The Mandelbrot Set: Atheists’ WORST Nightmare
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 гру 2022
- In this powerful lecture, Dr. Jason Lisle reveals a secret code seen throughout creation: the Mandelbrot set. Why is the Mandelbrot set atheists’ worst nightmare? Because it reveals the infinite, intelligent mind of God in ways that you’ve probably never seen before.
You can watch the original full-length talk here:
• Atheists CANNOT Explai...
Please help us continue to share the gospel around the world:
AnswersinGenesis.org/give
Now I believe in Math, thank you.
I'm no longer an amatheist.
@@jameswest8280 I’m a mathesist
Anything to escape God huh? Not gonna happen.
@@oreally8605 man shapes dont prove god
@@oreally8605 provide evidence there is anything to escape from.
As an Atheist, I am fascinated by the Mandelbrot! Not even close to a nightmare!
Same with me
Ikr it's so cool
ironic coming from a minecraft pfp
@@marquiseco.”IrOniC cOmiNg FrOm A hOrSe RiDeR pFp”
See how that doesn’t make sense?
hmmm... i mean... hmmm... I'm not going to talk- @@dryfox11
I'm an atheist. I have no idea why this was recommended to me, but it was a very good, entertaining, educational and non-condescending presentation on a series of complex topics. At least until the way it got to religion - you're right that atheist mathematicians/scientists don't understand everything, but to most of us that's the joy of science. To be on the very edge of understanding and not understanding.
Religious differences nevertheless, great presentation, thank you.
But that edge never is crossed nor can be.
Only eternity will allow us to understand infinity.
Hence the tragedy of science - it can NEVER reach its intended goal of understanding the universe.
And always falls short...infinitely short...Limited success is ultimate failure.
Only faith can answer the question that science forever seeks.
When science is looking for how it works, faith points to WHO makes it work.
For work it perfectly does, but fully understanding we don't.
Friend - find peace in Jesus, Him who is the image of the True God.
Science cannot give you that peace, faith in Jesus will.
The tragedy of religion is that it never tries to understand *anything*, it satisfies itself with medieval stories which "explained" things to people who thought iron tools were the last word in sophistication. "How does the work?" "God did it." only satisfies the feeble-minded.
It's not a tragedy of science, it's a strength. Faith is important on a personal level, but science excludes the unprovable. Some things are unprovable, and that's just the way it is. You could say, like this speaker, that God created math. You can say that, but I won't believe you because there's no proof in that claim - only faith. If I don't share that faith, then I can't accept that to be true. Turn to faith for comfort. Turn to science for truth. You can have both, just don't mix the two!
I thought the same. Very good presentation but the conclusion did not inevitably follow the evidence. For me, the reason that we get the same fractal patterns in nature and mathematics is because, in both cases, we are applying a simple rule repeatedly.
Some homosexuality is caused by child abuse. Why does the Bible want to kill them all?
As soon as you plot a graph you have brought the conceptual into the physical. An incremental formula using negative values to infinity creating a pattern that is infinitely smaller and infinitely beautiful is no nightmare.
Thank you for confirming to me there is beauty in everything.
In the case of the mandelbrot set. The answer to "What causes the complexity?" is "The work done iterating the formula". It's not a nightmare. It shows us that the beauty and complexity we see in the word around us can arise from a few simple rules.
Rules and laws need to set in motion by a force. Humans did not invent the shape of the Mandelbrot set. What are the actual chances something like this is random chance? Paired with all the other complexities in life? You reach a mathematical number of impossibility when you start adding them all up to chance. Of course an athiest will never give you an inch though so im wasting my time.
I agree. These religious types tend to overlook the simple, but still extraordinary, explanations for things.
@@scottdemarest9315 It's funny and sad at the same time anytime someone thinks that they can disprove God by claiming that "simple laws" are all the explanation we need for the complexity and order of the universe...
Where did these "simple laws" and every other perfect law that perfectly maintains order in the universe come from? Why did utter chaos not take over? Did a random big bang create this many perfect laws and this much order? How is the claim that a random big bang creating this many perfect laws and this much order not a supernatural claim that is based on faith?
There is nothing simple about the laws and the order that governs our universe... To state that the laws and the order that governs our universe are simple is intelectual dishonesty.
Just because you can explain something through science/math or various laws, it doesn't mean that God did not create them. That's the whole point of the video... the fact that something has a "simple" explanation that can be understood through science/math, it doesn't mean that God did not make it be so. Why do these numbers work exactly the way they do in such perfect order? They did not have to be so orderly and systematic, but they are. Why does math make sense and function so perfectly instead of it being complete and utter chaos?
I'm not necessarily making the point that the order in our universe proves God, but that would be a pretty good argument. I’m merely pointing out the fact that being able to explain our universe through science/math doesn't mean that God did not create it...
How does it make sense to say that the big bang made all of this order, but that God didn't?
@@Vladi.G great points! I see a mic drop. 🙂🙏
@@Vladi.G no one thinks it’s disproves God. People think it doesn’t prove God
I was an atheist and now I'm a mathematician after this video
no.... u r a god's servant!
@@zaplershorts7783 I am only my own God
That was an interesting reply, with multiple layers to it.
@@zaplershorts7783 Evangelising on Social Media is ineffective... Im not even sure these platforms and others like it are even close to be Godly.
You have to subscribe to a certain mind set just to even be on UA-cam.
Reading the bible you're in God's word, logging on to social media and coming to the comments you're exposing yourself to lowest form of spirituality possible.
Its like trying to climb the tower of Babel to deliver a sermon and preaching to worldly people consumed with themselves.
@@ethan_max1792 this is foolish. By definition we literally could never be God. All these rappers and famous people claiming they are their own God are just narcissistic. And there is nothing cute or special about it. We are nothing bro. We aren't even a drop In the bucket. Our entire galaxy isn't even a drop in the bucket. Our galaxy would be like a single grain of sand amongst all the sand on earth. And our planet would be like a single grain of sand amongst our galaxy. And we are like a single grain of sand on the beach amongst all the other teeny tiny grains of sand. Don't be foolish be humble. God is watching.
im an atheist with a degree in mathematics and i often find that this argument is self-detrimental as it provides an example of astonishing complexity that arises from an extremely simple basis. If you have an understanding of the mathematics behind the mandelbrot set I would like to know which step along the way is the one in which god steps in
Day ONE, The FiRSt DAY
Great point: incredible complexity can come from simplicity. Everyone is free to choose whether that came from a creator or not, but there isn't any logical requirement to pick one or the other. I prefer the simpler case.
At the beginning 😉
no. the first "choice" is logically invalid. @@JeffLearman
@@yonaoisme I'm not sure it's invalid, but it would get cut by Occam's razor, which is why I'm not a believer.
The fact that we can construct formulae that create interesting and infinite patterns when plotted on a graph does not prove or disprove the existence of a god. If you're convinced it proves there's a god, which god would that be? You not only conclude that math proves there's a god, but it somehow proves that it's the christian version of god. What do you think you would have concluded if you had been born and raised in a country that was predominantly islamic, or hindu, or any other religion? Is there room in your mind for a universal god for everyone, or just _your_ particular notion of god?
Well said😊
“Mathematical concepts were not created, they were discovered.”
this was in the context of humans discovering math, not creating it. He wasn' referring to God
@@filetmignon9978, yes, I understood that too. Thanks for pointing it out though. Good day.
@@lynnharrell9598 👍
Fractals do not need any creator
Yes, that's why we use Arabic numbers and not Roman numbers. Oh wait!
No, numbers are human inventions. And mathematics describes the properties of those numbers.
As a Christian, I don't think this is "scary" to atheists, or somehow conclusively proves the existence of God. It is some really cool math though, and I personally believe it adds to the glory of God, but I don't see how an atheist couldn't just be like "yeah. that's math."
Nice, funny, cool sermon!
no buddy, atheists don't need fractals to be afraid, their sole naked factory-consciousness should do the job
I believe you're straight-up wrong. Evidence for God is literally all around us. It's our Ego and usually lack of a willingness to truly think for ourselves that keeps us blind to it. If you contemplate the complexity of a single cell, and all which composes your body, and all the subconscious processes and interactions which need to occur to keep your body living. If you've contemplated it appropriately, without bias, you must conclude God. I remember being under the age of 8 a determining that evolution, more specifically what they would term now macro evolution, was a lie. In an objective and logical way; mathematically the requirements for a new trait, which could also be considered "good" to come about, and then also become the dominant one that is passed down, even though it's rare, makes macro evolution something which simply would never occur. And literally an intelligent 6 year old can figure it out on their own. Now there's plenty of evidence on the net that macro evolutionist have been clawing at anything for decades, to try to conform it to their beliefs. So info is readily available but most people still believe in macro evolution. Even lots who would call themselves "Christian". A protein, DNA, RNA, all the parts of a cell and how it functions, none of it is "random" or "chance" or "Nature"; the only nature it is, is God's Nature.
@@F2332unn32i.e. your standard of proof is insanely low. You shouldn’t ever walk into a courtroom if that’s all it takes for you to reach a conclusion.
P.S. macro evolution is an outdated term. Strangely enough, the only people that use it are ones that don’t believe in evolution (which is the scientific equivalent of not believing in gravity or particles).
Evolution is proven all over the place. AI programmers proved it. The fact that new strands of virus and pathogens were created, not despite, but because of the existence of medicine proves it.@@F2332unn32
@@F2332unn32" It's our Ego and usually lack of a willingness to truly think for ourselves that keeps us blind to it. If you contemplate the complexity of a single cell, and all which composes your body, and all the subconscious processes and interactions which need to occur to keep your body living. If you've contemplated it appropriately, without bias, you must conclude God"
Retarded
I thought bananas were our worst nightmare.
