on a second, just heard a voice in my head telling me to sacrifice my firstborn............... jkjk he was messing with me whew thank GOD
@@citizenguy True, but honestly trying to say things about god by looking at one single thing he has done is, at best, insulting to him. You wouldn't want people to assume things based random minute things you created and that they chose as important, right? That's just reductive.
Only a fool tries to make an argument against something about which he knows NOTHING. But a wise man searches for wisdom and knowledge to base his arguments upon.
Truly fascinating! Romans 1:20-22 comes to mind for atheist scientists, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts..."
HIS eternal blah, blah... How convenient for the patriarchy that gawd just happens to be THREE MALES. 🤣 And... Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, tRUMPISM... Don't EVEN talk to me about "DARK HEARTS."
@@artemisnite God created man AND woman in His image. Furthermore, Jesus included women in his earthly ministry. And he came to earth because of those sins you mentioned. None are righteous. We need a Savior.
I haven't seen any "secret code". If you found a unexplainable structure inside a mathematical representation that is definately not coincidence, that might be the greatest scientific discovery of all time.
The secret code is the sacred geometry found in creation. Accidents and coincidence don't create geometrical structures. You need math and a computer to create the advance geometry found in creation.
Close towards the end he says “I’m writing a book” my thought was “how in depth does he go”😂 . Seriously though,this was/is absolutely amazing. Thankyou
4:57 Wrong, members of a set need not have any common characteristics. They can be chosen with complete arbitrariness. 45:42 If God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places. To assume other wise is to limit God. You assume properties of God on faith then reason from them. It's just faith with more steps.
And there is no reason to believe that mathematics IS different in different places. Have you seen the size of the universe? What you call God limiting God "here" is called structure and order "here". And no believer in God claims that we can believe without an ounce of faith. We accept that that will always be in place and to be honest....I kinda like that God has opted to not to "make it plain". Those who just don't want to "see" can be free to do just that. Don't think you can prove God does not exist so that does leave us both believing something we can't prove.
@@jayceejm Agreed. No evidence about math being different. No evidence about God either. Of course you can't prove that God does not exist. This is a basic element of logic: one can't prove a negative.
"f God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places." Yep. We haven't discovered such places yet. Even if we did, God making a different mathematics there would also be evidence that God exists.
@@neutrino78x No, there can be no evidence for the existence of God. Suppose you find evidence for a being of great power. You would need to verify that it was evidence of INFINITE power. How does one differentiate between power that is finite, but so huge that we cannot measure it and power that is truly infinite. Further, how to verify that God is eternal? One would need to wait forever to confirm this.
@@citizenguy bullies are the absolute worst. I heard in prison they bully pedophiles and that’s just unchristianly as hell. And I can’t believe they just allow the woke left to bully Nazis online when they’re free to have that belief. It’s not like it’s causing anyone harm just by being a nazi. Not to mention they bully Christians now too! The 65% of Americans that are Christians are the real bullied minority. Lettuce prey for they/them.
@@cameronhill8279 Judeo-Christian values prevented humankind from getting a better understanding of the universe around them all through the Middle Age. Great scientific minds were killed by the Church on the grounds that what they proposed didn't correspond to sacred scriptures, even though we now know they are true. Nicolas Copernic is one example. The scientific method is the opposite of faith, it doesn't require believe because it relies on proof.
That’s funny I didn’t pay anything to listen to his teaching of a mathematical equation that you curse at…thank you for reminding me math is now racist.
@@theseustoo Better than you have tried to disprove it, every attempt to inspect its assertions end up proving it further. It is historically accurate and proven to be reliable in following bloodlines.
Francis Schaefer's "The God Who is There", and Michael Heiser's "The Unseen Realm" are two books that do thoroughly answer and solve the issues posed in this thread. Read or audiobook The Unseen Realm first to thoroughly understand that the Bible was written for us, and not to us. Heiser's PhD in ancient Semitic languages really sold me on taking the time to go through his book, then over the years I went through it 8 more times because it is just that good. Helping me to understand the reality and brevity of my disposition, that I know nothing as I ought to know and yet I get to be known by His knowledge. I think Paul was agnostic, save the knowledge of God.
I will never understand how people can just deny something with so much evidence, yet believe something with literally no evidence, but evidence against it. this guy isn't a scientist, he is a preacher.
God bless you! Thank you so much for this exceptional video. I'm a seminary student here in Brazil, and I'm glad that I spent time watching how the glory of God is everywhere.
it never ceases to amaze me just how easy it is to lead sheeple down the garden path your invisible sky wizard is a fantasy made up by man in his image
I’ve seen this discussion before. Unfortunately the entire thing is built on a false premise. The Mandelbrot set is not infinite complexity built from a finite equation, but rather it is infinite complexity from an infinite equation. The set is created from multiple iterations on a single simple equation. The more you iterate the equation the more complex it is. We can never actually have an infinitely complex set because we can never actually iterate the equation infinite times.
"I can't understand why flowers look so beautiful, so fairies exist." "If fairies didn't exist I would be very sad and my life wouldn't make any sense anymore. I don't want to be sad and give my life meaning, so fairies exist." "The only reason we humans see beauty is because fairies enchant us with the beauty of their creations. You can see beauty? So fairies exist." When it comes to thousands of other magical creatures and gods, believers see through moronic arguments immediately.
how dark and lonely it must be for those who choose not to believe in God our creator 😥 I simply do not know how people can live in that state! the evidence of God it's essentially everywhere.
@@jasonspades5628 I think he just means that for every moment of our existence we are being grossly overpaid, no matter what that existence happens to be.
@@johnjeffreys6440 think about what you just said. At the time of Job… NO MAN would have any clue what a dinosaur was because we didn’t start to discover fossils of said creatures until thousands of years later. Because according to established timelines, dinosaurs and man never coexisted. People from Jobs time could not have had ANY idea what a dinosaur is. Because they are separated from the nearest one by about a million years. Someone’s lying
"The problem is that this has nothing to do with god." No, but it has to do with God. "One cannot just look at patterns and say „hence god“" We're saying, "hence God", not "hence god", but sure you can. It's subjective and not scientific, but yes, this is evidence of the existence of God, who wrote the laws of physics with the intention that at least one intelligent species would evolve, and then left it on autopilot, with everything occurring as has been discovered by science. The Mandlebrot Set can be interpreted as evidence that an intelligence wrote the laws of physics. A "higher power" if you prefer but most of us write it in short hand as "God". Not any specific religion just the general concept of a higher power. (the gods of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, the Hindu gods, Yahweh and Allah are all God. All are equally correct.)
That's Alex! Did you watch the video? Why would concept designs be the same as physical? Note the keyword design. Design immediately points to a designer. What's the point of a design if there is no designer? Honestly what's the point of any design if there is no designer? Even useless items that have no definitive point or actual benefit, has a "design" and someone with a mind created them. But there is obviously a point between a useless item with no specific benefit and a useful item with a specific benefit. Do you realize there is irreducible complexity in us humans, both male and in female that it is impossible for it to come into existence without a mind?
@@fireguy-id7ky could you ever theorize that lamp to come into existence without a human creating materials to create that lamp to work as it should, let alone a power source without a human mind to light the lamp to make it work as it should? Some perspective for you. You are not believing "God gave us this lamp" without considering a mind creating it, to make have a design and a function. No unbeliever nor you could actually prove there is no God. To do so, you literally have to prove your own non-existence and the non-existence of earth, ironically. So really good luck.
And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. - 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
Yeahh- the very idea that complex fractals would be assumed to be proof of a higher being is an innately pack animal instinct based conception. Fractals can also be used to prove how complexity can create itself with no outside intervention since it's already a thing in nature known as emergent patterns. What also is an emergent pattern? Landforms, planets, flowers, bones, hurricanes, and finally-- consciousness. Since it's a product of smaller parts that grows to have a bigger influence, it proves fractals are a visualization of happenstance.
@@dariunperkey4649 I am mostly familiar with debate tactics, personally I think it's the argument equivalent of the scientific method. And should be a common critical thought protocol in order to guide peoples minds toward clever solutions.
Havent even got 10 min in and through reading the comments i can already understand this guys main argument. I strongly recommend everyone of all religious beliefs to take a philosophy/ philo. Of religion class. The main theological argument this guy is trying to make for the existence of a monotheistic god is the teleological argument. Essentially the idea that there are too many specific details and coincidences in our natural world, therefore there must be a purpose for them and an intelligent god that created them. Where he sees complex natural phenomenon as evidence of god we see it as simply the complexity of nature. I think its rather presumptuous to assume our lack of understanding of nature is evidence that god is real. Humanity in the past explained the day night cycle by saying gods were pulling the ball of fire in the sky. How can we know we are not in the same predicament? Just because the majority of our reality is not known to use doesnt mean an all powerful being exists in the metaphysical plane. Additionally i knew this argument for god would be absolutely irrelevant when he dismissed evolution at the beginning. Buddy let me explain something. We know evolution is real through observation of the physical world. We literally see the genes evolving through generations and beneficial traits become more prominent. We have done multiple studies on insects and watched advantageous traits become adopted by the entire population. To say thats not real because god means you need to prove god’s existence and faith is not a good enough excuse neither is the teleological argument.
We see patterns and some people assume it means things were created to derive patterns, but we also see patterns in Conway's game of Life. Set some simple rules in this game, chaos emerges, and patterns emerge as well. This doesn't speak to creation, it speaks to the random nature of existence, and the emergence of patterns in chaos. The essential false premise is 'hidden code' using the mandelbrot set as an example. They do not understand how so much complexity can be found in a relatively simple set, but to assume there is a hidden mechanism is literally not understanding the basic premise of the mandelbrot set. There is no hidden mechanism, the set is clearly defined, good math. There is no wibbly wobbly space for hidden math, it's exactly what it is. There is no room for God, factually so, if God is hidden mechanisms in math as this suggests.
I’m a christian and yet i still know that there is no proof of god, that’s why we have faith, if god was proven for fact then everyone would believe him. You can’t prove him. Have faith in god.
@@ethancollinsworth3927 so you let something that has no evidence dictate how to live your life? Would you follow Christianity if you were born as a Muslim?
@@doity That’s a good question that i don’t know the answer to. But you let things you don’t know dictate your life everyday. You don’t know that god ISNT real and you let that dictate your life (seeing as you’re on a comment section about it)
@@ethancollinsworth3927 We see patterns and some people assume it means the world was created, but it only speaks to the random nature of existence, and the emergence of patterns in chaos. They do not understand how so much complexity can be found in a relatively simple set like the mandelbrot, but to assume there is a hidden mechanism is literally not understanding the basic premise of sets such as the mandelbrot. There is no hidden mechanism, the set is clearly defined, and the patterns emerge. There is no wibbly wobbly space for hidden math, it's exactly what it is.
"who created numbers?" We don't know if they were "created" in any sense of the word. But your argument is basically "where did this come from? You don't know? Therefore God." Which isn't an argument. Not knowing is a million times better than making up a God to explain mysteries.
I wonder what an atheist like Wigner would say to this misuse of his words? Of course, you could just look it up since he obviously addressed the religious take on these particular thoughts of his. However, to nobody's surprise, you seem to have not seen his replies, or maybe omitted them on purpose. You could also actually study how the math creates these shapes, so that they become no more mysterious than the fact that 2+2=4. But you won't do that either, because, as we all know, you're not really interested in learning anything here
The question is not the how, but the why. Math itself is a problem for those with a viewpoint that claims the universe happened randomly. Why would all these rules for how things work be in place to govern literally everything that exists? Why can nothing exist outside of those rules? Not to mention the many holes in any version of macro evolution- if we find a chihuahua and a great dane, fossilized in 10000 years, and dogs have been extinct for long enough that general knowledge of them has passed away, what would such a theory suggest was the reason for their extreme differences? Could a theory emerge that the older chihuahua bones are proof of a canine that evolved from a rat, seeing as they have so many similarities? “Then, as the animals adapted to their environment, and became more successful within their biosphere, they evolved, growing larger and better adapted, hence the much later date of the great dane fossil.” Sound familiar? This thought process a gross oversimplification of reality, based on a theory of what could have happened, if everything in the universe “just happens”, in a way that we can relatively easily explain- but, we have to ignore the faults in our logic, to hold to these theories.
@@ralphpierroii4626 your argument started to decay when you claimed that most people believe the universe was created randombly, nobody who believes in the big bang of other theories believes that, at least i, believe that the origin of the universe as a whole is unknown, but the universe as we know it works the way it does because of the law of physics, nothing random, now if you want to believe that the laws of physics are made by a god then thats on you to prove.
@@ralphpierroii4626 And also you misunderstand evolution greatly, you assume that every scientist would claim that every species was a succefull one, but you can clearly see various examples of species that scientist pointed out being too specialized to survive and explain why they don't exist anymore, if they found fossils of dogs they would point inmediatly that all of them belong in the same family, it would just be a mistery on why they were too diversified and some looked malnourish until its discovered one with a collar, then the articifial breeding would be speculated, because you know, evidence its important.
@@spinosaurusstriker so where do the laws of physics come from? They are so precise and ordered that you can build skyscrapers and massive airplanes with the confidence that those laws will remain constant. Why?
@@lauraandrews1676 you are seeing things in the wrong order , a snowflake looks the way it looks because of how the molecules of water work , the molecules aren't working that way to make the snowflake ,and the laws remain constant because there is anything to suggest they would need to change ,at least in normal circumstances. If you want to know were do the laws of physics come from ,its unknown at least for me but that doesn't mean you can automatically claim to be the result of whatever whitout proof ,just like you wouldn't believe a man saying that George bush lives in his house whitout anything to back it up , the task is to prove god first ,then we can use it to explain things .
So it means that the universe is designed as a never-ending formula that was created by God the creator. The universe is so huge which is proven already by scientists. If they keep on looking it gets bigger and farther, like what is in this video. It's a really fascinating and well-explained video.
No it doesn't. Universe can't be created, It always existed. If something is infinite it can't have the beginning or the end, hence its impossible that something existed before it (because there is no before in this context) . Pretty simple logic. If you insert the need of the creator, you are creating a paradox. Because creator needs to start randomly existing, or be created, but then that creator has a creator and so on. Unless you wanna say that there is an infinite number of creators in which case you aren't Christian.
@@diemyfriend yep who created the creator then this simple question christians can't answer I love it when logic breaks them down I want to believe but just don't see good evidence
@@caviestcaveman8691 the most reasonable way for me is Pantheism. Either everyone and everything is god (all as one) or nothing is. Seems like two most plausible answers. But its okay to say "I don't know". Something preacher can't say out loud.
Grow up Tara, be an adult. Stop browsing content you care nothing for and learn to possibly use your time more wisely. You can be more than an internet troll if you simply put your mind to it. I believe in you Tara, you can do it! 🙂
Just take a point called Z in a complex plane, Let Z1 be Z^2+C, Z2 is Z1^2+C, Z3 is Z2^2+C, and so on. If the series of Zs will always stay Close to Z and never trend away, That point is in the Mandelbrot Set.
If you're an atheist, you might wanna start believing in God. Think about it this way: if God doesn't exist and you believe in vain, nothing happens. However, if He does and you spend your whole life denying Him then you will be denied by Him. You literally have nothing to lose, but everything to gain.
@@lukestewart2525 How about the one with the most archaeological evidence to support its claims? I mean there's a giant boat on top of a mountain in Turkey, there are chariot wheels and horse bones in the Red Sea, there are numerous biblical locations you can find including Sodom and Gomorrah that are still showing remnants of being burned with sulfur and fire.
@@lukestewart2525 Heck, even Islam acknowledges that the God of Israel is the true God. They just claim he favors them instead and sent another prophet just to them. So 2 religions agree on which god is the one true God.
@@lukestewart2525 Not a bad idea, there's another faith that agrees on the same God as the one and only. Personally, I'm Messianic, so I believe in the whole Bible. Not just new testament like the average Christian.
The talk just presents an explaination how beauty and complexity emerges from simple rules with no god in them. What a service to his own beliefs … True, you cannot touch rules. But information processing devices like brains can still discover them, and so we got math. Still no sign for a god. It all boils down to the question why there are laws of nature. The answer you gave: if it wouldn‘t, there wouldn‘t be complexity and you to observe it. This simple.
