The Mormon Naturalist

[Cross posted at BCC.]

No this isn’t a post about Steve Peck, much as I think that would be fun. Instead, its in the vein I’ve been sort of mining lately. I hesitate to use the tired “Mormonism and Science” title, but what the heck. Why not?

Advertisements

Cosmology – The Big Bang – And God

Recently, Stephen Hawking announced that there is no need for God, in terms of winding up the universe. The Big Bang [1] is a demonstrable result of M-theory. I won’t bore you about M-theory, except to say that It’s not complete and it’s not a sure bet yet. But even if it or one of its competitors turns out to match the data, be complete and self-consistent then great: such a thing might even have everyday consequences.

Classical Scattering and The Convergence of Science and Religion?

In the mid 1960s the theory of classical wave motion took a leap ahead with an incredibly simple idea. A formalism allowing a single family of equations to describe seemingly diverse phenomena like wave motion in plasmas and other conducting fluids, the propagation of light (electromagnetic waves) and sound in complex media, seismic waves, electric waves on transmission lines, even the movement of fish larvae in ocean currents.

Adam, Eve and the Garden of Eden-This Week.

Alrighty then! In my last blurb on how a priesthood lesson went from the “Gospel Principles” manual, I mentioned the rather free-wheeling bashing of science (and scientists) that occurred. This week, it was all about Eve, er, Eden. Right off the bat, I found it a bit startling to see how much the speculations of the 19th century have been preserved in the lore of creation in Mormonism. At least in my little corner of Mormonism.

Correlation: FAIL

So, on a recent Sunday morning in our high priest group we took up the lesson on “creation” from the “Gospel Principles” manual published by the LDS Church.

Our group is an eclectic bunch in terms of training. Ex-car salesmen, olympic coaches, astronomers, mathematicians, physicians, dentists, farmers, classicists, historians, inventory specialists, elevator technicians, programmers, business executives, mailmen, music teachers, linguists and that’s only the ones I can think of right now. (I used the plural, but actually in a number of cases, there’s only one example.)

Is Reality Consistent with First Order Predicate Calculus?

The whole of science is based on answering yes to that question. But what about religion? At least from Augustine to Aquinas, people hoped the answer was yes. Of course, they wouldn’t have used the same terminology.