Great lecture on Mandelbrot set until the sudden 13:50 jump to "god's understanding is infinite". In other words "the Mandelbrot set is amazing - therefore biblical god loves you."
My man, in that case, there is a whole bag of lectures in between completely missing. Lots of work ahead 🙂
Quantum Leap, Maybe if we say The Universe Loves itself, therefor it love is ❤
Notice there was no Bible quote for "God thinks mathematically". And no explanation why miracles exist if there are "invariant, exceptionless" laws? (34:40)
This kind of god is not a christian god indeed. It is just something look-scientific.
@@Mabelstarot What?
@@user-ct6sy5ky8p That is not the vibe I got from the video.
It was found that there is a pinch in the Mandelbrot set. That pinch, when the set is applied to the motion of the physical body, causes a flaw in the gait of one revolution of the motions required to complete one whole human step. Therefore, that pinch would physically look like a palsy. God showed me this. He said that every person has their own rhythm. If the rhythm has an interruption, like a pinch, it shows. I asked him, " Then what can be done?" He showed me a line in the air about four feet above the ground. It appeared to me but also seemed invisible. He lifted his finger through this line and broke the interruption, reseting the appropriate rhythm for the motion to be completed smoothly. So, there is an answer for those with palsy. The rhythm formula for their body needs to be reset. With God all things are possible. So we ask, we pray that God lifts his finger and changes the person's mathematical rhythms so they line up with the fullness required to complete a step without a flaw. People are created by God for fellowship with him and are meant to work with God in all of creation. Can you imagine being alone in the universe? If you were God, you would make children you could enjoy who would partnership with you and love you and think you are the most awesome Father ever. You might think this crazy, but you will not know for sure until you seek God for answers.
As an atheist I have always liked mandelbrot set since I first learned about it. It still hasn't given me any nightmares...
Satan has deceived you. In this life you are either a child of God, or a child of satan. Ps. Hell is a lake of fire, NOT a party place. Choose wisely!!
Dito😎
No nightmares, but where is God in that? I don´t see any god at all.
Your an atheist so your not to bright to start with
its a representation of how perfect God’s mind and how infinite it is… not a matter of how you can see Him
The truth is always more crazy than the craziest predictions. Math looks boring because of school, but it's implications are absolutely mind-boggling.
So true… I’m terrible at maths. Yet when I see people do equations and all the rest of that Mathy stuff .. it’s quite astounding!
I’m not be able to do it yet I can understand how amazing and truly brilliant it is.
When your hour of trying comes, cry out to Jesus and he will save you because He loves you so much.
if he loves me so much wouldnt he save me even if i dont cry to him?@@sk-un5jq
@@sk-un5jq
Srsly
One question?
What the fk did u gain by this comment😂
Plss enlighten me O Great Sage
What did you gain from yours? An internal emotional response to your own actions and perceptions, the mild satisfaction of various social drives, and the feeling that you may have altered another person's cognition in ways you desired? If those things are true for you, then they're probably also true for them: you both found significant yet subtle benefits through what from certain perspectives looks like nothing but meaningless chatter. Further, given that this comment is on a Christian video, it is appropriate to both the topic at hand and its intended audience, meaning that such comments are likely not only expected here, but encouraged. So the comment in question also passes a test for socially appropriate or even friendly and polite behavior given its context, even if elsewhere it would be out of place.
That's my possibly subjective opinion anyway. I know a lot of people frown at any hint of religious proselytization whatsoever, so maybe I'm considered objectively wrong in whichever specific group you feel you may belong to, if any. I do think I'm wrong for trying to answer a rhetorical question that doesn't really concern me, but it's not a bad way to pass a few minutes and I personally think that entertainment requires no excuses if it does little to no harm. @@namangaur1551
I remember when this formula came out. Later, in the early days of PCs, I remember software that would calculate these plots for Mandelbrot sets and for Julia sets. It took longer, and the images were pixelated compared to the images in this video because of the quality of graphic cards of the time.
There's some incredible beauty in math for sure, but while I cannot rule out a "designer" of the mandelbrot set, all of math is connected. You cannot invent only the mandelbrot set without also inventing the notion of complex numbers, squaring, and adding. To paint the beauty of the mandelbrot set is to also paint all the dull or chaotic parts of math with seemingly no pattern. Really, there's just patterns everywhere and it's up to you decide which to enjoy. It's not beautiful because God created it for us, it is beautiful because we ignored all the patterns that weren't.
The Mandelbrot is the greatest fractal formula ever written. Every time I use a Mandelbrot formula for my fractal art, I'm never let down.
@@DlnCDMP3 Simve give not received a reply, I'll suggest that it may possibly be similar to 10:10 in the video?
If you have ears, hear...
Religion is fake....Yeshua is the 10 commandments, whom is the Jew's eternal King or God: and whom became flesh to make himself an example for the Jews as he had promised them;
So Obey the 10 commandments and Apply love to your lifestyle; exit religion, for the very first laws is to have no other gods before him, and it is written that no man can serve two masters;
Sell your unnecessary possessions and help the fatherless, the widows, the poor, etc.
*Again*
Love yourself and your fellow brothers and sisters; if you have an extra t-shirt, give it to him that have none; likewise if you have 2 pair of shoes, give one pair to him that have none...*and no vaccine*
...again, If you have ears, hear....
Fractal art sounds intriguing
Computers. Clever aren’t they? And most people in the Midwest of the USA think that they’re full of little people doing sums and drawing pictures
@@nialllambert3194 is that what they think? I lived in the Midwest for awhile and I can assure you most people don't think that. 😂
I have to admit, if you ignore the fallacious reasoning and logical leaps for the last 10 minutes or so, this man did an amazing job explaining sets, complex numbers, fractals, and the Mandelbrot Set. Good job!
What fallacious reasoning and logical leaps?
@ThePubliusValerius
1. At around 25:20, he says that "beauty is built into math". It's quite hard to define beauty, since it is something so subjective. I find the fractals beautiful, but one could just as easily find them drab and uninteresting - you can't continue the argument from there.
2. At 26:30, when defining numbers, though I could accept the definition that a number is a "concept of quantity", his analogy of "destroying the number 3 and thus making students count 1,2,4" doesn't make much sense. I have the ability to kill a chicken in front of you, but I didn't eradicate chickens, I only "destroyed" one. So despite accepting his definition, the argument for it doesn't hold much water.
3. At 27:40 he talks about the origin of math. Specifically if math "evolved". I'm not making the claim that math evolved, but his question "did 7 used to be 3 and then it evolved?" Misunderstands the concept of evolution at a fundamental level. I don't think anybody makes the argument that math evolved, but if they did, his breakdown of it makes no sense at all.
4. At 28:05 he asks if the laws of math were created by people. This is actually a deep philosophical question that many people disagree on. He even comments on the fact that some people make that assertion. Again, his explanation as to why the argument that math is man-made is faulty. It is possible to create systems that operate on different logical axioms, though there could be a couple explanations as to why it's difficult to imagine one (be it someone going their entire life using the current system or even the human mind evolving over tens of thousands of years to accept this system as natural). Either way, telling an architect that 2+2=5 or trying it at your bank obviously won't work, because you're still using the current logical system. So giving that explanation and coming to the conclusion that math can't be man-made is faulty.
5. At 33:50 he asks why the universe obeys mathematical laws. If math were man-made, an answer can easily follow: man created math in order to explain the universe. Therefore, the language of math is used to contextualize the universe. It obeys mathematical laws because we formed mathematical laws around the universe.
If math isn't man-made, one could argue that the universe and math complement each other and are linked in their existence.
6. At 34:50 he said "you come up with something in your mind, does the universe just obey it?" But that's a misunderstanding of causation. A man sees flowers tens of thousands of times in his lifetime and comes to the conclusion that all flowers have petals. The universe doesn't obey his claim, rather his claim was shaped around the universe.
7. At 36:30 he says that there is no sufficient answer an evolutionist can give regarding math's ability to explain the universe. First of all, he's equating somebody who believes in evolution with atheism, though they aren't equivalent. An atheist can disbelieve in evolution and a theist can believe in evolution.
However, my main point here is that even if atheism can't explain why math works so well, it's not reasonable to conclude that God exists (that's the God of the Gaps fallacy).
In ancient Greece, just because you didn't know why the sun rose each morning doesn't allow you to conclude Apollo rides a chariot of fire across the sky each day and brings with him the sun. When you don't understand how lightning works, you can't conclude Zeus is fighting with his signature weapon.
Likewise, just because you don't understand how math can explain the universe doesn't mean that God created it.
8. At 36:50, he claims that numbers existed before people, but since they're solely conceptual, a mind had to exist before people. But how did he arrive at the conclusion that numbers existed before people? Sure, 4 apples can fall from a tree before people existed, but the number 4 didn't exist, only the apples. The "fourness", as he would call it, is a concept that we attribute.
9. At 37:30 he claims that the world contains fractals. So...? I can create a circular function x²+y²=1. Once graphed, you'll get a circle. Nature has circles, therefore God exists? I don't understand that conclusion.
Overall, again, I really liked this video. Most of it's really good. Just the last ten or so minutes are misguided.
@@deanyona6246 If your 'argument' pertains to 'a proof,' you're correct. However, a discussion from his premise will quickly show your "one could just as easily find them drab and uninteresting" to be well below 1% of respondents. So, your dismissive statement would dismiss itself as "drab and uninteresting."
How charming to throw conceptual 'mud' and then simply walk away as if you answered him in-kind. In other words, you liked his presentation but dismiss the implications.
@moongoonrex I commented on the beauty of mathematics because it is a subjective topic. Some people can find something beautiful while others find it ugly. It's a matter of perspective. I do concede my first point isn't a major gripe I had with the video (the only reason why it's number 1 on my list is because my list is organized temporally).