"The talk just presents an explaination how beauty and complexity emerges from simple rules with no god in them." You cant be more wrong... If you listen carefully... before even evolutionist' theory of how things came about random and didnt need God, well as explained, the rules of our physical universe existed until the so called big bang (or point of creation). Before that math stops. With big bang, math starts, and math didnt need humans, but human's brain can conceptualize it because of the partial power given to us all. We can understand it through math, again, math doesnt need us to work. How and why it works is the mystery if you are secular, if you are religious, it is kind of known. God created everything, his power is infinite, he is everywhere, and left us some of his power in limited quantity in our brains to understand and find him if you are looking for him. Our brains can visualize these concepts but these concepts does not and did not need us. world still revolved, sun still shined the way it shined after it became sun. and we can visualize/conceptualize how sun started and and how it may end, but it doesnt/didnt need us for it to happen! Fractals make sense only if you believe in an infinite wisdom. otherwise it makes no sense in a finite universe! Math is not bounded by the physical dimensions we are locked in at the moment. we can conceptualize beyond the current dimensions, but we cant practically and physically see it. "It all boils down to the question why there are laws of nature. The answer you gave: if it wouldn‘t, there wouldn‘t be complexity and you to observe it. " You cant be even more wrong that this. It is you who doesnt grasp the reality of god. before you existed, math still was there! as explained before Pythagorean theorem, do you think triangles behaved differently? Before humans figured out and observed the galaxy, did the stars moved and behaved differently? you answer is not only silly it is meaningless. there was complexity before us, and will be after us, whether you observe and appreciate it is an entirely different matter! It is the best proof that god existed before us in an infinity! there are finite particles in the universe, yet math can count beyond that. it only proves that beyond us/universe, there is something infinite beyond imagination but you can still conceptualize it all thanx to god's biggest gift to us that made us different from all other living beings: MIND, many creatures has brains, but MIND is an entirely different concept again blows everyone's MIND when you try to explain/quantify it!
Sorry Falk, have to agree with My tester. First of all let's get this out the way. "God" = "spiritual higher power in one form or another, all religions being correct". In other words Allah, Yahweh, the gods of ancient Greece and Rome, the gods of Hinduism, all are God. Please don't build straw men. Now, look, math wasn't created by man. It was discovered by man. The laws of physics were discovered, not invented by man. But they're fundamental, we can't say "before mathematics existed" or "before the laws of physics existed". With one exception. You have to pick a starting point. Either that starting point is the material universe itself (physical laws were always there in one form or another, before the big bang/multiverse is meaningless) OR the starting point is God. Now, I don't care how back you want to go. Pick it yourself. Whatever you think that most fundamental state is. Deism is unaffected by your choice. Whatever you choose, I would say the most fundamental state is God. God is the one that is without cause, God is that which causes everything else (by writing the laws of physics). The difference being, your view of the universe is a materialistic one. You see no Purpose. As a Deist, I see a Purpose. I'm not sure what it is of course. I would think probably so at least one intelligent species would evolve (probably more than one has evolved in the vastness of space). So therefore I can't pick the starting point as the laws themselves. Just looking at those laws, they look like they have purpose. And we didn't write them. We DISCOVERED them. So you can't say "they're beautiful because Einstein wanted them to be"....no...he just discovered what God created. Maxwell's Equations, written by God. The Mandelbrot Set, written by God. Since I'm not violating any known science, and not making any falsifiable predictions (I accept all that physics/evolutionary biology has discovered), both our positions are equally rational. They are just different ways of interpreting the universe. I see one with Purpose, therefore I see God. You don't, therefore you see the absence of God. Neither is irrational.
As a mathematician I understand that people invented numbers to describe the world around us. Given the mechanics of the way our universe seems to have arisen it is hardly surprising to see that it contains similar patterns to the way a mechanistic function describes the mandelbrot set
since whether or not there is a God is unknowable it's all opinion....as a Deist I'm with this astrophysicist Christian...to me this is evidence of God. But I know it's subjective and you can reasonably look at it a different way. That's why it's not scientific evidence. But it is evidence for us to make up our own minds about it.
@@atharv-gautamEinstein quotes disagree with you, as does the tons of detail, sources, & evidence I've found that proves my last comment, & how all the major religions, sciences, proven prophecy, etc. directly or indirectly came from the 5 Vedas, which I show in my book & unfinished videos. I'd provide them here, if you sounded more nice & open minded, & if youtube's AI stopped removing the wrong comments. Just stay tuned. Vedas even correctly predicted that their spiritual, merit based Varna system would get distorted into a birth based system.
Simulation theory is becoming more popular because humanity is now in a state where we can imagine it being true. We are now creating virtual worlds, virtual systems, simulated models of the world, and simulated origins of life models. All of these simulations needed a creator to make them. As a Christian who believes in special creation. I think we need to embrace special creation as a type of simulation but with an emphasis that the creation can’t be greater than the creator.
@@Captain-Cosmo 1) God is eternal. No beginning no end. Created things have a beginning. 2) Lets say creating an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal being was possible. It would be created by an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal being. Thus, it would be redundant and unnecessary.
@@ultraderek take the game of life of Conway… it can generate itself with its basic rules, infinitely. This works like a simulation of a simulation .. to ever… with no beginning and no end…. And still only a basic rule. And no god
I’m an atheist. Looking at te title and listening to just the first 15 minutes I can say this means absolutely nothing. For 1, atheists not being able to explain something does NOT equal “god exists.” 2. Even IF his little math show proved a god existed, it would ABSOLUTELY NOT prove te Christian god. That has already been disproven. So we’re back at start wondering what a god would want from us and withholding belief in any specific god until we have reason to believe in a specific god.
@@ArcherMVMaster So everything called science in human history was factually correct? Like when science said flies spontaneously spawn, lead is perfectly safe, asbestos is perfectly safe, making hats with mercury is fine.... need I go on? There's good science & scientists and bad "science" and "scientists" that only care about upholding the orthodoxy of the day and are immune to facts or the scientific method itself, if it dares defy them!
55:21 Here's an awnser from a 2nd semester Biology student: The universe obeys the laws of mathematics because they themselves exist within it. This could lead one to the assumption that the universe itself is god, thus containing both the physical and conceptual part. We could very well exist within a multidimensional (at least 4 dimensions, with 3 spacial ones + time) fractal, and just be a physical form of the universe computing/plotting said fractal over time, without even being aware on which part and scale we are. While I currently have no access to the computing power needed for more complex calculations like this, I tend to see the reoccurring shapes in everything I explore, may it be the structures of life or the very concept of reality itself, I'm staring into the abyss of infinity, smiling back at me with such beauty and purity. I don't know if I am scratching at the border between genius and insanity, but the infinity is all that remains, all that will be. And I can't stop but to stare in amazement as the universe keeps on unfolding.
Wow when he zoomed in my mind was blown and then again and then blown some more. Glory be to our creator who is infinitely beautiful and beyond our comprehension. It saddens me that the world believes we live in an accidental world that came from nothing.
How are you so blown away by fractals, the Mandelbrot set is an old hat at this point. It's just a selected set of complex numbers represented as a geometric figure. It has nothing to do with some invisible man in the sky, it's just visualized maths, and as maths is a rational, organized way of describing reality, it results in an organized structure if you visualize a set of complex numbers. Nothing godly there. Man, Americans and their terrible education system...
@@meta7517 Did you not see how beautiful it was? 😊 No coincidence. I'm not from America by the way. And I don't think God is an invisible man in the sky. He is infinitely everything at its purest form ✨ I'm not sure you understand the Mandelbrot if you think that it is a selected set of complex numbers. It is one of God's patterns 💚 arohanui
@@cathrynholland8149 math is beautiful. But it is not gods pattern. Math is man-made. Just a way to describe the world we live in. It's beautiful because it's visualized numbers. That has nothing to do with god.
With or without the aspect of religion this could be the best video on the Mandelbrot set I've ever seen. And I've seen a few. Very good job explaining the details in an easy to understand way.
I agree. Though I am not a religious person, I enjoyed the presentation very much. I have to say that his was the best presentation I have ever watched on Mandelbrot set.
The guy is trying to negate what we can actually see in the gradual progression of evolution and adaptation. His religion has made him delusional and sick from fear . These people cannot be trusted in their decision making. It's sad that people need to believe in something so badly, and we have tens of thousand s of completely different religions, yet they are each so limited.
God not being real is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it. These people see the intricacies of our universe and never once assume the possibility that it could've been Rick Sanchez
The idea of God not being real is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it. Just like all that intricacy and ourselves being attributed to "randomness" being a lie, is inconvenient for those who have built their lives around it. Never understanding that design only comes from an intelligent mind.
God being real is inconvenient for fools who choose to ignore the fact that a spontaneously generated universe is _literally_ less likely to occur than the formation of a functional aircraft in the aftermath of a thermonuclear explosion at a plane factory.
@@jameson2916 This dialogue is equivalent to: "1+1 not being equal to 3 is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it." "Oh really? Two can play this game! 1+1 not being equal to 2 is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it."
Never will I understand how Christians can look at something and completely ignore it at the same time. It's like they're not hearing themselves speaking
Never will I understand how non-Christians can look at something and completely ignore it at the same time. It's like they're not listening because they refuse to hear anything that refers to God. Their pride and arrogance has hardened them against him and closed their mind. "Pride leads to disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom." Prov. 11:2 "Mean-spirited slander is heartless; quiet discretion accompanies good sense." Prov. 11:12
No arrogance present when it is true. When Usain Bolt said "I am the fastest man alive" He was. No one would say "how arrogant" as it was just a statement of fact. If you believed Justin Gatlin was faster, Usain would SOUND arrogant but it would never make it so just because it is what you believe.
Human : creates math. Creates some arbitrary rules to plot out numbers in a graph. Discovers it creates cool fractal patterns. Also human : Aha!! Proof of a supernatural god!!!! 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
No, it's different when it comes to fractals, they are not arbitrary. Fractals have been discovered in nature as well. What's fascinating about them is a concept known as self-similarity. Mandelbrot was a genius, and he inspired an entire generation of mathematicians.
@@MosesMatsepane these patterns come from rules that we created to plot the points..... it's not that astounding. It's just cool to look at. This pattern don't occur naturally. It occurs because of the rules we made up to plot out the points on a graph.
You're insane if you believe the Mandelbrot set is "made up" the finitude of the human mind could never capture such thing, besides great mathematicians like Roger Penrose acknowledge that these mathematical concepts are not invented but discovered.
As an atheist, I can explain this just fine: Math starts at a series of simple rules, and the rest naturally follows through logic. When you take a simple ruleset and apply it to a field like numbers, patterns tend to emerge. Take prime numbers for example. A number is prime if it's not divisible by any whole numbers except for 1 and itself. When you look at the prime numbers, 2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,... you might notice that after 2,3 there are never 2 prime numbers in a row. There is always at least one number between two prime numbers. This is a pattern, yet it's not immediately obvious why it's there. Nothing in the rules says that 2,3 can be the only couple. If you look deeper into it though, you might find that among two consecutive numbers there is always one odd number and one even number. Furthermore the only even number that can be prime is the one that's divisible by 2 and 1, which is 2. Now the pattern is explained. That explanation was fairly simple to find, but you can imagine there are patterns that are much harder to explain. In some cases mathematicians can spend their whole careers trying to find one and still falling short. Just because we can't find an explanation, that doesn't mean there isn't one. We still find new solutions to old problems relatively often. Also, when you map a complex enough function onto 2d space, it's gonna make pretty pictures. It's gonna make 2d patterns, and our brains like 2d patterns because they're easier to process than random noise. The mandelbrot set is really interesting, and the visuals we can make with it are truly stunning, but I personally wouldn't go looking for higher meaning in it.
how you can still be an atheist after watcing this is beyond me, ok so i had a head start i already had the theory for a long time - the fractal signature repeats itself throughout the whole universe from the macrocosm to the microcosm how can there not be a higher intelligence behind that if a painting cannot paint itself then the universe couldn't bring it's self into existance with all that mathematical and artistic precision from galaxies to flowers its Gods signature he made us in his image - he fractalised himself some people can't see whats right in front of there nose there are 3 types of people those who can see, those who can see after theyv'e been shown and those who can't see no matter what evidence you provide a kind of psychological colour blindness, science fact !
Very beautiful math plots. As a math guy myself I appreciate this. Don't necessarily believe that it proves god exists, but I do agree that math is beautiful
I remember when I was in college (1986) Penn State I had a Tandy computer. Major: computer science. It came with a built in function,,,, that almost nobody knew about. I did. A small graphics program based on the Mandelbrot set. You ran the program, entered values, and it spit out mind blowing images. I always said the language of God is like math, the answer is right or wrong, there is nothing in between. No such thing as a gray area
The "language of God" is a figment of your imagination. Childhood brainwashing is no doubt the cause. But math is real -- not some absurd occult supernatural conjecture.
@@stevecarson4162 Well Mr Carson I have 3 degrees, masters. Very well educated. How do you know math is true? By reading math books. Now go read the Bible, test it, try it, see if it's true. Just like you do with math books
@@joek511 : I HAVE read it, tested it, and tried it -- and no, it's NOT true. I'm always amazed when apparently intelligent and otherwise well-educated people still cling to beliefs in all that occult supernatural hokum that was written to frighten naive little children and make them behave. Sadly, a lot of adults still haven't outgrown their belief in such fairytales. Their thorough indoctrination at such an early age is no doubt to blame.
@@joek511 "Now go read the Bible, test it, try it, see if it's true." Ok. I loved my neighbour and found that it was a good thing to do. Bible proved. You don't really think the Bible is meant literally do you? The point of that book is "love thy neighbour as you love thyself", period. There is nothing in it that needs objective or scientific proof.
What we don't know about reality is staggering. I'm watching this in 2022 and there's plenty to be pessimistic about... But then I watch a video like this and I'm reminded there's way more beauty and complexity and all of our political bickering is so utterly pointless. Whether or not God exists will be debated until the end of time, most likely, but to dispute there is intelligent design in our Universe is willful ignorance.
@@amitypredator9385 No-one. This question is a natural question but easily answered. God is by definition uncaused, eternal, and outside of time and space. So, IF he exists, he would HAVE to be the first cause of everything. He is the uncaused logos. Does it make more sense that everything came from something or someone? or that it evolved out of ABSOLUTE nothingness with no help, no power, no plan, no intelligence? The cause of a finite universe has to be outside of space and time, because space and time didn't exist before the universe. A personal being with intelligence and enormous power who is outside of space and time would make perfect sense for how an extremely complex, massive universe exists with people that live in it and that are sitting here talking about God. You might say that's a God of the gaps argument, but not really. It simply makes sense, doesn't prove anything. It's simply reasonable. If you're looking for proof, that's not it, but it's perfectly reasonable, even if we cannot know everything about this eternal God. There are things we cannot know and will not know. Science will NEVER have an explanation for absolutely everything. Jesus Christ is the best evidence of God.
Uh not really, if the world and people are intelligently designed, then the creator did a horrible job. It's actually ignorant to tell other people they're willfully ignorant for not seeing what you see, when it's most likely patterns and shapes formed from natural causes
No, it's the OPPOSITE. Assert that there is an intelligent design in our universe is willful ignorance, AND naivety. So don't be pretentious and categorical in your statements. Where is the "intelligent" design you speak of? In wisdom teeth? In myopia? In pharynx which makes choke? In childbirth who hurts extremely? In stinky, disgusting excrement? In congenital diseases? In menstruation? In earthquakes and hurricanes? Lol, all the examples i cited clearly prove that there is NO intelligent design, on contrary, it's rather poor and incompetent design.
The evidence for intellect design is everywhere, including in us. But everyone is missing the obvious next questions. 1. Why do we have to attach this intelligence to a hierarchical deity who would divide us between the chosen and damned? That line of thinking is antithetical to the whole design of nature and the mathematics used here. 2. Why Christianity , when all other major religions and belief systems have the same findings through mathematics, as does Quantum Physics? 3. Why do we not attach this to the true teachings of the Christ, which pre-date Jesus by thousands of years. And in fact Jesus predates Christianity by hundreds of years. The true teachings being that We, our Souls, are all fractals of God, and as such We Are God seeing creation through a 3rd Dimensional lense. 4. Why use higher intelligence to show a beautiful truth in intelligent design, then use the lowest form of intelligence to attach this to a them vs us argument? 5. Why assume that we should be either Cristian or Atheist? Why should we be any label. Faith does not mean religion, yet the enlightened individual know there are truths in most teachings, especially those that have stood the test of time….one’s that many Christian/religious groups and mainstream atheism have label as evil or mocked because they dare to suggest a move away from the hierarchical duality of these non-intelligent, limited world views that either say we are nothing special, or waiting to be saved. Truly intelligent learning has no attachment. Only the search for truth. One day All People will understand the truth, because they will no longer sit in judgment or be attached to a limited paradigm such as Christianity, Atheism, or any ‘ity’/‘ism’. ❤️
The very first wonder I could remember is about astronomy. This was before I was put in school or taught any religion. Everything we see are all so beautiful. And then there's music....