Regarding your conceptual mud claim, I see nothing wrong with giving criticism. I didn't just say I hated something and walked away, I started by stating my appreciation towards the video, while giving what I believe is honest and valid criticism. Somebody asked me what I meant and I rewatched the video, going into detail about what my problems were. It took me over half an hour to write. Somebody who wanted to throw conceptual mud and walk away would not respond like that.
finally, it's not that I liked the presentation but dismiss the implications, I liked the presentation, but find his conclusions unbased. I don't think the implications are such as he stated.
The universe does not inherently obey mathematical laws; rather, the physical world has an intrinsic behavior that we have learned to describe using the language of mathematics. Referring to these descriptions as 'laws' is a misnomer, as the universe is not governed by our mathematical constructs. Instead, we stumbled upon numerical patterns and scenarios that closely resemble and model the behavior we observe in the universe as we explored and played with numbers over time.
THANK YOU!
Math “LAWS” are descriptive, not prescriptive.
This is a nightmare in that we get to observe individuals wholeheartedly discount high, yet rational, complexity, to the whim of a deity simply because the human mind finds it difficult to comprehend. The nightmare is knowing that people are inflicting this abject deism on other people throughout societies, guiding policy and lawmaking, and subjugating people to their own narrow band of "belief."
Exactly. It is "the god of the gaps," yet again! Whatever we cannot fully understand is taken as "proof" of the existence of "god" (whatever THAT means).
If a fractal is an atheists' worst nightmare then we truly have nothing to worry about.
No, the atheist worse nightmare is living a life without meaning and purpose. Which inevitable ends up being the case for every atheist. It happened to me, it’s not pretty.
Mandelbrot set should open your mind up about the universe following coherent, logical structures that couldn’t otherwise be possible without the existence of intelligence, a being that made it so on purpose. The chances of such well organized and beautiful phenomenon happening just because of “magic” is not convincing enough, it makes no sense.
Is it plausible to believe that the universe we live in happened out of nowhere?, it just randomly decided to exist and in such a well organized, logical manner. No right?
I mean this seriously, but this is a skill issue.
You absolutely can find meaning and purpose without a mysterious invisible entity creating everything. Unfortunately, it requires a bit more effort than saying "god done did everything" and pretending that gives your life meaning.
Moving on, the universe following a coherent, logical structure is not even remotely proof of an intelligence. This is another weakness of religious people, they assume that any complex structure they can't comprehend MUST have an intelligence behind it.
@@shadowjuan2 It is entirely plausible that we live in a universe governed by chance, from beginning to end. It is not the most convenient concept for us humans to comprehend, but it is perfectly possible.
@@olivercharles2930 Mon anglais n'est pas suffisamment élaboré pour vous répondre dans votre langue. Je ne suis même pas mathématicien et j'avoue que dans ma jeunesse les maths m'ennuyaient profondément... Néanmoins le modeste esprit littéraire qui est le mien, a pressenti il y a de cela plusieurs années, que l'origine de notre univers repose sur des concepts mathématiques... C'est ce qui est dit dans cette vidéo, si le niveau de compréhension de mon anglais ne l'a pas trahie... Pour le reste, je pense qu'il est vain d'entamer des discussions sur l'existence on non d'un dieu créateur. Cela n'aboutit à rien, si ce n'est à des querelles d'égo pour savoir qui a raison... Je trouve bien sûr ridicule et caricaturale l'idée d'un dieu à barbe grise, mais non moins idiote l'hypothèse émise par un physicien athée, d'une onde d'énergie surgit soudain du vide ( néant). Je suis agnostique et je suis sensible à la beauté que je vois autour de moi, dans la nature et dans les plus belles créations humaines.., l'homme qui dans ces moments là, agit comme un petit dieu... Salutations de France.
....Except for the irrational anger towards a kind God
Lisle explains the Mandelbrot set very eloquently and without requiring the audience to know much math at all. As an allegory for the mind of God, I think the Mandelbrot set serves perfectly. It is infinitely complex in the literal sense that it would require infinite resources to render in its entirety and it represents a certain blend of repetition and unpredictability that makes it particularly beautiful.
Really, though, it does not serve as an argument for God. There are so many fractals like this and it's pretty easy to come up with new ones on your own, and there are other systems such as the Lorentz Butterfly that are similar in their beauty. The Mandelbulb is another good example, a 3D generalization of the Mandelbrot that was invented in a fractal rendering forum. These things are all beautiful for the reasons mentioned above, but they are even more beautiful because their complexity emerges from such simple rules. That doesn't show God at all, it only demonstrates the property of emergence. It also makes sense that a mathematical equation would give rise to mathematical properties (the cardioid, circles, counting, etc.) It also isn't a "code" by any reasonable definition, I really don't understand how that word is meant to be interpreted here. The Mandelbrot conveys no knowledge that isn't required to make the thing, and doesn't encode any wisdom beyond counting, adding, and so on. It is a fascinating thing to study the properties of, but that's about it.
To the contrary, I find its demonstration of emergence to be an excellent counter to the mind-body dualism which Christians often presuppose (and then go on to argue that their god offers the best explanation for). With the Mandelbrot, we see that complex properties sometimes emerge naturally from a simple system. Our consciousnesses, then, may also have emerged rather than requiring some external soul or agent to explain. It isn't a proof of physicalism, but it's a good way to explain emergence as a hypothesis for how our minds came into existence.
If you want to use the Mandelbrot as a metaphor for the mind of God, then do that. I completely understand, it's a beautiful metaphor. Please don't call it an "atheist's nightmare", though. It makes no sense.
Some Titles get more clicks (Atheists will cover their heads in ash and be all crying when they see this)
than other Titles (Learn about a beautiful math formula)
Some Titles get more clicks (Christians like you are smart, and Atheists are not)
than other Titles (Everyone will get along better after watching this video)
Some Titles get more clicks (You are smart, everyone else isn't, and they will pay!)
than other Titles (Let's all get along)
I gather info from this meta data, as to WHY people click on these videos. It's almost like they still need approval from Dad and Mom, and this video gives them that? Maybe I'm wrong? Cheers!
Not a religious person at all and always found science and math could explain things... that being said I do find it odd that tesla said everything is energy, frequency and vibration which basically describes sound... and the Bible says In the beginning, God brought creation into existence by the power of His spoken Word.
Not just by his word. They added spoken to that sentence. Idk I'm finding all sorts of things from long ago that seem to vaguely answer questions science has just recently proven. It's making me feel like we had these answers all along and something happened making us either forget or destroyed our records and only hidden answers survived but they're so vague...
@@BallsMcGee88 Ideas pertaining to vibration, energy, frequency, and so on have emerged throughout the world in many different ways. Scientifically, the concept pertains to the fact that everything is in motion. A hermeticist, for example, would probably relate the concepts to the vibrating motions of all atoms as well as to the orbit of the Earth and even the fluctuations of our unpredictable emotions.
Not trying to devalue your thoughts, but I feel I should point out that the connection you draw is rather tenuous. Modern Christian apologetics tends to eschew the concept by saying that the Bible is not a science textbook, which is a great choice to make it in my opinion. The Bible also talks of all humanity descending from a single pair of people, of a flood covering all the Earth, of all languages diverging from the tower of Babel, and of an Exodus from Egypt and a war on Ca'naan that historically have no evidence. This is accepted fact among not only the scientific community but most Christian Bible scholars as well. AiG is an outlier. Stories like these can of course be read as metaphor, but we only now have the ability to discern what is true and what is not true in the Bible by comparing it to our observations. In the past, there was no way to discern the literal from the metaphorical. In a sense we always did have answers, but many of them were not the correct answers.
Yes, the bible provides some answers where science may never be able to do so. That does not mean that the Bible's answers are accurate. Even if it is right about a personal god that made the universe, how can we assume it's right about what God wants? His personality? The afterlife? It certainly is not the only book that claims to be the word of such a god.
I also can't help but wonder where, exactly, you are getting these answers from. It's not for me to know, but the best source is the Bible itself. If you are learning through AiG, I implore you to open a Bible. The Oxford study Bible is my go-to. The Bible is very much subject to interpretation (hence the countless Protestant denominations), and I would recommend you allow yourself to form your own.
@ekobadd1966 idk what AiG is, but I've been looking up stuff via Google and kinda started with the flower of life and kept rolling. Interesting it resembles so many different things. Like holographic light interference and the seed of life is in it, which looks like an embryo. The yin-yang also resembles a toroid, which is found all over, like in magnetic fields, tornados, plasma fields, etc. that's also in the flower of life. Lots of things just seem weird about people that long ago could know without the tech.
@@BallsMcGee88 AiG = Answers in Genesis, the channel we're currently on. That's why I thought you might be watching them. Can you tell me what you mean by holographic light interference?
This is a grate maths lesson if nothing else, and if only it was done this way when I was at college, reminds me to brush up on my calculus!!
It's not scary, it's beauty and wonder
Exactly!
The incomprehensibility is the horror aspect of it, but no need to fear god’s knowledge bc there’s no reason to picture yourself with that knowledge, or picture the knowledge itself
@@wyattcole5452 Jesus Christ! Help! Philosopher. Even fideist-idealist... what could be worse?
@@michalpetrilak3976 what makes you think I relate to Fideism whatsoever?
@@wyattcole5452 Because you are talking about God's knowledge. I would not at all drag into the discussion such indefinite (fuzzy) terms as God. Everyone imagines something different under it and it's just a mess. After all, we wise ones know that there is an Absolute without attributes, outside of space-time, which never came into being or will never disappear. It is Presence and Nothingness beyond all description of words or logic. . It is not graspable by science.