Yes! I am amazed by polyphonic overtones in one note. I did not know I until experimented with my voice that I could make several sounds simultaneously because a tone is not simply one sound. Even that fascinates me!
@@rebeccaw68 The piano note is 'One' tone. The string instrument like violin is more levels of sound. The voice is the ultimate levels of sound more capable then any instrument producing a tone. That is why I love to add the string instrument sound with the piano sound on a digital keyboard, and then if you sing with that combination, that is the ultimate... combining all.
![ค้างคืนโรงเก็บกระสวยอวกาศร้างกลางทะเลทราย [Around The World Ep. 3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E5bWZQhABJE/mqdefault.jpg)
![เปิดบ้าน นาราเครปกระเทย 1 ไร่ ขายขาดทุนหลัก10ล้าน เอามาใช้หนี้!!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0jz84VFWVP4/mqdefault.jpg)
I have been a scientist for decades. This is why I scoff when people say science disproves religion. When you see these things, you will become a believer in Him, a disbeliever in science, or realize science points to Him.
Amen
@@philhart4849u scream reddit mod
@@user-ol6kb1qf6j "u scream reddit mod" Huh?
@@philhart4849 fallacy ? great word, but I see this is the only language you non believers know. I see in your own language. I see you all use words that make you fell smart and try to use them to prove nothing. We all see through it. I read many Atheist's books all full of words to confuse people that sound smart. But all conclude to nothing in any argument. I never once in my life found a Athests Dna book. Ever.
@@GameCreatorOfGod"I never once in my life found a Athests Dna book. Ever." Would you like mayonnaise with that word salad, Sir?
"There IS NO ATHIEST EXPLANATION for this amazing thing I'm about to show you."
They always say before talking about a mixture of stuff a 4th grader could explain and just meaningless gibberish
Most of what these types say is quite literally made up on the spot. It's disgusting. Say no to cults, kids.
@@stspy212 Yes, say no to the psychologically desperate cult of religion hatred.
The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is at all comprehensible -Albert Einstein When I consider the heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him? The son of man, that you should visit him? Psalm 8:3,4
Maranatha.
The son of man is actually the "sun" of man meaning literally the actual sun.
😭😭🤧
@@youaresomeone3413 perhaps you can surmise that interpretation as acknowledgement of it having dual meaning, but your comment neglects the actual meaning of the reference, and you are absolute incorrect in that claim. Son of Man is a direct reference to Christ.
It isn't comprehensible. Humans just know how to sustain elaborate delusions.
As a kid, I remember being endlessly interested in fractals and I told my whole family about it. Last year or maybe 2 years earlier, I discovered an app that lets you endlessly explore the Mandelbrot set, it kept me entertained for a long time.
thats so cool, what was the app called?
I think it was from the Google banner one week last year!
The app is called “Retinamandelbrot”, I know I posted this comment earlier but my reply mysteriously disappeared.
"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"
God is reality, everything else is man made fantasy @@losningen3665
“I’d rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
-Richard Feynman
"You said a mouthful, there.", to quote another wise man.
I'm 81 years old and I have no questions that need to be answered for I know how the world is going to be and why it has been like it has been. Man is searching for life and Destiny why am I here and what the future hold for me. So life has really many questions and it seems that no answers can be found but I found all the answers and I know where I am bound.
I would much rather have answers that can’t be questioned…. Are you crazy? You would honestly rather believe that god exists rather then KNOW for sure that god unquestionably exists?
@@philodox7599 %Theophobia can impels atheists to do incredible mental gymnastics in order to avoid the obvious, because the obvious terrifies them.
question away sir. questioning is good. apathy is the enemy.
As a visual artist, I'm mesmerized by the beauty of these forms.It's interesting that humans have used these forms and shapes throughout time, in their jewelry, pottery, textiles, buildings, etc.They seem to be innate in our imaginations.
Thought of hippie-era paisley right away. Also the scarves!
Human beings are the only thing in the known universe that can see beauty in creation and appeciate it's likeness reflected by us in art. This is proof we are made in God's image I believe.
Nature ends up using these forms as well, but science rejects the observation as coincidence.
Yet they have no issue in stating that 97% of our universe is an unexplained unicorn force called dark energy.
' the the only
@@puppiesarepower3682 8
Math over the years has caused me to shed many tears, all in frustration! This is the first time math has caused me to shed tears of awe and appreciation for the beauty of God! Thank you for sharing this
Same!!
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
I'm not surprised most of the comments here talk about struggling with math. It makes perfect sense honestly.
"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"
@@mistafizz5195i was about to say that😂
Our God is awesome His thoughts and ways are above and beyond ours
Amen, Praise God
You are right!! I’m thankful for Jesus! Thankful for His sacrifice and mercy!
There's three things I'm bad at.
#1. Math
#2. Athletics.
🤣
This is literally like the written Word of God. Same Word, but the more you go to it and hear from Him and receive of Him from it, the more you get and the more you get and the more you get. ❤
Fractal geometry exists, it's beautiful, and useful. That is what we see in it. But how is it God gets credit? His fingerprints are nowhere on it, because he has no fingers, no hands, no arms, no existence. You BELIEVE he exists. But Belief occurs in the absence of evidence, the absence of proof. 85% of mathematicians are atheists. Benoit Mandelbrot himself was an atheist.
@@OslerWannabe Where did human life originate? Don't assume I am asking this because I do or don't believe in God, it's just a literal question.
@@tsmith3286 Humans evolved from an earlier primate ancestor. Next?
The largest postive real value that lies within the set is 1/4.
@@richardgregory3684 Don't remember my ancestors ever coming from apes because our genetics don't show that we ever reproduced through apes since you can't change the genetic code after conception. So when did the first ape give birth to a human being then? Because reproduction pretty much contradicts this theory you're telling us
This is a great example of “the God of the gaps”…in other words, if we haven’t yet found the answer to a question, it must be God. Over the years, we’ve found answers to many questions that were once thought to be unanswerable. The Bible is a beautiful book, but was written by ancient people a long time ago. I don’t believe it is meant to be taken literally and is certainly not meant to be a science textbook. This is my belief, but I respect your right to believe what you want to as well.
There is an infinite amount of answers. Science attempts to catalogue irreducible complexity and then use human thinking to interpret what those facts mean. I would say the most ignorant people are scientists because they think they have awareness that they do not. At the end of the day it is the human mind and not the scientific method that gives us all of our insights. Data can only serve to trigger the mind it literally means nothing on its own without our interpretation.
Yep
They aren't really logical people
Nope
Cha-ching.
Pure math major here. Let's break this down.
5:00 "...a collection of elements with a common defined property"
Not necessarily. Some sets contain elements which have a common property, some don't. The only assured common property of all elements in an arbitrary set S is that they are all contained in S.
5:15 "In most sets, some numbers are included while others are excluded"
I am being pedantic here (admittedly) but it doesn't make sense to say "most sets". There are an infinite number of sets. You can't have "most of" infinity.
6:26 "...remains small..."
Again, being pedantic, but it's the set of complex numbers which don't diverge under that formula, beginning with zero. "Remaining small" is sort of subjective.
16:52 "...the main part of the Mandelbrot Set is a perfect cardioid"
Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained.
18:05
This pattern of number sequences also isn't a mystery to mathematicians.
20:10 "...and it doesn't lose complexity, it actually gains it..."
And? This is how all fractals work.
20:21 "...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks"
How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all?
20:32 "...God is responsible for numbers"
Nope. Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena.
20:33 "...and so it makes sense, in a Christian worldview..."
Why not any other theistic worldview? Why not a Muslim worldview or a Hindu worldview or a Nordic worldview or an ancient Greek worldview? Hell, you haven't shown why this doesn't make sense in a SECULAR worldview.
20:36 "...that when we explore and study numbers, we find intelligence."
How is this intelligence? Do you consider all patterns "intelligence"? Furthermore, again, numbers are a human invention. Of course, when we create a structure by infinitely iterating a PATTERN, we will expect PATTERNS to emerge.
20:44 "...not only intelligence, but infinite intelligence, 'cause this thing repeats infinitely."
But... we iterated the function infinitely. What's your point? How is this evidence of any intelligence besides human intelligence?
21:44 "...that exists in the mind of God..."
Source? Even if Christianity is true, do you have any sort of demonstration that this shape exists in the mind of God, or is it just something you feel would make sense? This is laughably lacking in rigor.
26:35 "Who would've imagined that such beauty would be built into numbers?"
You realize beauty is subjective, right? This is not an argument.
29:55 "...is there something special about that formula?"
No. There are infinitely many fractals and Julia sets. The Mandelbrot Set is simply the set of all complex numbers for which the Julia set for z^2 + c is path-connected. If you want more information, research it yourself.
34:44 "What causes the beauty in fractals?"
Subjective human opinion?
34:54 "What causes the complexity in fractals?"
We iterated INFINITELY. Why are you so surprised that complex structures emerge from infinitely iterated functions?
35:00 "The complexity increases as you zoom in..."
No it doesn't. The fractal is the fractal. It is infinitely complex everywhere.
37:33
This whole section on "beauty" is completely meaningless and demonstrates nothing.
39:04 "The complexity is 'built' into math"
Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction.
39:17 "Mathematics is the study of the relationship between numbers"
This is extremely reductive and mostly wrong.
39:28 "...some of these things that are very basic are hard to define, aren't they? Like consciousness..."
What? Consciousness is very basic??
39:50 "Numbers are a concept of quantity"
Still a shaky definition. It depends on how you define "quantity".
40:54 "...the concept, that's not something we created"
Not entirely true. Sure we may not have created the quantities of physical objects in nature, but 'quantity' as a concept is a result of human perception, intuition, and classification.
41:16 "Where do laws of math come from?"
Laws of logic, derived from philosophy (which have been amended over the years; see Godel's Incompleteness or the Turing Machine Halting Problem), coupled with a set of axioms that were (mostly subjectively) defined. Asking where the laws of logic come from is a much more fruitful question. Study epistemology.
41:29 "Did laws of math evolve?"
If you're asking "did laws of math change over time?", then yes.
41:45 "Will that work for math?"
Why does it matter? Math is not a physical object (as you yourself said), subject to its environment, under threat of death.
41:47 "Did 7 used to be 3 but it evolved?"
Again, completely irrelevant. Evolution is a process that applies to living beings in a physical world. In terms of numerals, 7 used to be VII and was changed. In terms of the concept of the number itself, sometimes 7 IS equal to 3 (for example, in the set of integers modulo 4). Lastly, the concept of equivalence is also subject to a set of axioms which mathematicians defined. Nothing is true in math or philosophy or any medium, except under a set of axioms.
As someone else has commented, this video here does seem to be a classic case of "God of the Gaps".
hmm, this comment intrigues me. Hopefully you won't mind if I look at all your points and give my take on them? I might leave a partial comment and edit in the rest over time, I'm finding myself to do much research on this topic.
You seem to be much more literate in math than me, so I'll skip / concede all points before 20:10. Apologies in advance if you feel like I'm "cherry picking" points.
20:10 your point, if I'm correct, seems to be that this fractal getting infinitely more complex doesn't matter because that's how all fractals work, and from my understanding you are correct. I would like to pose a question, however. How are fractals infinitely complex? How as in, what made them like that? Did a human design a fractal to look like that, or have they always looked like this? I can't remember a good timestamp but I believe he makes this point a lot of different ways in the video.
20:21 ok, here's where my low-quality understanding of the Bible is gonna haunt me. And yes, I know quoting "an old book that was probably made up" is a mortal sin on the internet, forgive me. I should also clear up that I've only seen this entire video through once. Honestly I saw your comment and just felt a burden to answer as much as I could, maybe spark a discussion. ANYWAYS, 20:21 . If I can be lazy and just copy what you wrote for a second...
"...I'm gonna suggest to you that this shape tells us something about the way God thinks"
"How exactly? Aren't you the one who proposes that God has never revealed himself to anyone and is impossible to conceptualize? Are you just asserting that God's thought process is comparable to fractals? How do you know how, or if, God thinks at all?"
This is an interesting one. I don't know if God has ever FULLY revealed himself to anyone, as I don't believe the human body / mind could withstand that. But we won't focus on that point, as to me it's not *quite* the point you're making. First off, I feel like you are jumping the gun a little bit. This is subjective, but "suggest to you.... tells us something" doesn't sound to me like an assertion. It sounds like a possibility that Dr. Jason is entertaining. As you somewhat said, I don't think anyone knows how God thinks or operates. what I can tell you, however, is that if we look at what we can confidently say is the Word of God (the Bible), we can get an idea of how God thinks actually. And, God has revealed Himself in some fashion to many people throughout the Bible. The easiest example I can point to, actually, is Jesus Christ. Jesus, being the Son of God and also being One with God, can probably give us some examples.
Low and behold! There's Matthew, Mark, Luke and John! Four separate accounts of this Man. I think the parables Jesus speaks in can give us good insight, perhaps. All of his parables seem fairly simple on the surface, but "zooming in" if you will we find an infinite abundance of wisdom. On the surface, the parable of the seeds makes sense, right? If the seed lands in bad soil, or rocks, etc., they die. But if the seed falls in good soil, they live and produce a bunch more seeds. Yeah, that sounds like basic gardening to me. I played Stardew Valley and that's how it worked. But when you ask "what's the actual point to that?", it could mean an infinite number of things depending on perspective. It could literally just be speaking about seeds. It could be talking about Christians. It could be talking about Churches. It could be talking about businesses, animals, any living thing, even by definition of "living" (like with businesses). Jesus' speaking seems to be ambiguous, although one could argue there is a more "ideal" meaning to his words (perhaps, Christians in this example.)
Now, let's connect. How does a 2000 year old dude that keeps being painted incorrectly in churches, that said some maybe interesting things here and there, have to do with the the question at hand? Well, it shows that if nothing else, Jesus' knowledge seemed to be infinite. Everything He predicted seems to have come true at least once, even the exact time day as things such as His death. That seems statistically unlikely, if I may. And, we know that Jesus is the Son of God, and that Jesus is God (in human form).
TL;DR: We know something about God's understanding and how God thinks because of Jesus and the Bible.
20:32 Yes and no. Yes, God didn't "create" numbers. He didn't say 'this shall be one, and those things, two" and it was so. We decided numbers would be called numbers. We decided "one" would be a single thing. We decided "single" would mean "one" in most contexts. However, whatever you would have called them, and however you would have spaced them out, (assuming reasonableness) this specific graph would have been created somehow. Let me touch on the parentheses there. Dr. Jason says at one point that the universe operates in a specific way regardless of what humans make of it. Somewhere he gives an example of an architect trying to disobey these laws of math and numbers to build a structure, and how that would not work out very well for the architect. You can look at an your water bottle and call it whatever you want, however you want, write it down using whatever letter or number or symbol you want, but at the end of the day you have yourself "one" water bottle. So, Yes and no. God didn't "create" numbers. But there will only ever be "one" of yourself no matter how you want to write it down. I can't change how the universe works and now there is multiple of you. We can change word definitions all day long and go in a circle, but I'm rambling at this point.
Reading that back, all that was more directed at the first half of the comment so I'll add this: Let's put aside if God is responsible for numbers or not. They were "created to describe perceived physical phenomena", in your words. And I ask you, how did that phenomena come into being? Did ancient Greece run a poll and they decided "yeah that exists"? Is our perceiving it making it up. Dr. Jason did an excellent job at dismantling this point, so I won't dive deep into it, but any way you frame it, something created it. Whether it was a God, a space jelly, or an explosion of stars, SOMETHING made it. Personally, the evidence points to a God with infinite understanding.
20:33 I notice you didn't explain how it DOES make sense in any other worldview. I would genuinely be interested to see if you can make sense of it in a reply, I'd love to hear it from a math major. Seriously. I love math and numbers, probability and statistics has been one of my favorite courses in college so far and I'm a PSYCHOLOGY major. Speaking of that psychology degree later....
20:36 + 20:44 you somewhat left out the part where he says "patterns", I notice. You make the point of "again, numbers are a human invention", which I feel like I have answered previously. And to be completely honest, unless you ask further, I feel like my pervious paragraphs have answered both of your points. No matter how we define numbers, this set existed in some form before humans did. Therefore it's impossible for humans to have created such an intricate pattern.
21:44 read above
26:35 "beauty is subjective, right?" here comes that psychology major I talked about, Mr. William.
Beauty is... somewhat subjective. Infact, I could even concede that MOST beauty is subjective. However, assuming a "normal" brain if I can call it that without offending a billion people... There is a baseline level of beauty that all humans share. For example, patterns. In some capacity, or at the very least in some form, patterns appeal to everyone. There is something in the brain that just likes it when things look nice and flow well. Do these particular patterns in some or even all areas of the Mandelbrot set appeal to everyone? *Probably* not. However I doubt that even you could say that nothing you have seen in this presentation wasn't at least in ONE aspect, beautiful. Even in grayscale, as Dr. Jason mentions later in the video.
My comment is so long I need a part two! My goodness.
Alright, part two.
29:55 I mean, kind of. I concede this is "subjective", however I find it quite special how "well" this set seems to work in it's intricacy and beauty. You look at many other fractals and they just repeat themselves, like ferns and ice. But this set is the first fractal I've learned about that is THIS unique. How many patterns there are! It's not just a shape that repeats but what other fractal has seahorses and elephants among other things! And I'll raise the question, since you mention other fractals: What's not to say they aren't beautiful? What's to say there isn't another fractal even MORE beautiful and interesting and "intelligent" (weird word to use) than this? Or have humans just not created one yet, hmmmm?
34:54 read above
37:33 uh... ok, I guess. I'm sorry you got nothing from it.
39:04 "Previously you stated that the math and the computers merely revealed the complexity that already existed but didn't create it. Now you are saying the complexity is a property of math itself. This is a contradiction."
This is probably the only thing that I'm just going to straight up point to what you said and say "no, you are wrong". I can't even completely discern what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that "he said we created math, but complexity is part of math, and he's saying that the complexity existed before math", then I think you misunderstood what he was trying to say. I'll refer to earlier points. Actually, I'll refer to what you said earlier: "Numbers are a human invention, created to describe perceived physical phenomena." So in a sense math is man-made, but it's based off of the universe. The universe wasn't man made. Math, depending on how you look at is, is either man-made and / or made by the universe and it's just something we have to explain. If you're saying anything else, you're have to clarify for me please.
39:17 I'm not a math major, I have no comment. The definition Dr. Jason gave worked for me.
39:28 not sure what you mean, Listen to what he said directly following it, and / or please let me know in a reply what you mean.
39:50 Forgive me if this sounds rude, but this sounds like you're grasping at straws to be honest. Amidst some of your genuinely good questions and comments, this just seems silly to mention. You do you, though.
40:54 debatable. This comment is getting so long that my laptop has started to lag, so I'll leave this one. Apologies for leaving one unanswered.
41:16 interesting answer you have, honestly. It falls perfectly in line with the type of answer Dr. Jason predicted one would have. I find it humorous that some of your answers have ideas of what Dr. Jason should study to "enlighten" himself with. I didn't know you were an expert in those fields as well, Mr. William. Although, for all you tell him to study those works, it personally seems to me like you have done very little to study "his" field. That is, the Bible. Study Genesis ;)
41:29 No, that's not what he's asking. Evolving is different from changing, however they ARE similar. Either way, the laws have always been constant. Our UNDERSTANDING of the law has changed, however.
Your last two points I will leave due both to the previously mentioned stuttering of my laptop and also because they don't make much sense to me, please elaborate in a reply.
I have one last thing to note. 16:52 "Maybe I'm assuming what his argument will be, but this is something that is perfectly, and easily, explained." I don't know if you were writing this comment mid video, but, whatever was "perfectly, and easily, explained", seems to have no explanation. Oh well.
No hate, nor disrespect, Mr. William. As I stated in the very beginning, your comment intrigued me. I would love to hear a reply from you. And despite my formalities, I'm only 19, so don't worry. I'm not some old guy with nothing better to do than harrass someone in a comments section.
@@lightoftheworld6578 it seems youtube deleted my original reply. Although I would love to type another essay-length comment, I am consumed by laziness. Would you like to discuss this over a call? Discord maybe?
@@williamwilliam4944 over call is great! TH-cam deleted my reply as well, it doesn't like seeing discord profiles in the comments, even when you space it out. In any case, It's the same as my name. Six thousand eighty-nine. Let's see if that works. (And if I butchered writing the numbers as words, I apologize 😅)
As an agnostic, I found this video fascinating. He got one thing wrong in the very beginning though. The Mandelbrot set does not prove biblical creation. It simply does not disprove it.
If one can see the Bible as poetic as well as informative, the meanings change for the Individual.
I was an agnostics until I was 38 years old. People that accept Jesus very early on, say in a Church going Christian family, usually aren't grounded very well. Not one writer of the Old testament or new testament ever claimed "the Bible says". I remember rejecting the book of James, fully understanding that he did not preach the gospel of Christ and him crucified. He taught a works orientated belief system. 2 years later I found out that Luther also rejected the book of James for the same reason. Genesis 15:6 States that Abraham was justified by his faith in what God told him concerning having a great multitude of offspring. He had no children at that time and yet the book of James states that Abraham was justified when he did the works of offering up his son. In Acts 21 we see that the judaizers had no problem with James but they had a huge problem with paul. Paul taught me Grace by faith from the book of galatians. I was a little surprised when I found out that Luther was also taught Grace by Faith by Paul but his realization came from reading the book of romans. Same author! same concept. They washed in the blood believer does not need the ten commandments for the same reason that a driver of a Buick doesn't need a buggy whip. At any rate scriptures are plural and anyone who says that James is just balancing out Paul's teaching doesn't have a clue.
He got more than one thing wrong.....
@@tommy5797 "If you pretend X means Y, it makes sense" - basically what you said
Wait he can't prove or disprove God? I thought some one finally was able to do it, and it was some one who believes the earth is a couple hundred thousand years old and evolution is wrong. Man wrote the Bible, edited it because some words of God were wrong, and God wrote the universe assuming it wasn't some cosmic coincidence.
What's cool to me is that this beauty exists in just a 2 dimensional plane. I'd like to see what happens when you add a 3rd plane and see what the set looks like in 3D.
I know we can’t imagine it but think of ♾D
The Mandelbrot set is inherently two dimensional, since the mathematical basis is simply whether or not each point in the complex plane (a two dimensional mathematical structure) converges to a specific value when it's used as a repeated input to a complex valued function. There isn't really a true three dimensional analog to the complex plane, though there is a four dimensional analog (the set of quaternions) and a three dimensional "slice" could be chosen from a similar processing of quaternion space and examined. Yes, if you don't know the math that's probably gibberish--can't really be helped.
It's probably worth mentioning that the Mandelbrot set isn't the pretty part most people think of. The set is just the solid black region. All the fancy coloration is just programmers making artistic decisions about how to color the surroundings. Usually it's colored in bands based on how many iterations the program made before deciding that a particular point is not in the Mandelbrot set.
There are videos on this platform that show that the 2D Mandelbrot set (x, y) is a subset of a 3D set (x, y, z) set to z=0, and there are videos that address the fact that imaginary/inverse numbers are the effect of things existing in a 3D or greater space with ties to periodicity (repetition over time). Tying these two concepts together, the images generated are as fascinating as they are beautiful. I won't spam these comments with links, but if you search for these terms, you should find what you're seeking.
Look at Veritasium's video. It shows how these sets look like in 3d. Not at all what you'd expect!
Yeah! The James guy is right one of those math channels like mathologer or numberphile did a video on exactly what u want to see :)
As an aspie, with an IQ that has me mostly working with atheists (Im sure most know what I mean here, no denigration of anyone is ok) this might help me talk more openly. We are commanded to share the word, which I have not been any good at-thank you for the help!
Yeah brain IQ has nothing to do with God which is experienced in the Heart. That's why the word Earth is a anagram for hEart. It's Heart. Hear t. He art. The Romans called it Terra. Terahertz is Trillions is Try is Triangle. Torah, Torus, Taurus, Tau Rho, Two. Plus none of you or most of you don't understand why the Greek alphabet is the Alpha and Omega and really all alphabets and numbered systems which are also originally gnostic symbols tied to whatever showed up and then those pyramids. Naw mean? Art bridges the gap between the material and the spiritual aka the 5D 6D Twilight zone.
The Christogram Chi Rho is pronounced exactly like Cairo the capital of Egypt. It's the X symbol that comes from the sign of the cross OR what we know call the Chladni Figures. Xmas? It's Ten. The One&zerO. The A and 0. Ask them where the ratio of the musical strings come from. This X comes from the 2:1 octave in the center or middle. Where'd all that go down? the center east? Anyways what else has a 2:1 ratio? Water H2O. Also the color violet has a 2:1 ratio. I realized this from an Epiphany hence the name epiphysis gland which is your Pineal gland. The name of the place Jacob saw was called Peniel meaning God face to face talking about your bodies center.
Tell them they hold blind faith in the big bang theory because of the effectiveness of the math model in natural science. They are indoctrinated into a theory. That got proven wrong when the James Webb looked and proved their math model is wrong. Big bang never happened.its ober. Big bang is just as a goofy religion as any other creationist theory from their own perspectives. Then tell them to go listen to Neil degrasse Tyson feed you bread crumbs about more dimensions and what a 3 dimensional creature looks like from the perspective of a 2d creature.
Its the Rogan episode. I thought Tyson was a fraud until I realized 90% of the stuff he says is from the perspective of some high ranking quantum phycisist tasked with trying to teach a pre school shapes and colors. The Rogan episode he speaks midwit tier.
I think the CIA is on board. is it religion? is it aliens? is it multi dimensional? is it time travelers? and the answer is nobody knows. We dont know.
Praise God, spread it
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
Makes the term “Cardiologist” more memorable!❤️
I’m terrible at math and my brain shuts down when anyone starts talking about numbers, 😮so I don’t “get it” enough to take a test on it! However, when you showed the illustrations and explained that part with the shapes & repetition, and then the spiral & so on, I do at least get the concept! That’s more than I could have ever imagined before! Thank you for bringing this to us!
Many blessings in Jesus name Amen 🙏 🇺🇸✝️
Same with me, my mind shutdown once numbers start adding up
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
We KNOW how to explain this, atheists know how to explain this. And it's NOT a secret code, nor a code. And there is NO creation, it's not a "creation" of a god. Mandelbrot set is absolutely not a proof of the existence of god, it does not prove the existence of god at all. It has nothing to do with god it's off topic.
God don't exist and jesus don't exist, sorry.
ur
"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"
In engineering classes we used 'J' to represent imaginary numbers rather than using 'I'. We referred to them as jimaginary numbers.
49:31 _LOL_
Jamariquie
"Jamanji" ?
In math class we called them complex numbers. Which is what they're called.
I always figured that engineers did that as an excuse to say "bj".
There's no better application of the expression, "It is what it is."
It's not that the laws of mathematics require a mind to exist. But a mind is required to discover, comprehend, and appreciate them.
Hence, why math is discovered, and not created.
Your platitude which means nothing. Say thst when you enter a 747 that just evolved?
@@Lighthousepreserve Uh. Okay. Whatever. You make so little sense right now, I'm wondering who you even meant to reply to.
@@roems6396 But the reality that math represents could not be so mathematically perfect unless it was created, just not created by us.
@@brianp6859 you have no way to prove your assertions while you maintain the burden of proof.
This is what visuals are like on psychedelics. This is kind of what thoughts are like as well when you’re in a thought loop. The understanding and emotional experience of the infinite becomes more tangible. Hard to describe typically with words but the fractals of this Mandelbrot set really help paint the picture!
People also report seeing 4 dimensional geometry which in a sober state the human mind cannot comprehend. Psychedelics truly are one of the greatest wonders of the world
@@Buf037 They might report it, but they would never be able to actually see 4 dimensional geometry. In fact even if they had the experience, they wouldn't be able to tell whether or not they saw 4 dimensional geometry, because no one knows what it looks like.
Having said that, psychedelics certainly are incredible, and I've had many amazing experiences with them. And certainly I've seen indescribably complex and beautiful geometry, especially with DMT. It's absolutely mind-blowing. Psychedelics can potentially be so otherworldly that I'm not surprised some people might interpret their experience as having 4 dimensional geometry, but thinking about that in terms of physics and math, and the fact that we can't even imagine what 4 dimensional geometry would look like, I've never even considered it as a possibility that I could experience 4 dimensional geometry.
I would rather say that closed eye visuals start feeling kinda 2 dimensional when you're on lower doses, and then as you increase the dose, you start adding depth, so that it becomes 3 dimensional, while at the same time, the visuals will also become more clear and complex. And when I say complex, I don't just mean in the sense that there might be more complex geometry or colors, but it also becomes much more complex in how you experience your visuals. In a sense, the visuals can become manifestations of our own thoughts and feelings.
While I do think there is a danger in people sometimes being too fast to accept what they experience as being true while under psychedelics, I also don't have a doubt that psychedelics can greatly help us understand our own minds, and also consciousness and the brain in general.
Kind of like the fractals you see with a good crack to the noggin.
You don't "see" dimensions, you experience it.
@@NA-gd3sd Granted, all of you may be right you don't see dimensions (without the help of some LSD), But keep in mind we are still looking at fractals here in this video, and those you can see.
I love this. I’ve spent so much time trying to make sense of the world around me and my place in it. I’ve been agnostic, pessimistic, self centered and selfish in my thought process for years. It’s far easier to just have faith. Like a suffocating heavy blanket being lifted from my heart. Faith sets the mind free, free to experience joy in each moment as it passes. Thank you for your content doc. ❤
Easier, because it does not require you to think or learn...
@@lukeevans9505 that's called ignorance. Ignorance on your part. Ignorance and arrogance to make such a statement.
I love what you say
@@marius-9333Why don’t you do a TH-cam video showing why this is “ignorant or arrogant”? Because people disagree w your view on subjects, doesn’t make them either of those things. I’d love to see the opposite reaction of this video in such detail by a non-believer.
@@marius-9333Ignorance because your emotions say so?
6:02 The Mandelbrot Set
14:00 Plotting the Mandelbrot set
14:50 Seeing the emerging patterns
16:20 Exploring the set
38:00 Discussion - Numbers, Concepts, Complexity and God
48:20 Fractals in the Universe and God
Which disprove Ken Ham's lies that complexity requires a god. Its math, no god needed.
@@ethelredhardrede1838 you make no sense at all! Numbers prove there is one true God!
@@stephenhays
Saying that does not make it true. The principles of math are independent of gods or men.
@@ethelredhardrede1838 You're a fool to believe that. People's intelligence prove God's existence. What humans and animals create are incredible, and these creations ironically has nothing to do with them. They've merely discovered what already exists.
@@sdays59
Matt. 5:22 Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire.
The rest of your post is just fact free assertions in denial of evidence. I bet you think there was a Great Flood. When do you think that happened?
I have a mathematics degree and I consider myself a Christian. I love the beauty of math and science. Fractals like the Mandelbrot set appear in a branch of physics called dynamical systems and chaos theory. The strange attractors associated with the Lorenz system is another example of a fractal. Lorenz showed that convection in the atmosphere could be described by a set of non-linear differential equations, and when you plot these equations, you get the fractal pattern of strange attractors. Fractals appear all over the place in math and physics.
so easily explainable from a science POV then!
This proves we live in God's matrix
@@TanyaRadic No it doesn't
@@TanyaRadic idk how it proves that. somebody’s brainwashed and grasping for straws.
Isn't is amazing how EVOLUTION creates so many fractals, David?
Here's the thing - it is a graphical representation of a mathematical set. There is nothing in there that requires God. This is another example of somebody who takes God as a given, and takes something that he sees in the world and uses that to justify that belief.
Consider for a moment - early in the video he's counting the number of branches in tendrils coming off the buds, pointing to two tendrils near to one another and getting excited about how "the" bud in between them has a number of branches equal to the sum of the two to either side of it. But he plainly ignores other buds that were in between; by his own description, there are an infinite number of those buds.
How many other mathematical formulas are out there that result in graphs with high levels of complexity, but which we don't perceive as "beautiful"? Does he get excited by any of those?
I saw a comment in the live chat to the effect of "what we know about science can't explain how the universe came into being, so it follows that God did it". That is not the logical conclusion. Just because we don't understand how the Universe came into existence, it is does not automatically follow that God did it; it only means that we don't know. It's generally referred to as the "god of the gaps" fallacy. Consider - two thousand years ago, we didn't know what caused lightning, volcanoes, earthquakes and disease. Setting aside the insurance phrase "act of god", do we invoke God as the cause of those events?
Another comment I saw was "you don't have to believe in the Bible for it to be true". But the converse is also true: just because you believe the Bible doesn't make it true.
Hi, no disrespect whatsoever but I do have some thoughts about your thoughts. Firstly, with regard to what you said about the buds he might not have said it that way but it was clear at least to me that he was talking size wise in the sense that the two “big”tendrils had their branch numbers adding up to the brand number of the smaller tendril between them and i’m pretty sure that this does go on infinitesimally given the fractal nature of the set. Him possibly not describing it the best or not doesn’t take away the fact that this exists. Secondly, beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder something i’ve come to learn the more i appreciate art. That doesn’t take away from the fact that what he’s saying about the Mendelbrot set is true. Truly there may be people out there who find the graphical representation of this set not beautiful at all and that’s their right however his excitement about this particular set doesn’t negate the complexity of other sets and in fact the complexity of other sets does in fact show that God’s complexity goes far beyond one dimension and can be seen in any way whatsoever. Similar to how beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder God’s complexity is seen in different ways at different levels by different people.