"If I can't explain it, God did it"
"if i cant explain it, must be a random accident"
More accurately, “if an explanation does not appear to exist in the natural world, it necessarily must be explained supernaturally”
Yes
Oh, many people said in God’s name, the earth is square and the Sun cycles it until some day, someone smart questioned the notions and did measurements and objective observations and calculations. Also, we cannot find the cold truth by finding evidences on what they tend to believe. In fact, to know who created the universe does not matter. Exploring how to be a fair human being is much more practical and productive than that. Wish it makes some sense. Self-similarity is one of the natural phenomena to form a stable and sustainable physical and biological system; however, it does not mean it is created by any God. Also, no one can judge what God thinks and likes, which is pretty arrogant. Doctor, right?
That's basically it, just said in a much more elaborate way
I had to laugh at the title of this. My maths tutor daughter, a confirmed atheist, is especially keen on the Mandelbrot set.
This is a comedic masterpiece, I laughed all the way through!
Ignoring the jumps to religion, this is genuinely a _great_ lecture on the Mandelbrot set and the beauty of mathematics.
Why would I ignore the idiotic "jumps to religion"? That's what this BS lecture is about. And why does every comment on youtube give a great review no matter how silly the video is?
@@brucewalker6141 Is it wrong what he is saying?
His religious interpretation may be disputable, but I think his math isn't...
religion is a blessing and a curse
@Choas_Lord_512 And so are religious people from time to time, attheists aren't wrong mentioning crusades, witch burnings, homophobia, etc...
The God of Math. Math didn't design itself and it's stupid to think it was always there.
1st off Maths causes the world to operate the way it does but it's conceptual meaning that it only exists in the mind and if maths was in existence before human beings that means There was a mind before human beings. And infinate mind.
God.
There's really nothing nightmarish about the Mandelbrot set but it's sheer beauty as we stare into infinity.
Jesus spoke everything into existence in 6 days, then rested the 7th. We are to rest on the 7th day too.
@@statutesofthelord , the children of Israel under the Sinaitic Covenant were required to rest on the 7th day. Such a command is not included in the New Covenant under which today's Christ-followers live. If you find that hard to believe, read Colossians 2:16 and the surrounding context. And notice that Sabbath observance was NOT imposed on Gentile Christians at the Jerusalem meeting of the Apostles in Acts 15.
@@statutesofthelord "Sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath." "If a man lost a sheep in the ditch on the sabbath, would he not pull it out?" From New Testament quotes like these, I believe God finds it important to rest on the sabbath, but does not require it of us.
@@lancepeterson7997 Lance, Jesus made those statements to show the true meaning of the Sabbath - to do good and save life.
Nothing of what Jesus did or said in any way lessens the true requirements of the Sabbath. "You shall not do any work".
@@VelvetRockStudios nice
12:35 "It knows how to count".
No, it does not. It is literally like saying "the three stones lying on the ground next to each other know how to count to three".
I know he might be using this figuratively, but this is exactly how it gets wrongly assigned to some "higher being" that can count to infinity = is infinite itself = listens to my prayers = etc etc.
Yeah but then what about the branch in the middle equalling the sum of the 2 branches on each side ?
@@maddogtannen6984 ...therefore god?
@@maddogtannen6984 How does this imply god? Every triangle's sum of angles is 180 degrees, so that must mean triangles know addition, and therefore god exists? Just because something looks more daunting and complex (like a Mandelbrot set) doesn't mean it can't show emerging patterns and rules the same way triangle's angles add up to 180.
Firstly, 1:23 a set is NOT a group (of numbers)! A group is a set together with a binary function/operator (*) which together satisfy the following properties:
1. For all elements x, y, z in the set: (x*y)*z = x*(y*z)
2. There exists an element e in the set such that for any element for: x * e = x, we call that the identity element (also often 0 or 1 depending on your operator)
3. Each element x has an inverse x^-1: x * x^-1 = e
4. The set is closed over *, which means that for every x, y, in the set there exists a z also in that set such that x * y = z
Secondly, 1:42, ALL sets have to be well defined. Maybe youc ant compute that for specific numbers, but still an elemnent is ALWAYS included or excluded in a distinct way. If you cant tell by "looking", well thats a skill issue i guess, doesnt make that set more or less special. Maths isnt concerned by what you can do in your head vs what you need a calculator for
Thirdly, imaginary numbers were INVENTED simply because the "god given numbers" didnt work in that case. if the square root if -1 is given by god, then so are vacuum cleaners and atomic bombs. For me that shows that the mandelbrot is an example for there being no corelation between maths and an omnipotent being
Fourth, 11:49 "the mandelbrot set knows how to count" this is just a plot of the set. a visual interpretation. the set, and certainly not its plot, are not sentient and dont "know" anything. guess ill worship the mandelbrot set now cause it is sentient and smart. Now, why does it "know" how to count? Because its made up of numbers! If you construct something from numbers, its gonna have numeric properties, easy as that.
Fifth, 22:47 why is the fractal god made and the color scheme manmade? why didnt god think of that color scheme when he thought of that set? Why did we not pick that formula the same way we picked those colors, why is one from god and the other isnt?
23:26 regardless of whether the computer plotted this or us by hand - we plotted it, not god. we wrote the code, we built the computers, we did the calculations
25:00 what causes the complexity? its chaos theory. small nudges to input give great differences in output
"Augustine was right when he said that we love the truth when it enlightens us, but we hate it when it convicts us." - Norman L. Geisler
There is no truth in atheism. Atheism is simply a disbelief it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God as true and no quality of evidence can convince someone of something they don't have the willingness or ability to accept as true
'''We love the truth when it enlightens us, but we hate it when it convicts us.' - Saint Augustine" - Norman L. Geisler
29:33 SNOWFLAKES ... "Snowflakes have a fractal quality to them; they have that six-fold symmetry."
But if you can be bothered to LOOK AT THE PICTURE...... you see a snowflake with .... *EIGHT* fold symmetry. Yes, it has EIGHT arms. If you don't believe me, _COUNT THEM_ !!!
That's not *SIX* - fold symmetry; that's *EIGHT* - fold symmetry. Can you count? *CLEARLY NOT* !!!
@@simonmultiverse6349 can you tell the difference between real photo and CGI? Clearly not.
@@SilverKnobsHMDT The video says it was a SNOWFLAKE. The video says it has SIX-FOLD SYMMETRY. The picture says not.
How can someone deliberately create a picture of something with *8-fold symmetry* and then say it has *SIX* sides?????????????
he literally demonstarted how a random simplest formula given enough time can give rise to infinitley complex structures i think he destroyed his own asssumtion that complexity must come from a complex designer and this is a video every atheist must watch
@zainroshaan's comment is so key; esp. its phrase, "A simplest formula, given enough time, can give rise to infinitely-complex structures" \ -- in infinitely- _elegant_ complexity, as well \ (This naturally happens in so many aspects thru this beginningless endless limitless universe; esp., it happens as living patterns \ ) \\
mathematical identities follow by logical necessity. 1+1 equals 2 in virtue of the identity of the terms. what is equals (=)? an operator which takes two or more parameters and yields a truth indicating if its arguments represent the same entity. what is addition (+) (and multiplication (×))? binary operations on a set which satisfy at least some of following axioms:
1. there is a 0 such that for all x, x+0=x. (addition identity)
2. for all x and y, x+y=y+x. (addition commutativity)
3. for all x, y and z, x+(y+z)=(x+y)+z. (addition associativity)
4. for all x, there exists a (-x) such that x+(-x)=0. (inverse element addition)
5. there is a 1 such that for all x, x×1=x. (multiplication identity)
6. for all x and y, x×y=y×x. (multiplication commutativity)
7. for all x, y and z, x×(y×z)=(x×y)×z. (multiplication commutativity).
8. for all x, iff x is different from 0, then there exists a y such that x×y=1. (multiplication inverse element)
9. for all x, y and z, x×(y+z)=(x×y)+(x×y). (distributive property)
what is 2? if it exists, a number which satifies the following equation, for all x: 2×x=x+x. let's suppose that 1+1 indeed equals 2. then i can substitute it in the equation above:
2×x=x+x
(1+1)×x=x×x
applying some of the axioms above, we can see that this expression is trivially true:
(1+1)×x=x+x
x×(1+1)=x+x
(x×1)+(x×1)=x+x
x+x=x+x
it is inconsistent for 1+1 not be equal to 2, hence necessary that 1+1=2.
I think if I had a hotdog cart it would be fun to have a Mandel Brat that allowed for infinite variations in basically the same toppings. I'd call it the Barbara Mandel but she's really a Mandrell so I'd go with Howie Mandel because it's my hotdog cart and I could say "And Howie havin' it?" when I scribble down their order and then mess it up like real life.
Ha !
The name Mandelbrot comes from a Yiddish term for "almond bread," so you could have a food truck that bakes infinite varieties, too!
@@JeffLearman I would maybe need to offer Kosher brats which might be a logistical problem. What could be the wurst of that? 👼
@@intentionally-blankHah!
The Mandelbrot set was discovered because mathematicians like doing math for fun. There's a lot of things like this
But it did not start existing because of that
@@Felipe2009cvb yes it did
@@Dragonryu So something starts to exist at the moment someone discovers it? By your logic gravity started to exist when newton saw the apple falling... Must be a really weird place, your mind.
Penicillin was discovered because A.Flemming was a very untidy scientist and had a desktop overfilled with stuff that got mixed up and started a life of its own right there.. well thats maybe not 100% true, but not all lies either....
@@Felipe2009cvb key difference is that gravity occurs in nature and the Mandelbrot set does not
This is hilarious considering that the Mandelbrot set actually proves that complexity arises not by design but as a natural consequence of the interaction of simple components. 😂
@@abdullahimahamudbilehow does that relate to what he said? just curious
@@Meepmope it doesnt
@@abdullahimahamudbileno correlation
@@abdullahimahamudbilethe sun? You mean a star? Stars, they’re being Literal billions of them in our galaxy alone and there are billions of galaxies out there? Yeah I love stars but ours isn’t that special. The whole reason you have a religion is because you can’t accept the fact that the universe doesn’t care about your existence or mine or anybody’s for that matter. Cope by all means but quit spreading your harmful propaganda around the modern era thanks
@@woohooo4936 actually it is at the core of what he said. Regularity, uniformity, predictability... the very touchstones of science itself, are in fact not even scientifically "provable" but are axioms of sheer faith. We have no ability to "prove" the assumption of uniformity, yet we cannot assume otherwise. Aside from the clickbait title of the vid (which is not helpful) this is the essence of what is being claimed. There is an inescapable order and an "appearance of design" (thanks, Dawkins) to the cosmos. An atheist must argue that his anti supernatural presuppositions trump that appearance. ---ps. you may thank me for summing up The Blind Watchmaker for you in two sentences.
The statement "The mathematics of sets and logic are not infinite" was made by Kurt Gödel in his famous paper titled "On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems I". In this paper, he introduced the concept of undecidability, which showed that there are mathematical statements that cannot be proven true or false within certain formal systems.
Is this like the idea that logic always necessarily leaves a piece unanswered, because in answering that unaswered piece you create a new logic with its own new unanswered piece? (Sorry if I'm misrepresenting, I'm just trying my best to understand.)
Fractals are infinite.
Mathematics is a conceptual language, a human creation which arises from the human tendency to look for patterns, which is something our brains have evolved to do. But all the mathematical laws in physics e.g. Kepler's laws, are the best approximate descriptions we can find to describe things we observe in the world, until they are replaced by a better approximation, like Einstein's general relativity. Really we have a patchwork of different physical theories that describe different aspects of the physical world to a lesser or greater extent depending on the context. It does not prove the existence of an intelligent creator, it just shows that we have evolved to be rather clever at creating mental models that give an accurate picture of what we experience.
If you study mathematics, especially mathematical logic, then you will find there are different choices of axioms for set theory, and certain statements can be consistent or inconsistent depending on what axioms you start with.
Also, there are many different choices of number systems: the number pi makes sense in the real numbers, but there are other number systems (finite fields, p-adic numbers, etc.) where pi doesn't exist. Assuming that physical space is a real continuum is something we have been doing at least since Euclid, but there's no reason why this must be true (especially at the quantum level).
Mathematics was actually "Discovered" and taught to us by a higher intelligence. Math describes relationships between numbers. Why is there 60 sec in a minute or 24 hours in a day? Who knows - we were just taught this to be a true measure of time - which is once we spend it (Time) - we don't get it back. 369 theory.......
@@bk3rd_para_lel the reason we use 60 and 24 comes from the Sumerians, who used sexagesimal notation (base 60) in 300 BC. The reason for using that base, and those divisions for time, is that 60 and 24 have lots of factors, so provide lots of ways to divide things up (land, goods, time). There's no reason to invoke any supernatural or 👽 extraterrestrial intelligence!
Furthermore, most mathematics does not describe relationships between numbers. The core parts of modern mathematics are geometry, algebra and analysis. Most of these subjects have very little to do with numbers, in the sense you understand them. They deal with abstract patterns and structures.
"Imaginary" numbers is not the original term for them, instead they were called "lateral" numbers. The term "imaginary" was utilized by Descarte, who was a critic of the concept.
Nice tidbit.
Cartesian skepticism.
If I'm not mistaken, Gauss was the one who prefered to call them lateral. Before Descartes, they didn't really have a name
I think I'd have called them perpendicular, but lateral is better than imaginary.
As an aside, I think we've inferred the number line as a concept of time, where 0 is now and positive numbers are the future with negative numbers representing the past. After nearly 50 years of deep meditation, it's been decades since I've seen time that way. I see the present moment as being real, with the past and future being imaginary constructs. The present moment is continually being replaced and the creation, existence, and expiration of each moment is perpendicular to the usual timeline. It's the imaginary numbers of it's domain.
Didn't someone call them "fictitious numbers"
This is possibly my favorite "atheists can't explain this" argument I've heard so far, both because they're making this argument completely seriously, and because the Mandelbrot Set is such a beautiful example of structure and complexity arising naturally without a need for a god.
I was the elegance of the mandelbrot set that gave me my faith in God. I was blow away by it's infinite beauty and was what made me realise that God and infinity are the same thing.
Complexity does not occur randomly. Concepts of quantity existed before man made characters and representatives of these concepts
@@lukethedude3902 citation needed.
@@drzaius844 the first commenter makes a claim that needs a citation as well. Why do you not apply this requirement evenly?
@@WishfulThinking-vg9tp if the big bang was a random occurrence and the macro evolutionary process arose from that, you have a complex process occuring randomly.. So no evolution doesn't explain anything here. That's circular reasoning
2+2 = 5 if you have a high value for 2.
2.4+2.4 =5 with rounding. But rounding 2.4 is 2.
I might think about numbers differently than the speaker but I do think he makes some fun points about set. Fun watch.
as a Christian, i agree. however, this argument only really works if it's viewed using a Christian mindset.
Eight minutes in, I am reminded why I dropped math, and spent the last three years of high school learning business math which I use every time I balance my checkbook.
And that’s also perhaps why much of what makes life worthwhile has totally passed you by, and you’d have no way of knowing. If you live underneath a rock in smallville Ky or Mo etc your world will always look like the underside of a rock in some useless backwater.
@@nialllambert3194 Yeah, you're probably right, Niall, my dismal life would be so much better under this rock had I learned calculus and trigonometry, I still write Pi as 3.141. It appears to me your up-turned nose comes in handy considering your attitude for persons living in 'fly-over country'. I watched the entire video, my comment was 'tongue-in-cheek', get a sense of humor lest your life becomes dismal as well.
You made it about 7 minutes longer than me before I felt that way. You Brainiac you. To be clear, I'm not knocking it. I'm a Christian. Maybe I'll try it another day and my brain will be a little clearer.
Balancing a checkbook?
Like doing addition and subtraction?
@@DaBlaccGhost Your degree is paying off, good job. Are you off today or unemployed?
That is not called "worst nightmare", that is called emergance
emergence*
shut up@@thatoneman1
Right I do not know why these people think they can beat atheists by saying something logical. There is no logic in religion. Religious people should just accept that.
@@HearUsRoarprove it.
@@HearUsRoar bro can't even spell right talking about "you will loose badly". go to bed bro. you have 1st grade classes in the morning.
Despite the fallacies of the ending, the whole video and the animations were pretty nice! And the information was correct for most of the video
The main error in the reasoning is where he says at 26:26 that "Numbers are abstract in nature, not physical." This is in fact wrong... We could totally assume that numbers arises from the repetition of discrete observations (3 sheeps, 3 stones, 3 trees, etc). So this may have its roots via bayesian induction performed by the brain.
And after that when he says "Laws of math are conceptual", well actually this is still not the case, as these are just construction from axioms. If we have to compare, laws of physics are much more conceptuals...
I like how he shows complexity arising from a simple process as a case for creationism.
dude exactly
I suspect he didn't think of that, despite literally making a video about it.
The worse part, and I'm a christian myself, is that the argument itself is disconnected from the presentation about fractals whatsoever. It's just the question about why does the universe obey mathematical laws, and he ends up making a purely emotional argument with "awe" and "greatness" in truly simples beautiful things
Creationism has been disproved a long time ago by scientists like Darwin when they discovered the process of evolution (Pls don't say that there is no proof of evolution; we have a lot of proofs (fossils being the most simple ones), Google them if you wanna learn)
@@sudiptadeb3107 darwin believed in god, what are you on about?
this was filled other bizarre and unfounded lines, for me at least, such as:
“it makes this very unexpected pattern” and “somehow it knows how to count, that’s kind of remarkable”
his entire speech so far (i’m not finished) has been filled with assertions of hidden and surprising meaning, all of which have so far just seemed like normal math.
"Guy who didn't realize math was cool has just realized math is cool."
He seriously has no idea how to interpret fractals if he's landed on "god exists" as his conclusion.
@@derekwood7329 Finally, someone with sense.
He's discovered that counting exists within mathematics. Stay tuned, he might discover that the sun gives off light.
Finally I found the comment thread I belong to
@@WyvernYT I hope he figures out how to make a baking soda volcano while he's at it. It'd probably end up being more useful then his entire career anyway.
I was an atheist, now I’m an atheist who likes math. Thank you
Atheists don't exist, just people with an inaccurate understanding of the concept of God.
haha, nice one :D Yes, it only shows that beauty comes from simple things. It all started with a row of numbers in a order and all of math followed from that simple thing. String theory things that all laws of physiks also follows from simple things, where all the forces we know are nearly the same. So it was pretty much order and from that all these different things in our world followed.
@@melonenlord2723 bro wants to sound smart after he misspelled physics
I'm literally a christian who discovered this type of Math like a year ago.
@@melonenlord2723psiychs
We can get you can zoom in infinitely. If you zoom out does it mean this would be the end of it?
I"m an atheist and the mandelbrot set gives me night terrors. I wake up in cold sweats. 🙄
Yooooooo, please take this serious - I care about you and I don't even know you - There's a war going on right now whether YOU believe it or not, more importantly a spiritual war, and you being a self proclaimed atheist is right where the devil wants you to be. The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people he doesn't exist. Makes you an easy target for his legion of demons. Watch the movie Nefarious. On the other hand God gave us the Best Gift ever, the power to choose bc Love cannot be forced but is chosen. And Jesus shed his Blood on the Cross for all of our Salvation and Redemption - All at the cost of FREE! So not one person can boast out of good deeds to earn it which God (Jesus in the flesh) did not want us to have to earn but given freely to All. We are in Biblical Prophecy now with Israel and Hamas. Please consider getting Baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit! All to Gain and nothing to lose!
Yes, me too, it proves the burning bush is real!!! I've already sacrificed a goat and desparately try not to mix the fabric of my clothes which Jahwe really hates.