I understand that you may not believe in God and to be honest that’s your right regardless of whether i agree or not and i doubt i’m answering or responding to everything you’ve said but just as you said just because we believe in the Bible doesn’t make it true. Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one?
CS Lewis said something once about how we shouldn’t see our faith through the lenses of our world but to rather see the world through the lenses of our faith and i believe that’s what science is meant to do. I love math and science and I do believe they show God in the physical world the same way this set shows the underlying complexity in numbers that we may not see but looking at this set with the mindset that God ultimately governs the natural laws of our universe helps you to see the beauty in Him and in this and I understand you may not appreciate that. As for the fallacy you described I see the way by which mountains and volcanoes are formed to yes he acts of God. I did geography to an appreciable level and those collisions and tectonic movements are wonders and acts of grace through which God made/makes those mountains and valleys. Science showing us how something came to be doesn’t mean that God didn’t make said thing through that process.
I’m sorry if you feel offended by anything i’ve said but just felt like i needed to say what I believed and felt
So ultimately it's down to the individual to choose what he believes.
@@darylldufu9324 "Similarly just because you don’t Believe in God doesn’t make Him false or a lie. In truth we may not get an answer to this in our life times but if for nothing at all wouldnt it be safer to believe in God and realise at the end of the day there isn’t a God than to live your entire life thinking there isn’t a God only to realise that there is one? "
yes, it doesnt make him false. you cannot disprove him (yet). But that's not the standard i have for things i build my whole worldview on.
And no, it wouldnt be safer. Because which god should you choose to believe in from the tousands that were already believed in?
@@darylldufu9324 in science, one part of the method is falsification. One can't falsify God. That makes it kinda impossible to take it serious in science. People tend to use God as the answer when things can't be explained. That's biased.
@@darylldufu9324 What you mention halfway through is Pascal's Wager I've always found it silly. Presumably God would know your thoughts and so know if you've just been doing mental lip service to get into heaven, conversely any good deed by an Atheist is not with the selfish intention of securing eternal paradise in heaven and so they might actually have a better chance of getting in if they live a good life without expecting anything in return.
Eg. If a devout religious person gives his life to save another person he 'knows' he will not die and will life forever in heaven.
If an atheist does it he 'knows' he faces total oblivion, that his one and only life will end forever. It's more of a perceived sacrifice.
The older I get, the more the Bible sounds perfect. I wish I could help more people, with my very limited ability. Have served the Lord best I can for 38 years. Creation is beyond astonishing. Oh Lord, our Lord, how excellent is Thy Name in all the earth.
Maranatha.
Read exodus 21. Your bible endorse slavery. Perfect morality?
Amen, praise God
Believe in Christ all you want but fractals don't prove the existence of god in anyway. I would know I actually studied math. Whoever can discover the existence of god using just math would've won a Nobel prize already.
This phenomenon was mentioned in 1917 by a French mathematician called Gaston Julia, he published them as the 'Julia Sets': although he could only guess at what they looked like, he never saw them, as modern computers were necessary.
From here you could say they were moved fractally by Professor Mandelbrot.
Well actually the mandelbrot set is a map collaboration of the Julia sets. All of the Julia sets can be found within the mandelbrot set somewhere
Very well said! That is why knowledge can be shown almost if not instantly for us to have today because of the high-tech....PC etc.
@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 I found this very interesting. As an artist I utilize this all the time in less intricate ways. I was always poor at math. Imagine my shock when an adult Ed. Teacher observed that I had algebraic thinking in my designs. This floored me because I was merely told I was "hopeless" in grade school and they sort of gave up on me. I was never trained as an artist, but discovered I enjoyed early American puzzle purse paper designs , origami and scherrenschnitte...and Bible study.
@@birdsflowers2289 I was told the same, and God put me into a desire... directing me towards the sciences of outer space, latest discoveries, and music by the age of 2-3 years old and the Bible, witnessing the Hand of God through my life starting by the age of three. Then, from my birth 1940... so many miracles in my life... with me still pursuing my studies in all these areas, especially in music until 2005, where God had me write, "God's Creative Design on the Piano (Music, using the Spiritual application with God's number system, and God's color system). By then, knowing above PhD in music theory, adding the rest blew my mind, but all in the right direction... completing the picture. He is doing that with you, too. Currently God has me writing a fictional story, because it is real through my life called, "Sky Pilot Mystery Series or a Novel. I hope to finish it this year 2022. Thank for your message to me. God bless you!
@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 Blessings to you for sharing with me 🥰
Show this to someone who wants to know why they should take math in school.
THIS is definitely not a reason to take math in school. Math is used to determine things, not loosely affiliate things that are real and imagined.
I showed this to my nephew, he ran away from home... 😭😢 Guess it backfired.
@@DiffEQ You have a very pedestrian view of math. Math is the language of the universe. The Fibonacci spiral is proof of that. So yeah, you can take math to determine things but you also need math to understand things such as why your dna is a unique genetic code. It’s very good that you’re retired because I wouldn’t trust you to run a bath let alone build anything
@@DiffEQ
Heres some maths for you
Obstacles to the formation of life on primitive earth would have been extremely challenging. Even a simple protein molecule is so rich in information that the entire history of the universe since the Big Bang wouldn't give you the time you would need to generate that molecule by chance. Even if the first molecule had been much simpler than those today, there's a minimum structure that protein has to have for it to function. You don't get that structure in a protein unless you have at least seventy-five amino acids or so. First, you need the right bonds between the amino acids. Second, amino acids come in right-handed and left-handed versions, and you have to get the left-handed ones. Third, the amino acids must link up in a specified sequence, like letters in a sentence. Run the odds of these things falling into place on their own and you find out that the probabilities in forming a rather short functional protein at random would be one chance in a hundred trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. That is a ten with one-hundred and twenty-five zeros after it. And that would only be one protein molecule, a fairly simple cell would need between three-hundred and five-hundred protein molecules. When you look at those odds and evidence, you can see why, since the 1960's, scientist have abandoned the idea that chance played any significant role in the origin of DNA or proteins
@@DiffEQ and that's not taking into account that we need rna. Dna. And proteins all to exist at the same time perfectly coded for each other for one to exist. They are symbiotic.
I wonder if creation was not in a ‘fallen’ state…. Would we see more perfect fractals in nature?? When all is redeemed will we see nature in more perfect ‘infinite’ fractals??? Therefore no more decay or degeneration… only eternity. The beauty of it all is hard for me to express.
If nothing died, nothing would live. Decay and degeneration are necessary components of living. With our current birthrate, wed be shoulder to shoulder with everyone within like 3 or 4 generations. It would be utter chaos.
@@TheAngryAtheist … I understand your thinking… and yes… that’s exactly true in the world in which we now live. But if you saw through my eyes from my perspective you would see things so differently. Don’t close your mind to all possibilities. The more I learn the more I realize how shallow man’s understanding is. We see through a glass dimly… but not forever.
@@rphjacobs9197 oh no, my mind is open friend :) i just try not to consider everything thats possible, because theres only so much time in a day. I try not to consider things just on the basis that it feels better to me. Heck, id love to be able to fly at will, but humans cant fly, so i wouldnt waste time considering flying humans as a possibility, regardless of how open my mind is... whats the saying? Be open minded, but not so open that your brain falls out. Cheers!
@@TheAngryAtheist …. Gotcha! And humans can fly. And there was a day a man thought about flying….
Also, sometimes that ‘feels better to me’ is an intuitive confirmation.
Sometimes not.. 😉
Blessings!
@@rphjacobs9197 well, humans can sit in machines they build that can fly lol. So yea you got me! But lets be real, i was talking about superman type flying.
Yep, i cant disagree there. For me, its not good enough, but i understand why its good enough for others
Cheers!
God is GREAT !!!! 🙏
When I first found out about time dilation it freaked me out way more than finding out about fractals. This world is full of some very DEEP mysteries. No question about it.
Tell me more
@@acbulgin2 this is fascinating
@@iriskeniafernandez Another weird mathematical thing is it's super easy to find the area of an ellipse, and we have a nice easy simple closed-form formula for it. But finding the circumference of an ellipse is insanely difficult and we still don't really have a simple closed-form formula for it, even after centuries of searching.
@@theboombody 😲
Hi theboombody, did you see a youtube video on time dilation? If so could you recommend it to me? Cheers.
"We serve a God who is beautiful and makes beautiful things."
AMEN 🙏 and ALLEUIA!!!!
Except we still have children born with birth defects.
which god is that?
God also makes ugly things... and evil things too.
Yes and Amen! God is the giver of all good things. The enemy comes to steal, kill, and destroy.
@@gammafishhh51 hush! The devil make things evil ... wait, wasn't the devil made by god? Oh, I guess god works in mysterious ways, it's his plan lol
42:03 "...laws of math have always been the way they are."
False.
42:08 "Were laws of math created by people?"
Yes.
42:15 "...because if we created them, we could've created them different."
Yes, we could have, by choosing different axioms and rules of logic. However, that wouldn't be practical, since the math in that case might not reflect physical phenomena, which is, after all, why math was invented as a study in the first place.
42:48 "The planets, the way the planets orbit, they obey mathematical laws."
No, they obey physical laws, described by mathematics. Furthermore, these physical laws were created to describe the motion of the planets, not the other way around.
43:20 "...the universe is constantly changing"
So? Math can't arise from a dynamic system? Without change (movement, etc), we wouldn't have created math in the first place, since a thought itself is a physiological change.
43:45 "The universe has 3 dimensions of space..."
False. Many physicists agree that the number of spatial dimensions is larger than 3.
44:26 "They stem from the mind of God"
You're doing a lot of suggesting and not a lot of demonstrating. What is God? Please define God and provide evidence of his (its?) existence. Then, demonstrate that it is indeed your God, and it does have a mind. Next, demonstrate what it means for a concept to "stem" from a mind, and finally, demonstrate that the laws of math stem from the mind of God, whatever that means.
44:45 "Laws of mathematics are conceptual, universal, invariant, exceptionless entities."
Which 'Laws' are you referring to? Are you referring to mathematical truths in general? In which case, you are wrong on 3 of the 4 counts. Mathematical truths are indeed conceptual. They are not universal, since they may not apply under different axioms. They are not invariant, since they DO change with time. They are not exceptionless either. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 under standard integer addition, but 2 + 2 = 1 under integer addition modulo 3. It also depends on how you define +, but that's another conversation.
44:52 "...characteristics make sense in the Christian worldview, where mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks..."
I don't think this is even true. Where in the Bible does it state that mathematics is a reflection of the way God thinks? Isn't God's thinking impossible to comprehend?
45:23 "God's thoughts are conceptual / God is omnipresent / God does not change with time / God is sovereign"
Do you have evidence of these claims? How do you know the nature of God's thoughts? God does not change with time, but his morals do, since he once allowed slavery and now doesn't (Colossians 3:22-24, Ephesians 6:5-8, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Titus 2:9-10, etc), made the 10 commandments (twice) to revert his own old law, etc? Or perhaps this infinitely moral being still condones slavery? How do you know anything about God? Because a book told you, and you believe everything you read?
45:29 "None of those properties of laws of mathematics would make sense in a secular or naturalistic worldview"
Why not? Surely something can exist conceptually in a secular worldview.
45:42 "...but how could you possibly know that?"
It is derived from the axioms. No God needed.
45:59 "You assume the laws of physics are the same there, you assume the laws of mathematics are the same there."
No, we KNOW the laws of physics are the same there. Not an assumption. And again, what do you mean by "laws of mathematics"? Like, the commutative law?
46:03 "How do they know that? Have they been there?"
Do you need to go somewhere to know something about that place? If you see that your neighbor's house is on fire, do you need to enter the house to know that it's on fire? Does a detective need to be at a crime scene while the crime is happening to determine what happened?
46:06 "It's in the Christian worldview that God is sovereign over the entire universe..."
How do YOU know THAT? Seems like special pleading.
46:14 "All mathematicians assume that the laws of mathematics are the same tomorrow as they were yesterday."
What laws?? Plus, mathematical truths are derived, not assumed. There is no assumption needed, unlike Christianity.
46:30 "How can you know anything about a future you've never experienced from a secular worldview?"
How can you know it from a Christian worldview? We both have axioms. If I throw a ball in the air, I can know with the same degree of certainty as you that it will fall back down. We create models which describe natural phenomena, withstand scrutiny, and have immense predictive power. Is the knowledge absolute? No! No knowledge is absolute. But it's the most reasonable method we have of determining truth. This is why physical laws change so often (contrary to what you believe); more accurate models are discovered. Einstein's relativity being used in place of Newton's model of gravity is a classic example of this.
46:38 "...because I know God"
No, you don't.
46:40 "...and he's told me some things about the future."
Like what? How do you know it was God? Were those things reliably accurate? Were they peer reviewed? Did they survive scrutiny? How do we determine which voice in which person's head is actually God? How do we know you aren't just making this up? Or delusional? Or confirmation biased?
47:12 "Laws of mathematics existed before people"
No, they didn't. First of all, you're arguing for physical laws, not mathematical laws (which you still haven't defined, anyway). Secondly, physical laws were CREATED to describe things like planetary motion. The planets don't move the way they do because of these laws. The laws are the way they are because the planets move that way.
50:40 "Why do fractals occur in math and the physical world?"
It's almost like.... math was created..... to describe the physical world.....
52:43 "The physical universe obeys mathematical laws"
NO! Math DESCRIBES the physical universe! Not the other way around!
thanks for showing me this argument explained this way. i had similar feelings like something just isnt being explained right here and you explained it perfectly and cleared up my confusion. im also using this info to do further research for debating my chrisitian friends, so thanks again!
@@awstenmielke2474 no problem!
If you seriously think laws of math haven't always been the same, how exactly in supposed 50million b.c.. can 1+1= 900?? Ok Boomer.....
@@jigsawjason1984 you are clearly demonstrating your ignorance here. First of all, the statement "1+1=2" is not a mathematical law. Secondly, the statement "1+1=900" can be true, under different axioms, under different definitions of + or =, under different frameworks. For example, 1+1=900 under integer addition modulo 2. You are taking your measly high school math education and arguing as though you're a mathematician. Did you even bother to research the sources I presented?
@@williamwilliam4944 Dammit. Michael ran away after getting owned only one time. I was hoping for more amusement from him. Oh, well.
Loved reading your thoughts. Very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
Peace
As an atheist, I agree with the video title. No need to look at the video. There are lots of things that atheists can't explain. In fact, nobody else can explain them either but that doesn't mean that "God did it." It just means WE DON'T KNOW.
Well you obviously don't know the basis of theology then
@@owen044 Well, I know enough about theology to realise that it's no more relevant than any other type of fairy tale. And frankly, the more I find out about it, the more ridiculous is appears. It has ZERO relevance in the 21st century. I don't know what religion or church you belong to, but you've been conned: "Our's is the one and only true religion and all the others are rubbish." Yeah right.
"Not everything you read is true"
*believes everything written in the bible*
Facts... good to see at least some people still believe in finding them instead of manipulating them to fit their own ideals.
Right like wtf you really are just born into whatever religion im sure if he lived in Japan he would be all about the japan religion and never even question it lmaoooo
@@caviestcaveman8691 pretty sure the japanese are mainly Christian
@@caviestcaveman8691 Many people are converts and definitely question their religion. You could also say many people just follow “modern day science” without ever questioning it and realizing experts could be wrong/there’s still more to learn and what’s “discovered” by them could be false.
@@madday9589 yup I take it all with a grain of sand
I mentioned that God is the greatest scientist of all and someone scoffed at me. But look what He DID! I am always amazed
He did what though?
Yes, do LOOK:
Leviticus 25:44-46
Exodus 21:20-21
I found this amazing pattern in 1990 when studying software programming (as well as the Julia Set)
I used to run the program on my PC XT (10 MHz turbo speed) -- took several hours to appear
Later, I found a program that ran automatically and on my PC AT-486 at 10 MHz (faster than the XT)
The spiral also appears on a corn cob
In my College Abstract Mathematics Class in 1998, we explored the Mandlebrot among many others, we affectionately called Mandlebrot the Cauliflower Fractal because when flattened on a slide, the outside edge of the cauliflower looks a great deal like the edge of the mandlebrot. I couldn't get the whole way through this guy's presentation because he kept taking the achievements of man away from us in his explanation of the Mandlebrot trying to extend divinity upon it. Humans discovered Cardioids in mathematics and learns how to apply them, and numbers are a concept of Ratio that when numbers are whole can be used for counting as well. Cardioids are applied by humans and are observed throughout nature because any spiral shape of movement with one dominant opposing force will form cardioid patterns...kind of like because we came from a big bang and gravity exists, cardioidal motion is at the root of everything we find in the universe...