It is okay, It is not a fearful thing. God answers questions. He is real and He loves you to ask questions. He knows everything, absolutely everything. He knows you better than you do and He is loving, tender, and kind. God Almighty and Jesus Christ is One. If you ask God anything in Jesus name, he answers.
People who understand mathematics have no problem with this.
I had a spirograph. It was like magic, but explained with math, too.
Spirographs made me religious.
So that's the name of that thing! Thank you! I had one as a child and still remember my first goose bumps caused by the observation of how it works. Cheers!
This comment made my day.
I'm finding more and more that when things look like magic, it's usually just science I haven't learned yet.
@@WilhelmFreidrich I'd get 95% of the way through a complex thing and slip, so they had the opposite effect on me.
its amazing what God can create
The subject area of mathematics itself is interesting. There are so many different areas of mathematics that you can study. I prefer Abstract Algebra and Topology, but I studied Differential Geometry, Real Analysis, Complex Analysis, Differential Equations, Number Theory, and more. There is no highest level of mathematics. Each branch of mathematics may have a highest level, but they all branch off from the basic mathematics found in high school and the first year of college. When we prove something new in mathematics, we are really discovering a new property. We are not inventing the property. We may "invent" the notation or definition, but we discover the properties. I wish that high school students saw more of the beauty of mathematics. By the time some of them are in college, they truly hate mathematics and find it boring.
Mathematics aren't boring and I don't think students understand that they aren't bored by math, but the ones teaching it.
Public schools are a failure.
I loved math in elementary to high school, algebra made me love it more. Then to find that math and science go hand-in-hand..I got an A and B in those classes and was failing the others.😂 This presentation speaks volumes of The creator tho!
Or plural ones (Genesis 3:22)
Math proves that you can think. It is thinking without the baggage of emotions and personal opinions. It is the ultimate "it is what it is".
i have to agree. I now see the beauty in mathematics but feel like the time has come and gone to really delve into pure maths
“Somehow the Mandelbrot set knows how to count”😦😦
It was perfect right up until “why” (33:49). Very well executed lecture on the beauty of mathematics and nature, but the interpretation of the cause is ultimately where we don’t know.
"I barely understand this, therefore magic. And its beautiful, therefore supernatural cause." Something complex isn't by definition magical.
We've come so far 🤣 We went from people scared of lighting, offering it meat and children in an attempt to bribe the gods to not harm us, to going on stage and uploading a 25 minutes presentation of: iunnomussbegawd 🤣
It's amazing to me how in thousands of years many have learned so much about the world around us, yet some of us became proud of our incredulity and the unfounded conclusions we can't reasonably draw from it and draw anyway and they use the actual knowledge that has proven all those other gods of the gaps false to proudly proclaim that theirs still has a gap to shove it in 🤣
Not that I agree that that gap actually exists, but I don't feel like explaining how languages work right now. Simplified: I am not at all surprised that the word ball is so unreasonably effective at describing a ball any more than I am surprised that math works in a universe that emerges from fundamental fields and their inherent particles that everything consists of. It would be far weirder if the water from my tap behaved different from anyone else's water.
Dude literally woke up one day and said he understood God’s mind
He doesn’t claim to understand it just a small part of it. The complexity and how it must be impossible for the world to exist in literal infinite complexity just by chance
@@jokebird6479 But that doesn’t follow from anything. And “infinite complexity” are so far just words with no precise definition.
Now let’s do inferences from cosmological questions about inflation, matter-antimatter asymmetry and so on. Real soil for unbased extrapolations here.
This is a new type of heresy and It's honestly incredible. I miss the early church heresies where you could just say stuff and cause a major global conflict.
You are projecting arrogance onto him which, while might be a little true, as we are all arrogant to some degree, is not warranted here.
He said this discovery gives insight into God’s mind.
@@jokebird6479there’s no definiative proof that the world is infinite though lol
What a beautiful and inspirational video . . thanku for the care and emotion and spirit that went into it . .
My understanding of this thing we call reality comes from the ultimately most simple principle of yin and yang.
Nuthing can exist without its opposite and everything is in relationship with it's opposite. Out of this principle flow waves, circuits, circles, spirals etc representing the back and forth or circuituous relationship between opposites. Out of waves deveop things like straight lines and 2 and 3D geometry that are shaped by paths of least resistance to waves. For example cutting a thing in two with a smooth plane enables the two halves to slide back and forth over each other easily in a repeating wave pattern. If there are irregularities in that plane they tend to be smoothed into a perfectly flat geometrically regular surface.
So all geometry comes from yin and yang and the wave interaction between the two. This most simple of principles yields the most infinitely complex geometries, including fractals and intersections of fractals with other fractals etc. It also explains "chaotic states" where such collisions can at least initially create disorder.
Without yin and yang we are referenceless. Even terms like God would not come into our reality. For God to exist he/she/it must also not exist. In order for sumthingness to exist there must also be nuthingness. In order for consciousness to exist there must also be a state of no consciousness. Things can only exist as a field, a circuit, a wave between one reference point and it's "other" or opposite.
The prime number distribution is already fabulously intricate, and that comes from an even simpler procedure. If anything here surprises you, you weren't paying attention to 2,3,5,7,11,13,17 ... back in elementary school.
The Mandelbrot set is an iterative ordered set, and not the only one. In fact there's an infinite number of them. There is also an infinite number of non-iterative ordered sets, which are ones whose Nth member is a function of N. In iterative sets, the value of the Nth member is a function of N-1.
This guy knows what he's talking about
@@danieln7777Jesus is coming. Repent and believe the gospel
@@camilosanchez831Jesus has been "coming" for 2000 years, I think I'll just chill. 🥸
You can also have a set of sets
Please plot these other sets in color too. Let us see THOSE patterns that have been put in place. God is amazing.
Here's a sumary of the content with timestamps, for those who want to see either the mathematics, the fractal or his philosophic interpretation thereof. (I tried to keep it neutral)
0:00-1:24 Proposition that there's a secret code built into numbers by god
1:24-10:35 introduction to necessary mathematical concepts needed to generate the fractal images in question
10:35-13:49 some interesting geometric properties of the Mandelbrot fractal
13:49-15:25 claim that the infinity of a gods mind is necessary for the infinite complexity of the fractal
15:25-19:53 exploration of some visually appealing regions of the fractal
19:53-20:14 claim that the beauty of the fractal must have been encrypted in the underlying mathematics by god
20:14-21:57 effects of changing the formula on the appearance of the fractal
21:57-29:00 Secularists are unable to explain why there is beauty or infintite complexity in the fractal, as opposed to christians...
29:00-33:25 examples of proximate fractals in the pysical world similar to fractals in mathematics.
33:25-38:24 Secular people are unable to explain why the physical universe obeys mathematical laws, as opposed to christians...
Now the critical summary: The mathematical buildup sounded aptly designed for the audience, average citizens that only have rudimentary mathematical knowledge that is. Well done on that part. The exploration of the fractal itself was interesting as well and had some nice variety. But the rest is just the same old storye as always: Claiming, sometimes rightfully so, that secularists don't have the answer to some deep question (Why X?) only to answer it along the lines of: Because the christian god made the world such that X! One couldn't hope for an answer less lazy than this... Or less helpfull for that matter...
Took too long to find this comment. Saying "AtHiEsTs ArE nOt GoNnA lIkE tHiS!" Is for the already christian audience to give them reassurance at best. He is taking a scientific and mathematical discovery and cramming it into his religious narrative. And i don't see why this would prove atheism right or wrong, this changes nothing.
TLDR: Simple rules, when repeated countless times, can reveal surprising beauty and symmetry. This works in math, cosmology, chemistry, plate tectonics, biodiversity, climate & weather, etc.
This video was a fun (and pretty good!) introductory dive into the wonder of fractal math, for those who may have never seen it before! ... but for the rest of us, it reads like a master class in Missing The Point.
Well he isn't wrong (x)
@@mattperkins2538 Beautifully explained, I couldn't have said it better myself. This explanation is somehow thorough, concise, and easy to understand at the same time. Well done.
@@PJM257 That's very kind of you, but in all fairness, I probably stole most of it subconsciously from Richard Dawkins or somebody. :)
It feels weird to be an agnostic person because I look at both fundamentalists and atheists as a little bit wacky. Both groups act like they know for certain yet lack substantial proof to prove their case.. wouldn't the most intellectually honest answer be that you simply didn't know for sure?
" I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong."
- Richard P. Feynman
I actually really appreciate this video. It explains fractals in a way that even the most simple people can understand it! 🤗❤
“Atheists don’t have the answers” math and creation arguments aside, we never pretended to have all the answers. We have theories, but everything could theoretically switch based on evidence
Exactly. I feel like this is missed in these conversations. Christian apologists will say we can't prove what came before the big bang, therefore the Christian bible is true? Where is the logic in that.
@@danielhamilton3496 a lot of the bible is history that can be proven true and there are people from it that were proven to be real people. Found through artifacts and writings from different people around the time.
@dejawalston6155 I couldn't care less if a man named Jesus actually existed. I'm talking about the creation of the universe and the nature of existence. Religion provides exactly zero evidence of it's claims here yet Religion pretends that any gap in knowledge by science is somehow a proof of thier religion.
Religious fanatics have answers without asking themselves questions in the first place. They're sheeps 🤡
Faith is healthy tho
The Mandelbrot Set was first defined and drawn by Robert W. Brooks and Peter Matelski in 1978, as part of a study of Kleinian groups. Afterwards, in 1980, Benoit Mandelbrot obtained high quality visualizations of the set while working at IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York.
Copy and Paste from Wikipedia much? Snicker snicker.
Yes. And not once was a god required to do all of this.
@@guitarszen Nope, I did not need a god to cross reference Wikipedia to see if the poster copied and pasted from Wikipedia.