@@verigone2677 Key word "discovered".
@@rebeccaw68 no matter the origin of something, be it divine or mundane be it fleeting or eternal, learning about it is ALWAYS discovery. Mathematical concepts are NOT signs of divinity, they are merely tools for analyzing patterns, creating better tools, and planning for the future. The cardioid has NO meaning outside of a cartesian diagram, and in every instance of a natural cardioid being discovered it is self evident that the atomic structures would make those shapes. When applied to social science analysis, cardioids and similar derivations are useful in normalizing data sets to discover the impacts of multivariate stimuli across socio-economic boundaries. It is even more disingenuous to behave like you can't just use the complex number set without context for each of those numbers being used. If one is looking at something designed, the patterns of each constituent part are perfectly engineered for their specific purpose, using the best materials locally available to its creator. The inconsistency of patterns observed in a designed item would be self evident from surface observation in most cases, and easily identifiable under more scrutiny. However when you observer the natural universe, the patterns maintain consistency throughout and have direct route of repeated physical processes from just after the Big Bang to Today...no magic, just Motion, Gravity, Light, and matter in a field of Extraplanar matter and energy not evidently, directly interactable....maybe your God still live in the anti-matter, but I wouldn't bet on it. Please stop looking for a benevolent sky daddy and use your book to discover what was truly fucked up about the people of the past and the people of the present and do your best to be a force for good...become your own sky daddy. Religion is a psychological coping mechanism created by man to deal with the enormity of thought. It allowed them to compartmentalize thoughts about what they have seen but do not understand. Without that compartmentalization they would probably have become very easy prey, as that kind of thought on its own generates dopamine. Eventually, these religious ides become campfire stories that are shared and in the sharing become collective instead of individual. Later, they are corrupted and used to command. This cycle of religiosity is a natural evolution of a mind of thought and dreams. One with time to contemplate and no distractions will create patterns where none actually exist in order to make their internal world view and what they see co-exist. We were eating all kinds of plants and fungi that could do all kinds of crap to our brains, we would then rationalize and contemplate those things...this process started before we could speak a true language, and potentially started around the time we began making cave drawings or began forming words. Add on top of that dreams and well, its not hard to see where the idea of God came from, why it was important for the establisment of civilization, and why it is also the source of so much conflict. If it were truly divine, would it not be even more self evident than the nose upon your face?
@@verigone2677 lol, you still believe something came from nothing, or chaos? Try this: just for once, be totally objective, try your best not to allow your mind to be in opposition and ask God to reveal Himself with as much sincerity as you can muster and see what happens. If God does not exist you'll get nothing, but if He does, you'll experience something that will be very different. You have nothing to lose, just try it.
@@rebeccaw68 why does it have to come from nothing to not be divine. We have no idea what the entire cycle of a universal expansion is. It is very likely that the nature of black holes and dimensional behaviors of Dark Matter and Energy serve as an never ending universal state cycle system. Just like all matter and energy changes state in the observable universe, it must also change state from existence to non-existence by an as of yet unknown physical phenomenon. Then again, any does it have to come from anything, your terrestrial existence and inablity to conceptualize 4th or 5th dimensional universalities prevents you from understanding the nested cyclical nature of matter and energy. Logically speaking there MUST be a period where the Universe exists and where it doesn't, interdimensional mathematics suggests that all possible configurations of the entire universe exist simultaneously. I had my revelation at the age of 17, and it pushed me away from worship of a God. The book so venerated for its divine love yet contains only contradictory paths for life that are supposed to be simultaneously good, yet both paths only lead to strife. Either be the sword of god and bring retribution to your oppressors, or allow yourself to be subjugated...there is no middle ground in Christianity where the working class rise to a position of self determination in the law. Instead they demand you maintain your lesser station, because that way you get all your rewards in heaven... Do you know why that is? If you don't question your worth here, where it really matters, you aren't competing with those who hold unequal power. If all of the poor rise up against the rich, the rich lose everytime...EVERY TIME. Every single Abrahamic faith is equal parts exploration of mystery, and subjugation of the working class to the abject slavery and serfdom.
In the mid 1980s I attended a lecture at a university that was given by Dr Richard Voss from IBM. He approached the explanation of fractals in an interesting way. First he discussed brownian motion and stochastic systems then talked about fractals and specifically fractal geometry and its relation to nature. What came out of it was how fractals are perfect for describing nature. We think in 3 dimensions but the fractal dimension of nature is something like 2.3 if I recall. His examples were fascinating but the one in particular that was amazing is the nile river. For thousands of years, the egyptians have recorded the flood stage of the nile river. He took these measurements and assigned them to musical notes. When you listen to these played on a piano, you are certain you are hearing a composed song yet there is a "random" nature to it. I doubt he is Christian but he was demonstrating this perfect tie in between nature and math. I've left out a ton of what he presented but if this isn't the creation of an extremely intelligent being I don't know what would be. There is so much more to fractals than what can be discussed in a reasonable time. Dr Lisle covers the Mandlebrot pretty well but there is soooooo much more and it all points to God. Truly amazing stuff. Back in that day he recommended a book called "The Fractal Geometry of Nature" by Peitgen and Saupe (stretching my memory here) but it was good. A little bit on the technical side to check it out of a library or something if you don't plan to write code to generate fractals.
"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"
@@losningen3665 Interesting. Also interesting that some of the people scoring highest on the IQ tests believe in God so...
@@NickFrom1228 Yes, but it's a stark reality that individuals with high IQs are often isolated, and it drives them to seek companionship. It's not that they are inherently drawn to religion, but rather, they find themselves in a world that often fails to understand or appreciate their intellect. This isolation can make them more susceptible to grasping for any source of connection, and religion is one of those avenues, though it may not truly resonate with them on a fundamental level. It's frustrating to see so many bright minds driven to this predicament by societal inadequacies.
Unfortunately I am agnostic. Your anecdote about the Nile river does more to convince me of a divine creator than my research to date. Thank you.
The cognitive dissonance is truly astounding.
How
👆 it really is!
@@missjennemeg1 I don't think you know what that word means...
Your argument is astounding too
@Joseph Stewart It takes true cognitive dissonance to believe any religion is true. Belief in god and religion is purely based on feelings. So believing something is true with no evidence is a solid definition of cognitive dissonance, especially when it comes to religion.
Christians: "you cannot comprehend God nor his actions"
Also Christians: "this is God's brain seeeeeeeeeeeeee"
hold on a second, just heard a voice in my head telling me to sacrifice my firstborn...............
jkjk he was messing with me whew thank GOD
Your argument is false. Dr. Lisle is saying we can get a glimpse of God's power.
Dr. Lisle did not say humans can fully comprehend.
@@citizenguy True, but honestly trying to say things about god by looking at one single thing he has done is, at best, insulting to him. You wouldn't want people to assume things based random minute things you created and that they chose as important, right? That's just reductive.
Only a fool tries to make an argument against something about which he knows NOTHING. But a wise man searches for wisdom and knowledge to base his arguments upon.
@@citizenguy never read the bible?
@@bennydagimp66 show me the quote of Dr. Lisle claiming that the Mandelbrot set allows humans to fully comprehend the universe.
Truly fascinating! Romans 1:20-22 comes to mind for atheist scientists, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts..."
HIS eternal blah, blah... How convenient for the patriarchy that gawd just happens to be THREE MALES. 🤣
And... Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, tRUMPISM... Don't EVEN talk to me about "DARK HEARTS."
@@artemisnite God created man AND woman in His image. Furthermore, Jesus included women in his earthly ministry. And he came to earth because of those sins you mentioned. None are righteous. We need a Savior.
Gods *invisible* qualities .... can be clearly seen.... contradiction right there?
@@mmiller5359 What a clumsy, jealous, sadistic, petty, and cruel thug this so-called lord is
@@mmiller5359 3 seconds after you die, discuss it with the Almighty. (Good luck with that ;-)
THANK YOU
Answers in Genesis FOR HELPING MORE ATHEIST COME OUT!!!
I haven't seen any "secret code". If you found a unexplainable structure inside a mathematical representation that is definately not coincidence, that might be the greatest scientific discovery of all time.
Needless to say, coming from this crowd - it ain't.😁
The secret code is the sacred geometry found in creation. Accidents and coincidence don't create geometrical structures. You need math and a computer to create the advance geometry found in creation.
@@WeWokeTheGiants Aye, waiting...
@@WeWokeTheGiants why a "god" and not a computer simulation, it makes way more sense lol
@@WeWokeTheGiants
You first have to demonstrate creation before asserting anything was created.
Close towards the end he says “I’m writing a book” my thought was “how in depth does he go”😂 . Seriously though,this was/is absolutely amazing. Thankyou
4:57 Wrong, members of a set need not have any common characteristics. They can be chosen with complete arbitrariness.
45:42 If God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places. To assume other wise is to limit God.
You assume properties of God on faith then reason from them. It's just faith with more steps.
And there is no reason to believe that mathematics IS different in different places. Have you seen the size of the universe? What you call God limiting God "here" is called structure and order "here".
And no believer in God claims that we can believe without an ounce of faith. We accept that that will always be in place and to be honest....I kinda like that God has opted to not to "make it plain". Those who just don't want to "see" can be free to do just that.
Don't think you can prove God does not exist so that does leave us both believing something we can't prove.
@@jayceejm Agreed. No evidence about math being different. No evidence about God either.
Of course you can't prove that God does not exist. This is a basic element of logic: one can't prove a negative.
"f God has authority over all the universe, then it would be perfectly possible for mathematics to be different in different places."
Yep. We haven't discovered such places yet. Even if we did, God making a different mathematics there would also be evidence that God exists.
@@neutrino78x No, there can be no evidence for the existence of God. Suppose you find evidence for a being of great power. You would need to verify that it was evidence of INFINITE power. How does one differentiate between power that is finite, but so huge that we cannot measure it and power that is truly infinite.
Further, how to verify that God is eternal? One would need to wait forever to confirm this.
This is one of the greatest videos i have ever seen in my entire life.
“Could you believe it’s beautiful? No you couldn’t” on repeat for 1 hour
and that the end you go against the scientific method and just assume that it points towards you premade beliefs.
Quintus says, "I'm an animal with no soul and no purpose in life. I like to bully people who believe in religion." On repeat for his troll comments.
@@citizenguy sure do :)
Saying somebody who just bullied basically all living things outside his/her church, saying they have no soul.
@@citizenguy bullies are the absolute worst. I heard in prison they bully pedophiles and that’s just unchristianly as hell. And I can’t believe they just allow the woke left to bully Nazis online when they’re free to have that belief. It’s not like it’s causing anyone harm just by being a nazi. Not to mention they bully Christians now too! The 65% of Americans that are Christians are the real bullied minority. Lettuce prey for they/them.
The only thing this video instilled into me, was awe and respect towards the beauty and wisdom of the scientific method :3
Scientific method was invented by Judeo-Christian values :)
@@cameronhill8279 Judeo-Christian values prevented humankind from getting a better understanding of the universe around them all through the Middle Age. Great scientific minds were killed by the Church on the grounds that what they proposed didn't correspond to sacred scriptures, even though we now know they are true. Nicolas Copernic is one example. The scientific method is the opposite of faith, it doesn't require believe because it relies on proof.
@@cameronhill8279 No, it wasn't
@@trumanyoung1345 What did then?
@@cameronhill8279 Imperialism and history, as well as human's greed for more control over new land
Well, as an Atheist, you're absolutely right. I could never explain this to you.
but I'd bet he could easily explain to us how he makes money spouting this sh!t.
You don't have the time, neither the crayons
That’s funny I didn’t pay anything to listen to his teaching of a mathematical equation that you curse at…thank you for reminding me math is now racist.
@@oldrrocr I didnt pay to see this
@@oldrrocr I mean no duh a video that gets views will gets revenue
Here from Redeemed Zoomer's video
01:20 "Not everything you read is necessarily factual" best line ever.
So how do we determine which parts of the Bible is factual and which are not?
Oh, mate! Don't you know? That book wasn't written by men at all... it was written by GOD himself! (I hope your recognise irony when you see it!) ;)
It's all factual, plain and simple.
@@Knifegash What? The buy-bull? 'Factual'? Surely you jest?! :D
@@theseustoo Better than you have tried to disprove it, every attempt to inspect its assertions end up proving it further. It is historically accurate and proven to be reliable in following bloodlines.
@@theseustoo God wrote in ancient Greek?
Francis Schaefer's "The God Who is There", and Michael Heiser's "The Unseen Realm" are two books that do thoroughly answer and solve the issues posed in this thread. Read or audiobook The Unseen Realm first to thoroughly understand that the Bible was written for us, and not to us. Heiser's PhD in ancient Semitic languages really sold me on taking the time to go through his book, then over the years I went through it 8 more times because it is just that good. Helping me to understand the reality and brevity of my disposition, that I know nothing as I ought to know and yet I get to be known by His knowledge. I think Paul was agnostic, save the knowledge of God.
How does Heiser's "Unseen Realm" compare to his "Demons"? For me the latter was highly technical and I kinda gave up. Maybe too soon.
"belief in God is associated with lower scores on IQ tests"
I will never understand how people can just deny something with so much evidence, yet believe something with literally no evidence, but evidence against it.
this guy isn't a scientist, he is a preacher.
Is science able to prove something which isn’t bound by space time and matter ?
@@G_Singh222 and you call yourself rational?
@@Charzilian
Stop with the melodrama, what’s irrational about my question ?
@@G_Singh222 it's irrational because you start with the assumption that there is something unbound by spacetime and matter.
@@G_Singh222 also, it was irrelevant to my comment in the first place.
God bless you! Thank you so much for this exceptional video. I'm a seminary student here in Brazil, and I'm glad that I spent time watching how the glory of God is everywhere.
it never ceases to amaze me just how easy it is to lead sheeple down the garden path your invisible sky wizard is a fantasy made up by man in his image
AMAZING. All glory belongs to our God!
Thor?
@@midlander4 No...no... it's gotta be Posiden... she is a fish after all. 🙄😏
I got a question who your referring to
Thor
Poseidon
Shiva
Vishnu
Horus
Brahma
Hades
Zeus
Jupiter
Wotan
I’ve seen this discussion before. Unfortunately the entire thing is built on a false premise. The Mandelbrot set is not infinite complexity built from a finite equation, but rather it is infinite complexity from an infinite equation. The set is created from multiple iterations on a single simple equation. The more you iterate the equation the more complex it is. We can never actually have an infinitely complex set because we can never actually iterate the equation infinite times.
Norman Wildberger will agree with this.
All hail the holy power of recursion.
ARE YOU THE PONYTAIL GUY FROM GOODWILL HUNTING?
@@wilmafudd9293 why are you yelling?
@@hudibrad YOU CAN NOT YELL ON A COMPUTER.
"I can't understand why flowers look so beautiful, so fairies exist."
"If fairies didn't exist I would be very sad and my life wouldn't make any sense anymore. I don't want to be sad and give my life meaning, so fairies exist."
"The only reason we humans see beauty is because fairies enchant us with the beauty of their creations. You can see beauty? So fairies exist."
When it comes to thousands of other magical creatures and gods, believers see through moronic arguments immediately.
"I can't understand why flowers look so beautiful, this is scientific proof that God does not exist."
"It is possible even in theory to have objective, scientific proof that God does not exist."
@@neutrino78x nobody actually makes that argument though
@@madisont3123 Timo B did.
@@madisont3123 this is all they have. Because the numbers are not on their side.
how dark and lonely it must be for those who choose not to believe in God our creator 😥 I simply do not know how people can live in that state! the evidence of God it's essentially everywhere.
science proves it, when I took my science classes I believed in God all the more.
“I always thought I would be arrested and jailed for life, but now I realize I am not worthy of such a grace”
St John Vianney
That's nonsensical. This is what happens when people value the way something sounds instead of its academic justification
@@jasonspades5628 I think he just means that for every moment of our existence we are being grossly overpaid, no matter what that existence happens to be.
God spoke about dinosaurs to Job.
@The Sinful Bastard who are u talking to lol
@@johnjeffreys6440 think about what you just said. At the time of Job… NO MAN would have any clue what a dinosaur was because we didn’t start to discover fossils of said creatures until thousands of years later. Because according to established timelines, dinosaurs and man never coexisted. People from Jobs time could not have had ANY idea what a dinosaur is. Because they are separated from the nearest one by about a million years. Someone’s lying
The problem is that this has nothing to do with god. One cannot just look at patterns and say „hence god“ (looking at you, golden ratio)
"The problem is that this has nothing to do with god."