Read my comment on secret codes and messages posted 12/22/22.
It is just another SCAM to fool the FOOLS into thinking that there is some secret messages from god.
But of course ONLY THE CHURCH can interpret these secrets, any god worth having would send out SIMPLE, CLEAR, MESSAGES THAT DO NOT NEED A BUCH OF CRAZED PRIESTS TO INTERPRET THEM.
Just another SCAM.
@@guitarszen Says who?
Me as christian is absolutely wonderful how infinit univers points to Infinite God
And because "spirit" arises from simple and at the same time complex structures, this is one of the most important indications that philosophical schools of thought that rely on physicality are the right approach. "Emergence" is the key word.
There is no god. And if there are gods, then they would be my enemies because they want to interfere in my life unasked and uninvited.
Religion did not arise so that man could be good. It came about because people are good and want to achieve good things.
So because there's a pattern in a set of functions the abrahamitic god exists?
What else than patterns does a theist expect to find in fractals?
Let's try Buddha.
@@Buzz_Purr Buddha said delusions are innumerable.
Religious folk often make the false assumption that their truth about an infinitely complex creator is the simplest... why bother to learn stuff that you perceive to be difficult, when you have an easy explanation and can just defer expertise onto an imaginary entity? The opposite is true: the simplest empirical building blocks can iteratively generate the most complex patterns. If you do not have the will to garner a basic understanding, then you can attribute everything to a creator. The video creator did just that. Fortunately, most people do understand basic maths, so it is more os a comfort than a nightmaere.
Step 1, assume God makes numbers
hey look; a complex pattern, must be god.
God is real, QED.
Ah, I see now: IF Mandelbrot Set THEREFORE New Testament. How could could I have missed this obvious connection.
Have you read the Bible?
He’s talking about the how the Mandelbrot set further confirms the illustration of God’s characteristics in the Bible.
@@XxBoriHalaMadridxX Try to find what Mandelbrot set is. And tey sometging to learn not only faith stupidity. It is many proofs of God on this world, but you still find only that are not proofs. :D Laplace or Fourier do not make proofs of God?
@@XxBoriHalaMadridxX If you want I can create it in few minutes in Blender. Can make tutorial for you. And then you can find for me the proof of God. :D It is in X power 2 minus Y power 2 or it is 2 multiply X and Y? Aftwr that you can add new nuber to it. Make new X and new Y. The length betwen this points must be greater like number 2. Becouse it is condition of it. :D And if new coordinates are thry you can make another interactions. When you connect interaction number with colour on points, the result is Julian set. If you add same X and same Y then you create Mandelbrot. It is simple math not proof of God.
@@adrianpolomsky358 I’m a third year mechanical engineering student 🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️ mandem thinks I haven’t done relatively complex math
Absolutely fascinating. There seems to be an underlying mathematical code in the universe (just like in DNA, genetics, life), an algorithm or a set of instructions on how matter, energy, forces of nature, and everything else relate to each other, from vast galaxies to the tiniest subatomic particles. Einstein was already amazed at elementary arithmetic but Wigner elevated the discussion giving very elegant yet complex mathematics featured in high-level physics such as Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics or quantum electrodynamics! Happy coincidence? I think not 😉
Everything in the universe follows the same rules. That we discover mathematics that describe it is hardly surprising.
As a matter of fact chaos theory is at the heart of explaining many things religion claim must be explained by some god. Abiogenesis and consciousness for example.
@@pellestorck3776 Really? How so? Thanks.
This is only the tip of the iceberg of what God made and who He is. Even eternity will not be enough for us finite beings to even begin to understand an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient God!
Exactly.
Thanks for this video. I was fascinated with Benoit Mendelbrot, the Mandelbrot set and fractal geometry in the early 1980s.
Those hours or even days of waiting until the computer screen had finally filled up with an new zoomed-in part of the Mandelbrotset in a stunning 16 colors! It's a pleasure lost to the generation that grew up with _telephones_ that are capable of doing that stuff in mere milliseconds :(
Everyone is like; "Ooh, aah- it goes on forever...", and; "it's so pretty!"
But no-one is seeing the big message inherent in this formula and it's pattern, namely; that infinity can, and does exist in the natural order.
The Mandelbrot Set shows us that an infinite universe is not only possible, but probable! This Set is one of the answers we are seeking, all we have to do is ask the right questions to make it fit.
However, as was stated in the video the Mandelbrot set, like all things mathematical is an abstract concept ONLY IN THE MIND. Whereas the universe is a PHYSICAL thing. Can you make that absolute comparison and assume they are equal? You'd have to be God to accurately do that.
@@justpassingthrough...6128 Consciousness isn't physical, yet it dictates our physical life ,.
@@chandlerthebing3472 Consciousness is definitely physical, unless there is evidence otherwise.
@@olivercharles2930 you need the proof mate , because so far scientists don't even know what consciousness is , so it's definitely not definitely physical.
@@chandlerthebing3472 Well, hit yourself on the finger with a hammer, and tell if you don't CONSCIOUSLY feel the PAIN...
As an athiest , i must say that this isn't my worst nightmare.
This is pure beauty and just reaffirms my strong beliefs in aliens.
❤
so god's on an acid trip?
ironically he has Alienware laptop
as an atheist, my worst nightmare people like this have a platform to spread this BS
My worst nightmare is that there are people who believe that a god really exists…
Man was created in the image of God. Man is a living being, so God is a living being.
God created the Earth.
If God created the Earth, he cannot originate from the Earth.
Living beings that do not originate from Earth are, by definition, aliens.
God is just an alien. A completely ordinary alien. Nothing special.
@@karayuschij I doubt that
38:24 Very nicely done.
Some criticism. It could be said that your final argument, at least hints at affirming a formal logical fallacy. Set that aside.
Paredolia is a very human error where esthetics prevails over reason. The beauty of mathematics can be stunning, but no certainty follows from that.
Mathematics has NO laws, but conjectures that apply to each class. A perfectly fine mathematics can be explored from any set of conjectures. It is a question WHICH conjectures appear to be rules in the physical universe-that is where the game plays out.
Whitehead and Russell wrote the Principia Mathematica with definition of the natural numbers from which your thoughts might benefit.
In general, Jason, your approach to wondering at how things are and why, is a refreshing and energetic voice in inquiring about metaphysical reality.
The "message" or meaning isn't embedded in numbers, it's in the functions/algorithms which were intelligently designed by humans. There are an infinite number of sets/functions, of which the Mandelbrot is just a single one...which we intelligently picked because we like the output.
As an accountant, I can firmly say that numbers used for business and finance have a specific purpose. And that purpose is fully manipulated by humans. I’m honestly not sure what he was trying to convey here, because it’s pretty obvious for anyone who understands the intend of math, that numbers are just human invented symbols that represent quantity. And yes, those algorithms must have a pattern, in order for our universe to function how it is now.
I do believe there is a number of examples from our daily, material life, that point to the divine mind. But this is definitely one of the weaker claims
@@michaelchoruss7544 I agree mostly with what you say. However I'd say the universe basically does not care about numbers. Only laws/rules. Numbers are just a way for us to represent things, and math operations are a way for us to practice laws and rules. Now, the universe being created OR the universe being anthropic biased due to our sample size of one and life having evolved for such anthropic bias...is a whole other discussion. But as long as you have boolean logic, you can create and emulate whatever laws/rules/functions, Mandelbrot set included. And boolean logic is fundamental and universal...even in other universes with other laws of physics.
But yeah, dude saw a pretty pattern (fractals). Doesn't want to understand the grace of numbers, instead thinks it's god. It's the same as if I took my computer running stable diffusion (AI art generator) back 200 years and showed people a magic box capable of creating almost any image you want in any style you want. Instead of taking awe at the sheer amount of math, science, and trying to understand that it's based literally on comparing 1s and 0s, they would assume it was magic.
I picture maths as the sketches, or manuscript or architectural drawings for designs that are later built in nature. Kind of like thought process, prototype and final work
It is not just math it is also consciousness. We have five senses for experiencing, a sense mind for processing experience, and an intellect that ranges far beyond our environment to the further reaches of space; awareness through consciousness.
All that is amazing,, and in addition, all based on a spark of light that is unique to each of us a wonderful gift that connects us with the elemental forces of nature. The stage was set for us with oxygen and water when we arrived. We should treat nature and animals better, they are for our use, not for our abuse based on greed or entitlement.
Trying to prove the unscientific with science, the illogical with logic. That's the way to go. NOT! Thanks for your hard work in further reinforcing my atheistic worldview.
Atheists' worst nightmare: Beautiful fractals
Religious people's worst nightmare: Hell
I've made my choice.
I like how atheists cope with this devastating fact to their worldview
@@RedstoneCriper everything will come to an end, but i don't have to worry about that because i won't be alive when everything stops existing
The implication of the fractal existing is what you should fear.
@@UTTPOfficerBennie that math is an amazing thing?
@@luckythelucklesswolf1419 that math was consciously created by an all-knowing, all-powerful being.
I was never good at math or even liked it very much, but I find this video COMPLETELY FASCINATING!!!! I shared the original hour long one with a few of my friends and they all LOVE IT too!!! Thank you for posting a shorter version, I will continue to share with people!
God creates both the people who love math and the people who dislike it among His children, but they can work together as the limbs of Jesus for the whole benefits of the ones beloved by God.
O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allāh except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allāh and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allāh and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allāh is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allāh as Disposer of affairs. 4:171
The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded.5:75
The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was. 3:59
That Day shall a man flee from his own brother,
And from his mother and his father,
And from his wife and his children.
Every man that day will have concern enough to make him heedless (of others).
[Some] faces, that Day, will be bright -
Laughing, rejoicing at good news.
And other faces, on that day, with dust upon them,
Veiled in darkness,
Those are the disbelievers, the wicked.