No, but it has to do with God.
"One cannot just look at patterns and say „hence god“"
We're saying, "hence God", not "hence god", but sure you can.
It's subjective and not scientific, but yes, this is evidence of the existence of God, who wrote the laws of physics with the intention that at least one intelligent species would evolve, and then left it on autopilot, with everything occurring as has been discovered by science.
The Mandlebrot Set can be interpreted as evidence that an intelligence wrote the laws of physics. A "higher power" if you prefer but most of us write it in short hand as "God". Not any specific religion just the general concept of a higher power. (the gods of the Ancient Greeks and Romans, the Hindu gods, Yahweh and Allah are all God. All are equally correct.)
Exactly I could look at a lamp and be like “god gave us this”
@@fireguy-id7ky nope. Math was discovered. We're talking about something natural here bro, that's the whole point.
That's Alex! Did you watch the video?
Why would concept designs be the same as physical? Note the keyword design. Design immediately points to a designer. What's the point of a design if there is no designer? Honestly what's the point of any design if there is no designer? Even useless items that have no definitive point or actual benefit, has a "design" and someone with a mind created them. But there is obviously a point between a useless item with no specific benefit and a useful item with a specific benefit.
Do you realize there is irreducible complexity in us humans, both male and in female that it is impossible for it to come into existence without a mind?
@@fireguy-id7ky could you ever theorize that lamp to come into existence without a human creating materials to create that lamp to work as it should, let alone a power source without a human mind to light the lamp to make it work as it should?
Some perspective for you. You are not believing "God gave us this lamp" without considering a mind creating it, to make have a design and a function.
No unbeliever nor you could actually prove there is no God.
To do so, you literally have to prove your own non-existence and the non-existence of earth, ironically. So really good luck.
The Mandelbrot set is pretty interesting, but it only really demonstrates maths, and not God
🤦🏻♀️
Exactly. Amazing stuff. Evidence for God? No.
And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. - 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
Oh the Lord i worship is a great and beautiful one. God Bless Dr. Jason Lisle.
its Actually related to Buddhism not Christianity
As a mathematician and an artist, I thoroughly enjoyed this video
Hell yeah!!! Satan gave us some great math!!
@@technodrone313 Huh?
@@voidzennullspace Satan created fractals duh. What this guy is talking about in the video. HELL YEAH!!
@@technodrone313 Okay
Yeahh- the very idea that complex fractals would be assumed to be proof of a higher being is an innately pack animal instinct based conception. Fractals can also be used to prove how complexity can create itself with no outside intervention since it's already a thing in nature known as emergent patterns. What also is an emergent pattern? Landforms, planets, flowers, bones, hurricanes, and finally-- consciousness. Since it's a product of smaller parts that grows to have a bigger influence, it proves fractals are a visualization of happenstance.
Thanks for this comment, these people cannot comprehend what infinity means.
I vote you debate this guy
@@dariunperkey4649
I am mostly familiar with debate tactics, personally I think it's the argument equivalent of the scientific method. And should be a common critical thought protocol in order to guide peoples minds toward clever solutions.
@@xellotathschosen910 Can you?!
@@xellotathschosen910 How can infinity exist in a physical universe? Are you not a naturalist? Do you think the universe is eternal?
Havent even got 10 min in and through reading the comments i can already understand this guys main argument. I strongly recommend everyone of all religious beliefs to take a philosophy/ philo. Of religion class.
The main theological argument this guy is trying to make for the existence of a monotheistic god is the teleological argument. Essentially the idea that there are too many specific details and coincidences in our natural world, therefore there must be a purpose for them and an intelligent god that created them.
Where he sees complex natural phenomenon as evidence of god we see it as simply the complexity of nature. I think its rather presumptuous to assume our lack of understanding of nature is evidence that god is real. Humanity in the past explained the day night cycle by saying gods were pulling the ball of fire in the sky. How can we know we are not in the same predicament? Just because the majority of our reality is not known to use doesnt mean an all powerful being exists in the metaphysical plane.
Additionally i knew this argument for god would be absolutely irrelevant when he dismissed evolution at the beginning. Buddy let me explain something. We know evolution is real through observation of the physical world. We literally see the genes evolving through generations and beneficial traits become more prominent. We have done multiple studies on insects and watched advantageous traits become adopted by the entire population. To say thats not real because god means you need to prove god’s existence and faith is not a good enough excuse neither is the teleological argument.
We see patterns and some people assume it means things were created to derive patterns, but we also see patterns in Conway's game of Life. Set some simple rules in this game, chaos emerges, and patterns emerge as well. This doesn't speak to creation, it speaks to the random nature of existence, and the emergence of patterns in chaos.
The essential false premise is 'hidden code' using the mandelbrot set as an example. They do not understand how so much complexity can be found in a relatively simple set, but to assume there is a hidden mechanism is literally not understanding the basic premise of the mandelbrot set. There is no hidden mechanism, the set is clearly defined, good math. There is no wibbly wobbly space for hidden math, it's exactly what it is. There is no room for God, factually so, if God is hidden mechanisms in math as this suggests.
I’m a christian and yet i still know that there is no proof of god, that’s why we have faith, if god was proven for fact then everyone would believe him. You can’t prove him. Have faith in god.
@@ethancollinsworth3927 so you let something that has no evidence dictate how to live your life? Would you follow Christianity if you were born as a Muslim?
@@doity That’s a good question that i don’t know the answer to. But you let things you don’t know dictate your life everyday. You don’t know that god ISNT real and you let that dictate your life (seeing as you’re on a comment section about it)
@@ethancollinsworth3927 We see patterns and some people assume it means the world was created, but it only speaks to the random nature of existence, and the emergence of patterns in chaos.
They do not understand how so much complexity can be found in a relatively simple set like the mandelbrot, but to assume there is a hidden mechanism is literally not understanding the basic premise of sets such as the mandelbrot. There is no hidden mechanism, the set is clearly defined, and the patterns emerge. There is no wibbly wobbly space for hidden math, it's exactly what it is.
"who created numbers?" We don't know if they were "created" in any sense of the word. But your argument is basically "where did this come from? You don't know? Therefore God." Which isn't an argument. Not knowing is a million times better than making up a God to explain mysteries.
I wonder what an atheist like Wigner would say to this misuse of his words? Of course, you could just look it up since he obviously addressed the religious take on these particular thoughts of his. However, to nobody's surprise, you seem to have not seen his replies, or maybe omitted them on purpose.
You could also actually study how the math creates these shapes, so that they become no more mysterious than the fact that 2+2=4. But you won't do that either, because, as we all know, you're not really interested in learning anything here
The question is not the how, but the why. Math itself is a problem for those with a viewpoint that claims the universe happened randomly. Why would all these rules for how things work be in place to govern literally everything that exists? Why can nothing exist outside of those rules?
Not to mention the many holes in any version of macro evolution- if we find a chihuahua and a great dane, fossilized in 10000 years, and dogs have been extinct for long enough that general knowledge of them has passed away, what would such a theory suggest was the reason for their extreme differences?
Could a theory emerge that the older chihuahua bones are proof of a canine that evolved from a rat, seeing as they have so many similarities?
“Then, as the animals adapted to their environment, and became more successful within their biosphere, they evolved, growing larger and better adapted, hence the much later date of the great dane fossil.”
Sound familiar? This thought process a gross oversimplification of reality, based on a theory of what could have happened, if everything in the universe “just happens”, in a way that we can relatively easily explain- but, we have to ignore the faults in our logic, to hold to these theories.
@@ralphpierroii4626 your argument started to decay when you claimed that most people believe the universe was created randombly, nobody who believes in the big bang of other theories believes that, at least i, believe that the origin of the universe as a whole is unknown, but the universe as we know it works the way it does because of the law of physics, nothing random, now if you want to believe that the laws of physics are made by a god then thats on you to prove.
@@ralphpierroii4626 And also you misunderstand evolution greatly, you assume that every scientist would claim that every species was a succefull one, but you can clearly see various examples of species that scientist pointed out being too specialized to survive and explain why they don't exist anymore, if they found fossils of dogs they would point inmediatly that all of them belong in the same family, it would just be a mistery on why they were too diversified and some looked malnourish until its discovered one with a collar, then the articifial breeding would be speculated, because you know, evidence its important.
@@spinosaurusstriker so where do the laws of physics come from? They are so precise and ordered that you can build skyscrapers and massive airplanes with the confidence that those laws will remain constant. Why?
@@lauraandrews1676 you are seeing things in the wrong order , a snowflake looks the way it looks because of how the molecules of water work , the molecules aren't working that way to make the snowflake ,and the laws remain constant because there is anything to suggest they would need to change ,at least in normal circumstances.
If you want to know were do the laws of physics come from ,its unknown at least for me but that doesn't mean you can automatically claim to be the result of whatever whitout proof ,just like you wouldn't believe a man saying that George bush lives in his house whitout anything to back it up , the task is to prove god first ,then we can use it to explain things .
So it means that the universe is designed as a never-ending formula that was created by God the creator. The universe is so huge which is proven already by scientists. If they keep on looking it gets bigger and farther, like what is in this video. It's a really fascinating and well-explained video.
No it doesn't. Universe can't be created, It always existed. If something is infinite it can't have the beginning or the end, hence its impossible that something existed before it (because there is no before in this context) . Pretty simple logic. If you insert the need of the creator, you are creating a paradox. Because creator needs to start randomly existing, or be created, but then that creator has a creator and so on. Unless you wanna say that there is an infinite number of creators in which case you aren't Christian.
@@diemyfriend yep who created the creator then this simple question christians can't answer I love it when logic breaks them down I want to believe but just don't see good evidence
@@caviestcaveman8691 the most reasonable way for me is Pantheism. Either everyone and everything is god (all as one) or nothing is. Seems like two most plausible answers. But its okay to say "I don't know". Something preacher can't say out loud.
@@diemyfriend but the Universe has a beginning tho, the Big Bang Theory yeah?
@@lordfin6211 have you ever read anything about that theory? Your question suggests that you didn't.
Q: what does the ‘B’ stand for in
Benoit B Mandelbrot?
A: Benoit B Mandelbrot.
One of my favorite jokes!
This is an impressive illustration of Olympic level mental gymnastics
Grow up Tara, be an adult. Stop browsing content you care nothing for and learn to possibly use your time more wisely. You can be more than an internet troll if you simply put your mind to it. I believe in you Tara, you can do it! 🙂
Just take a point called Z in a complex plane,
Let Z1 be Z^2+C,
Z2 is Z1^2+C,
Z3 is Z2^2+C, and so on.
If the series of Zs will always stay
Close to Z and never trend away,
That point is in the Mandelbrot Set.
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace where hydrogen is turned into helium at a temperature of billions of degrees
I don't really go around calling myself an athiest, but that first minute is really depressing that a grown adult thinks like that
What do you expect from people believing in something they can't see or prove lol
Well, to others it may be "depressing" that you may never know God's truth or feel the warmth of his love.
What are you talking about you just plug some numbers into the formula and you can feel God’s warm love.
If you're an atheist, you might wanna start believing in God. Think about it this way: if God doesn't exist and you believe in vain, nothing happens. However, if He does and you spend your whole life denying Him then you will be denied by Him. You literally have nothing to lose, but everything to gain.
Which God should I choose there’s hundreds to choose from!!!
@@lukestewart2525 How about the one with the most archaeological evidence to support its claims? I mean there's a giant boat on top of a mountain in Turkey, there are chariot wheels and horse bones in the Red Sea, there are numerous biblical locations you can find including Sodom and Gomorrah that are still showing remnants of being burned with sulfur and fire.
@@lukestewart2525 Heck, even Islam acknowledges that the God of Israel is the true God. They just claim he favors them instead and sent another prophet just to them. So 2 religions agree on which god is the one true God.
@@joshdudeguy2830 Sounds good, I’ll head to my nearest Jewish synagogue
@@lukestewart2525 Not a bad idea, there's another faith that agrees on the same God as the one and only. Personally, I'm Messianic, so I believe in the whole Bible. Not just new testament like the average Christian.
The talk just presents an explaination how beauty and complexity emerges from simple rules with no god in them. What a service to his own beliefs …
True, you cannot touch rules. But information processing devices like brains can still discover them, and so we got math. Still no sign for a god.
It all boils down to the question why there are laws of nature. The answer you gave: if it wouldn‘t, there wouldn‘t be complexity and you to observe it. This simple.
"The talk just presents an explaination how beauty and complexity emerges from simple rules with no god in them." You cant be more wrong... If you listen carefully... before even evolutionist' theory of how things came about random and didnt need God, well as explained, the rules of our physical universe existed until the so called big bang (or point of creation). Before that math stops. With big bang, math starts, and math didnt need humans, but human's brain can conceptualize it because of the partial power given to us all. We can understand it through math, again, math doesnt need us to work. How and why it works is the mystery if you are secular, if you are religious, it is kind of known. God created everything, his power is infinite, he is everywhere, and left us some of his power in limited quantity in our brains to understand and find him if you are looking for him. Our brains can visualize these concepts but these concepts does not and did not need us. world still revolved, sun still shined the way it shined after it became sun. and we can visualize/conceptualize how sun started and and how it may end, but it doesnt/didnt need us for it to happen! Fractals make sense only if you believe in an infinite wisdom. otherwise it makes no sense in a finite universe! Math is not bounded by the physical dimensions we are locked in at the moment. we can conceptualize beyond the current dimensions, but we cant practically and physically see it.
"It all boils down to the question why there are laws of nature. The answer you gave: if it wouldn‘t, there wouldn‘t be complexity and you to observe it. " You cant be even more wrong that this. It is you who doesnt grasp the reality of god. before you existed, math still was there! as explained before Pythagorean theorem, do you think triangles behaved differently? Before humans figured out and observed the galaxy, did the stars moved and behaved differently? you answer is not only silly it is meaningless. there was complexity before us, and will be after us, whether you observe and appreciate it is an entirely different matter! It is the best proof that god existed before us in an infinity! there are finite particles in the universe, yet math can count beyond that. it only proves that beyond us/universe, there is something infinite beyond imagination but you can still conceptualize it all thanx to god's biggest gift to us that made us different from all other living beings: MIND, many creatures has brains, but MIND is an entirely different concept again blows everyone's MIND when you try to explain/quantify it!
Seriously, open up your eyes! The creator is everywhere!!
@@flo19776 you’re absolutely right. Everywhere I look I see the might of Zeus’ creation
hail zeus
Sorry Falk, have to agree with My tester.
First of all let's get this out the way.
"God" = "spiritual higher power in one form or another, all religions being correct". In other words Allah, Yahweh, the gods of ancient Greece and Rome, the gods of Hinduism, all are God. Please don't build straw men.
Now, look, math wasn't created by man. It was discovered by man. The laws of physics were discovered, not invented by man. But they're fundamental, we can't say "before mathematics existed" or "before the laws of physics existed". With one exception. You have to pick a starting point. Either that starting point is the material universe itself (physical laws were always there in one form or another, before the big bang/multiverse is meaningless) OR the starting point is God.
Now, I don't care how back you want to go. Pick it yourself. Whatever you think that most fundamental state is. Deism is unaffected by your choice. Whatever you choose, I would say the most fundamental state is God. God is the one that is without cause, God is that which causes everything else (by writing the laws of physics).
The difference being, your view of the universe is a materialistic one. You see no Purpose.
As a Deist, I see a Purpose. I'm not sure what it is of course. I would think probably so at least one intelligent species would evolve (probably more than one has evolved in the vastness of space). So therefore I can't pick the starting point as the laws themselves. Just looking at those laws, they look like they have purpose. And we didn't write them. We DISCOVERED them. So you can't say "they're beautiful because Einstein wanted them to be"....no...he just discovered what God created. Maxwell's Equations, written by God. The Mandelbrot Set, written by God.
Since I'm not violating any known science, and not making any falsifiable predictions (I accept all that physics/evolutionary biology has discovered), both our positions are equally rational. They are just different ways of interpreting the universe. I see one with Purpose, therefore I see God. You don't, therefore you see the absence of God. Neither is irrational.
As a mathematician I understand that people invented numbers to describe the world around us. Given the mechanics of the way our universe seems to have arisen it is hardly surprising to see that it contains similar patterns to the way a mechanistic function describes the mandelbrot set
since whether or not there is a God is unknowable it's all opinion....as a Deist I'm with this astrophysicist Christian...to me this is evidence of God. But I know it's subjective and you can reasonably look at it a different way. That's why it's not scientific evidence. But it is evidence for us to make up our own minds about it.
Mindblowing indeed.... phantastic presentation!
the correct title: "believers use fractals to captiously hook the idea of god as truth"
If you're filtering what you see and hear to suit yourself, you're deceiving yourself, this dude and his father are classic cases.
Yeah, this is the same logic that leads people to nitpicking the Bible &/or science. It usually leads to some pretty freaky stuff.
So what do you believe in besides criticizing others?
a statement without a counter.
@@giogarcia4002 Why does it matter what his beliefs are? And also, critique isn't a belief, it's a verb and a noun. xD
Amazing lecture. He explained the concept of Vedanta without even realizing it, and that's genius.
Well all math came from Vedas. but I'm curious to know what he said that explained the concept of Vedanta?
@@Playitalready BS.
@@atharv-gautamEinstein quotes disagree with you, as does the tons of detail, sources, & evidence I've found that proves my last comment, & how all the major religions, sciences, proven prophecy, etc. directly or indirectly came from the 5 Vedas, which I show in my book & unfinished videos.
I'd provide them here, if you sounded more nice & open minded, & if youtube's AI stopped removing the wrong comments.
Just stay tuned. Vedas even correctly predicted that their spiritual, merit based Varna system would get distorted into a birth based system.
Simulation theory is becoming more popular because humanity is now in a state where we can imagine it being true. We are now creating virtual worlds, virtual systems, simulated models of the world, and simulated origins of life models. All of these simulations needed a creator to make them. As a Christian who believes in special creation. I think we need to embrace special creation as a type of simulation but with an emphasis that the creation can’t be greater than the creator.
Was your creator also a creation?
@@Captain-Cosmo most likely not.
@@ultraderek How did you determine that probability?
@@Captain-Cosmo
1) God is eternal. No beginning no end. Created things have a beginning.
2) Lets say creating an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal being was possible. It would be created by an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal being. Thus, it would be redundant and unnecessary.
@@ultraderek take the game of life of Conway… it can generate itself with its basic rules, infinitely. This works like a simulation of a simulation .. to ever… with no beginning and no end…. And still only a basic rule. And no god
I’m an atheist. Looking at te title and listening to just the first 15 minutes I can say this means absolutely nothing. For 1, atheists not being able to explain something does NOT equal “god exists.” 2. Even IF his little math show proved a god existed, it would ABSOLUTELY NOT prove te Christian god. That has already been disproven. So we’re back at start wondering what a god would want from us and withholding belief in any specific god until we have reason to believe in a specific god.
TRUTH and Wisdom
truth and "wisdom" are subjective.
@jwhitman2447 Everything is subjective but in this regard the facts about the science of this matter proves Wisdom and truth of a Creator.
"The science book told me lies" What irony!
While using science for investigating 😂
@@ArcherMVMaster So everything called science in human history was factually correct? Like when science said flies spontaneously spawn, lead is perfectly safe, asbestos is perfectly safe, making hats with mercury is fine.... need I go on? There's good science & scientists and bad "science" and "scientists" that only care about upholding the orthodoxy of the day and are immune to facts or the scientific method itself, if it dares defy them!
True!
Just “filter” out the stuff that doesn’t fit
I find it interesting that if one consumes certain types of mushrooms, one actually sees the fractal nature of everything.
I don't need mushrooms to see that
When I eat a mushroom I see an empty plate and that's about it... :)
I know . Weird
those were the original bread of christ wafers one would eat at church for sure.
@@ArcaneBear
What evidence do you have of that? Or is it just an idea?
55:21 Here's an awnser from a 2nd semester Biology student: The universe obeys the laws of mathematics because they themselves exist within it.
This could lead one to the assumption that the universe itself is god, thus containing both the physical and conceptual part. We could very well exist within a multidimensional (at least 4 dimensions, with 3 spacial ones + time) fractal, and just be a physical form of the universe computing/plotting said fractal over time, without even being aware on which part and scale we are.
While I currently have no access to the computing power needed for more complex calculations like this, I tend to see the reoccurring shapes in everything I explore, may it be the structures of life or the very concept of reality itself, I'm staring into the abyss of infinity, smiling back at me with such beauty and purity.
I don't know if I am scratching at the border between genius and insanity, but the infinity is all that remains, all that will be.
And I can't stop but to stare in amazement as the universe keeps on unfolding.
Listening to this I can't help thinking of the Kronecker quote: "God created the integers. All else is the work of man."
Wow when he zoomed in my mind was blown and then again and then blown some more.
Glory be to our creator who is infinitely beautiful and beyond our comprehension. It saddens me that the world believes we live in an accidental world that came from nothing.
How are you so blown away by fractals, the Mandelbrot set is an old hat at this point. It's just a selected set of complex numbers represented as a geometric figure. It has nothing to do with some invisible man in the sky, it's just visualized maths, and as maths is a rational, organized way of describing reality, it results in an organized structure if you visualize a set of complex numbers. Nothing godly there.
Man, Americans and their terrible education system...
@@meta7517 Did you not see how beautiful it was? 😊 No coincidence.
I'm not from America by the way. And I don't think God is an invisible man in the sky. He is infinitely everything at its purest form ✨
I'm not sure you understand the Mandelbrot if you think that it is a selected set of complex numbers. It is one of God's patterns 💚 arohanui
@@cathrynholland8149 math is beautiful. But it is not gods pattern. Math is man-made. Just a way to describe the world we live in. It's beautiful because it's visualized numbers. That has nothing to do with god.
its an image of budha
With or without the aspect of religion this could be the best video on the Mandelbrot set I've ever seen. And I've seen a few. Very good job explaining the details in an easy to understand way.
Yeah I don't think it's fair to tie it to a particular religion, but the concept of The Creator is intricately intertwined *into* it.
I agree. Though I am not a religious person, I enjoyed the presentation very much. I have to say that his was the best presentation I have ever watched on Mandelbrot set.
There’s one where the Mandelbrot set actually computes pi that’s cool.
@Juan Ramon Silva Parra Yes especially such a tiny formula.
The guy is trying to negate what we can actually see in the gradual progression of evolution and adaptation. His religion has made him delusional and sick from fear . These people cannot be trusted in their decision making. It's sad that people need to believe in something so badly, and we have tens of thousand s of completely different religions, yet they are each so limited.
7:38PM
Very helpful study. Bolsters your faith.
God not being real is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it. These people see the intricacies of our universe and never once assume the possibility that it could've been Rick Sanchez
The idea of God not being real is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it. Just like all that intricacy and ourselves being attributed to "randomness" being a lie, is inconvenient for those who have built their lives around it. Never understanding that design only comes from an intelligent mind.
God being real is inconvenient for fools who choose to ignore the fact that a spontaneously generated universe is _literally_ less likely to occur than the formation of a functional aircraft in the aftermath of a thermonuclear explosion at a plane factory.
@@kooldudematt1 And its not just by a little either. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction
@@jameson2916 This dialogue is equivalent to: "1+1 not being equal to 3 is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it." "Oh really? Two can play this game! 1+1 not being equal to 2 is inconvenient for those that have built their lives around it."
@@thepiratepeter4630 I see you've been inconvenienced 😆
Never will I understand how Christians can look at something and completely ignore it at the same time. It's like they're not hearing themselves speaking
Never will I understand how non-Christians can look at something and completely ignore it at the same time. It's like they're not listening because they refuse to hear anything that refers to God. Their pride and arrogance has hardened them against him and closed their mind.
"Pride leads to disgrace,
but with humility comes wisdom." Prov. 11:2
"Mean-spirited slander is heartless;
quiet discretion accompanies good sense." Prov. 11:12
@@RobobinAnne touche
@@RobobinAnne quotes the Bible proudly, and with arrogance as if that's the only answer.
No arrogance present when it is true. When Usain Bolt said "I am the fastest man alive" He was. No one would say "how arrogant" as it was just a statement of fact. If you believed Justin Gatlin was faster, Usain would SOUND arrogant but it would never make it so just because it is what you believe.
@@jayceejm yeah yeah different believes we will never understand each other. You do what you need to do to get by in life
Human : creates math. Creates some arbitrary rules to plot out numbers in a graph. Discovers it creates cool fractal patterns.
Also human : Aha!! Proof of a supernatural god!!!!
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
No, it's different when it comes to fractals, they are not arbitrary. Fractals have been discovered in nature as well. What's fascinating about them is a concept known as self-similarity. Mandelbrot was a genius, and he inspired an entire generation of mathematicians.
@@MosesMatsepane these patterns come from rules that we created to plot the points..... it's not that astounding. It's just cool to look at. This pattern don't occur naturally. It occurs because of the rules we made up to plot out the points on a graph.
You're insane if you believe the Mandelbrot set is "made up" the finitude of the human mind could never capture such thing, besides great mathematicians like Roger Penrose acknowledge that these mathematical concepts are not invented but discovered.
I have no words. No words at all. Let's just pick and chose science and math that fits our beliefs.
As an atheist, I can explain this just fine: Math starts at a series of simple rules, and the rest naturally follows through logic. When you take a simple ruleset and apply it to a field like numbers, patterns tend to emerge.
Take prime numbers for example. A number is prime if it's not divisible by any whole numbers except for 1 and itself. When you look at the prime numbers, 2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,... you might notice that after 2,3 there are never 2 prime numbers in a row. There is always at least one number between two prime numbers. This is a pattern, yet it's not immediately obvious why it's there. Nothing in the rules says that 2,3 can be the only couple. If you look deeper into it though, you might find that among two consecutive numbers there is always one odd number and one even number. Furthermore the only even number that can be prime is the one that's divisible by 2 and 1, which is 2. Now the pattern is explained.
That explanation was fairly simple to find, but you can imagine there are patterns that are much harder to explain. In some cases mathematicians can spend their whole careers trying to find one and still falling short. Just because we can't find an explanation, that doesn't mean there isn't one. We still find new solutions to old problems relatively often.
Also, when you map a complex enough function onto 2d space, it's gonna make pretty pictures. It's gonna make 2d patterns, and our brains like 2d patterns because they're easier to process than random noise. The mandelbrot set is really interesting, and the visuals we can make with it are truly stunning, but I personally wouldn't go looking for higher meaning in it.
Whoosh.
@@infiniLor Wait, what did I miss? None of this needs to be explained with some deity.
@@Drawoon you didn't missed anything, but the video was so wrong that it was a joke
@@vijaykumarjha7822 ahh. nice.
I enjoyed the video. As an atheist, I have a different view, but the presentation was good.
how you can still be an atheist after watcing this is beyond me, ok so i had a head start i already had the theory for a long time - the fractal signature repeats itself throughout the whole universe from the macrocosm to the microcosm how can there not be a higher intelligence behind that if a painting cannot paint itself then the universe couldn't bring it's self into existance with all that mathematical and artistic precision from galaxies to flowers its Gods signature he made us in his image - he fractalised himself some people can't see whats right in front of there nose there are 3 types of people those who can see, those who can see after theyv'e been shown and those who can't see no matter what evidence you provide a kind of psychological colour blindness, science fact !
Very beautiful math plots. As a math guy myself I appreciate this. Don't necessarily believe that it proves god exists, but I do agree that math is beautiful
How to prove you're right:
1)Show a shiny thing
2) Talk sciency-sounding word salad
3) PROFIT
And?
I remember when I was in college (1986) Penn State I had a Tandy computer. Major: computer science. It came with a built in function,,,, that almost nobody knew about. I did. A small graphics program based on the Mandelbrot set. You ran the program, entered values, and it spit out mind blowing images. I always said the language of God is like math, the answer is right or wrong, there is nothing in between. No such thing as a gray area
The "language of God" is a figment of your imagination. Childhood brainwashing is no doubt the cause. But math is real -- not some absurd occult supernatural conjecture.
@@stevecarson4162 Well Mr Carson I have 3 degrees, masters. Very well educated. How do you know math is true? By reading math books. Now go read the Bible, test it, try it, see if it's true. Just like you do with math books
@@joek511 : I HAVE read it, tested it, and tried it -- and no, it's NOT true.
I'm always amazed when apparently intelligent and otherwise well-educated people still cling to beliefs in all that occult supernatural hokum that was written to frighten naive little children and make them behave.
Sadly, a lot of adults still haven't outgrown their belief in such fairytales. Their thorough indoctrination at such an early age is no doubt to blame.
@@joek511
"Now go read the Bible, test it, try it, see if it's true."
Ok.
I loved my neighbour and found that it was a good thing to do. Bible proved.
You don't really think the Bible is meant literally do you? The point of that book is "love thy neighbour as you love thyself", period. There is nothing in it that needs objective or scientific proof.
What we don't know about reality is staggering. I'm watching this in 2022 and there's plenty to be pessimistic about... But then I watch a video like this and I'm reminded there's way more beauty and complexity and all of our political bickering is so utterly pointless. Whether or not God exists will be debated until the end of time, most likely, but to dispute there is intelligent design in our Universe is willful ignorance.
Well it won't be debated forever really
If you see intelligence behind the design, then who's behind that intelligence?
@@amitypredator9385 No-one. This question is a natural question but easily answered. God is by definition uncaused, eternal, and outside of time and space. So, IF he exists, he would HAVE to be the first cause of everything. He is the uncaused logos. Does it make more sense that everything came from something or someone? or that it evolved out of ABSOLUTE nothingness with no help, no power, no plan, no intelligence? The cause of a finite universe has to be outside of space and time, because space and time didn't exist before the universe. A personal being with intelligence and enormous power who is outside of space and time would make perfect sense for how an extremely complex, massive universe exists with people that live in it and that are sitting here talking about God. You might say that's a God of the gaps argument, but not really. It simply makes sense, doesn't prove anything. It's simply reasonable. If you're looking for proof, that's not it, but it's perfectly reasonable, even if we cannot know everything about this eternal God. There are things we cannot know and will not know. Science will NEVER have an explanation for absolutely everything. Jesus Christ is the best evidence of God.
Uh not really, if the world and people are intelligently designed, then the creator did a horrible job. It's actually ignorant to tell other people they're willfully ignorant for not seeing what you see, when it's most likely patterns and shapes formed from natural causes
No, it's the OPPOSITE. Assert that there is an intelligent design in our universe is willful ignorance, AND naivety. So don't be pretentious and categorical in your statements. Where is the "intelligent" design you speak of? In wisdom teeth? In myopia? In pharynx which makes choke? In childbirth who hurts extremely? In stinky, disgusting excrement? In congenital diseases? In menstruation? In earthquakes and hurricanes? Lol, all the examples i cited clearly prove that there is NO intelligent design, on contrary, it's rather poor and incompetent design.
"We need to Filter it through God's Word" Oh, so you Admit that the Bible is Wrong? Got it!
The evidence for intellect design is everywhere, including in us. But everyone is missing the obvious next questions. 1. Why do we have to attach this intelligence to a hierarchical deity who would divide us between the chosen and damned? That line of thinking is antithetical to the whole design of nature and the mathematics used here. 2. Why Christianity , when all other major religions and belief systems have the same findings through mathematics, as does Quantum Physics? 3. Why do we not attach this to the true teachings of the Christ, which pre-date Jesus by thousands of years. And in fact Jesus predates Christianity by hundreds of years. The true teachings being that We, our Souls, are all fractals of God, and as such We Are God seeing creation through a 3rd Dimensional lense. 4. Why use higher intelligence to show a beautiful truth in intelligent design, then use the lowest form of intelligence to attach this to a them vs us argument? 5. Why assume that we should be either Cristian or Atheist? Why should we be any label. Faith does not mean religion, yet the enlightened individual know there are truths in most teachings, especially those that have stood the test of time….one’s that many Christian/religious groups and mainstream atheism have label as evil or mocked because they dare to suggest a move away from the hierarchical duality of these non-intelligent, limited world views that either say we are nothing special, or waiting to be saved. Truly intelligent learning has no attachment. Only the search for truth.
One day All People will understand the truth, because they will no longer sit in judgment or be attached to a limited paradigm such as Christianity, Atheism, or any ‘ity’/‘ism’. ❤️
The very first wonder I could remember is about astronomy. This was before I was put in school or taught any religion. Everything we see are all so beautiful. And then there's music....
Go to TH-cam and see the title, God's Creative Design on the piano.
Yes! I am amazed by polyphonic overtones in one note. I did not know I until experimented with my voice that I could make several sounds simultaneously because a tone is not simply one sound. Even that fascinates me!
@@rebeccaw68 The piano note is 'One' tone. The string instrument like violin is more levels of sound. The voice is the ultimate levels of sound more capable then any instrument producing a tone. That is why I love to add the string instrument sound with the piano sound on a digital keyboard, and then if you sing with that combination, that is the ultimate... combining all.
@@dr.bonniewoodruff1906 So, so beautiful.
and then there’s the Beatles