80/34-42
For such is the state of the disbelievers] until, when death comes to one of them, he says, "My Lord, send me back
That I might do righteousness in that which I left behind." No! It is only a word he is saying; and behind them is a barrier until the Day they are resurrected.
So when the Horn is blown, no relationship will
there be among them that Day, nor will they ask about one another. 23:99-101
Check out the Fibonacci Sequence, too! It's a very simple formula (the current number plus the previous number), but it appears to be found in everything in the universe, both living and nonliving.
It's also derived uniquely by angles, straight line, and spiral.
It's totally fascinating and also points heavily toward God.
I bought the book & loaded the app on my laptop and it is mind boggling. The infinite mind of God does really make one fall to their knees and worship
@@wangmary888 Sorry, so how did that end blood libels, schisms, Inquisitions, or the slave trade?
Also, how did one third of all angels, miss the Mandelbrot set, and the implications of Romans 1:18 (or something very like it) directly, in heaven, either?
With none being 'natural men' or 'spiritually dead' at the time?
I'm good with arithmetic, as for higher math I'm lost. I barely passed high school Algebra and geometry....I was so glad I wasn't required to take any more math classes in my junior and senior years. It's what kept me from wanting to go to college. If I couldn't do algebra who thinks I could 'get' calculus. Talk about a nightmare. This guy has just blown past me, I don't get anything he said. He thinks it's easy, because it's easy for him. He doesn't understand that there are many people who's brains work differently. I carried a B+ average in high school, so I'm not a complete dolt. P. S. I've loved watching the Mandelbrot set video online for years. I'm neither an atheist nor particularly religious...just a little bit artistic enough to appeciate its magnificent beauty.
I'm always impressed with the sheer ubris of religious believers, having the guts to declare they know it all, believing everything, without questioning, written in a book hundreds years ago. Mathematics is the product of the human mind. Its basic principles are simple, and from this simplicity comes the, still not well undestrood, idea of complexity and, let alone, beauty. Physics builds theories on maths, and the laws of Nature seem to agree with that.
Problem is that these theories are an approximation and we will never achieve perfect laws of Nature (a theory must be falsifiable).
The fact that math now works does not tell us anything about the future. These laws may change, and they may change randomly.
We seem to live in a stable gap of laws, hence the growing complexity and life. From life, mind. From mind, math and, sadly, god.
It's really neat that shapes that we've observed in space, and in nature appear here in the numeric plot.
I was an agnostic and God revealed himself to me with this. I had no idea what it was. It was profound. I knew there was a creator after I saw it in my head. It sent me on a mission to see what it was about. Praise God
Good,or god? I believe in good, but not god.
@@jerrylong6238 pretty sure he said praise God
Hey there! May I ask how you're doing now? Lemme know if I can share some helpful resources with you that have been tremendously beneficial for me.
@@angelt.5276 I have a relationship with God that I never had before. I'm always open to more information though. Let's see what you have.
@@marksimmons4414 God has infinite beauty to discover friend! I pray you would continue to dive deeper and that God would be tangibly present in your life. God bless you brother!
Mandelbrot set is indeed fascinating. The problem I have is mixing up two concepts :
1) infinity and
2) divines
Mandelbrot set is infinit per definition. The Beaty of recursive infinity is fascinating but it has nothing to do with divines.
369 theory....................!
Another way to visualize eternity (infinity in mathematical terminology) is simply to look up. The sky has never looked exactly as it does today; each day features a unique sky with large fluffy clouds, with high cirrus, etc., and those are always unique. It is as though God provides a new and unique vista for each day. And it's all for our own enjoyment; all we have to do is look up at least once per day.
Many people have the mistaken idea that God manifests his design only in complexity but in point of fact the real astonishing genius of God is in bringing infinite complexity unfolded out of the most perfect elegant indeed wondrous simplicity.
It has been proven that if a set of rules follows a few criteria complexity will naturally follow no joke this proof has been around for 60 years now. So if your god would have made almost any rules complexity would have followed and if its that high chance why even rely on this concept of god?
All this proves is that simple patterns can make complicated things. It's just as strong as an argument for atheism
Facts, they trying so hard to say a magical sky daddy made everything
First off, not a simple pattern. Secondly, it proved that mathematics (an abstract concept in the mind) has identical patterns in the material world. It simply proves that everything is engineered, and it doesn't make sense except for the mention of a creator. Who is that creator? I believe its the christian god but this simply doesn't prove its him, just that a creator creating this laws is much more possible than it being random.
The "golden number" is a great way of seeing how the universe seems to be designed, or engineered, perfectly and its incredible to see. Would recommend you checking on it.
edit: and if you wanna say "oh but its random, thats how nature works doesnt prove nothing" the important thing to consider is that it is MUCH MORE LIKELY that a creator exists than a bouncing of atoms creating this complex and universal patterns. It doesnt mean its the case, but its MUCH MORE LIKELY. An objective man looks at the possibilities and makes his own choice.
@datboi imma keep this short and sweet. The human mind is terrible for understanding things to scale. The full scope of concepts can barely be scratched. You lack an understanding in concepts such as random and infinity. Understanding enough about something to understand that you dont know enough about something is a great start to true understanding.
@@thebakenboy it's common knowledge that numbers go into infinity in both directions. Random probability isn't as common but it's taken into account when researching quantum theory.
There is no basis for morality, physics or maths in the evolutionary Atheist world most of us belonged to.
Intricate design can't come from biological chemicals
pattern is in the numbers used .what does it look like in base two without base eight iteration
There’s a really cool documentary about the Mandelbrot set called the colors of infinity. And it’s set to the music of Pink Floyd
Whoa! And PF happens to be my fave band of all time too! Can you pls give me the link pls? Would not be surprising if the Mandelbrot patterns are set to the whole "Dark Side of the Moon" album, both are masterpieces of beauty and magic.
I'm an Atheist and have seen much of what Answers in Genesis publishes, but I was surprised by this video.
It's really quite good and I think it's accurate about all the math stuff, the explanation of the Mandelbrot Set, and some of the super interesting things inside the set (or outside, I suppose).
I just wish you all could keep that up and not resort to the bit at the end about how "the secularist thinks.... blah blah blah"
You could have maybe had me convinced, or at least on the edge of my seat. The math is really incredible and is something special, could even be God, maybe.
I just wish people in your position would lean into the idea that God might not be limited to just Christianity...
I know that would be going against your God of the Bible, but really, how the hell would God only reside over one religion?
He'd be responsible for the "false" ones too, I guess... hmmm interesting
It's an interesting video, all except for the conclusion at the very end. Saying "it makes sense" over and over isn't enough to suddenly jump me from math and what you're talking about to, "it's God's mind." That actually doesn't make sense... there's nothing to suggest that, even the Bible doesn't necessarily agree with that. Nice try though. Very interesting, just maybe keep it there instead of trying to "destroy" the Atheist.
I agree fractals are beautiful but why would they need intelligent design? Nature is full of complexity and patterns but why would they not just be like that, it seems to me that the neccesity for it to be designed is fabricanted by people like the guy from the videi
People who attempt to represent knowledge about God are not perfect... but if you want to find the truth, why would a message that you perceive as imperfect shy you away from the Source? Why not just ask God to prove himself to you if you want to find Him... Maybe you have already. He has given you and us all a mind that is capable of much, but I guess religion would be a void if it would just mean intellectual gymnastics, no, it's a relationship which goes deeper than just the mind, which we often would like to have define us. Anyway, give it a shot! :)
Just because math works doesn't mean there is a god
Intelligent design by our creator. 👍 I believe when one speaks of secularists they mean people who refuse to even consider the possibility of a creator and therefore intelligent design.
I submit to you that attacks on atheism by Christians are because of atheism’s propensity to focus its attacks on Christianity rather than God or religion in general. I never see atheists attacking other religions.
The physical universe has infinite complexity but in its complex manifestation it is finite. That finite interaction creates the complexity which we sentient beings battle to investigate and understand. As a mathematician and physicist I think Slartibartfast has the right answer... "I'd much rather be happy than right any-day".
This phenomena is a beautiful thing. Does it really need to be presented as anyone's nightmare?
I really appreciated the first mathematical part. Great pedagogy. For the rest, to bring smthg to that issue of the effectiveness of maths and so, I will only quote another brilliant mathematician : "Nothing takes place in the world whose meaning is not that of some maximum or minimum."(Euler, btw)
I have done some game development. Euler angles are used a lot. I especially hate them with regard to quaternions. That Euler guy gives me immense displeasure.
@@codeninja1832 when your name has been given to 100000 things, their might be some collateral damage...
@@brettsteed7242 He's got it coming alright. Euler better not let me catch him slippin.
Euler was a devout Christian by the way
@@josephsaab7208 Yep, and Francis Collins mapped the human genome. What's your point about broken clocks being right twice a day?
Thanks Jason. I've tried to understand fractals since your article first appeared in your magazine and this video opened the lock to the mystery.
There is not a mystery to it. All functions and formula can be plotted and some of it is more visually appealing to humans than others. X^2 grows infinitely and has many actual real world applications, it just does not make a pattern that we find pretty.
Cantor set is the most researched fractal and it's easy to understand too
The colors do have a purpose. They represent how quickly the given number becomes unbounded (when the absolute value becomes greater than 2 I believe.)
i love this channel, its so much better comedy than most comedians, like this guy definitely chose the wrong career path
The Mandelbrot set, involving simple relationships carried to sufficient extremes, is remarkably like the simplified computer weather prediction experiment that gave different predictions for two weeks in advance, at a fourth decimal place of initial conditions.
Hence the butterfly effect.
At last, proof that god does not exist.
@@peterbradbury784 How so?
The design of the many aspects of this world is very beautiful.
@@dfacedagameAnd that disproves God how?
@dfacedagame everything has a creator, the universe can't just form itself out of nowhere