From: Merv <mrb22667@kansas.net>

Date: Thu Feb 22 2007 - 23:33:59 EST

Date: Thu Feb 22 2007 - 23:33:59 EST

I think your overall point is well-taken -- that number games after the

fact should be taken skeptically, especially if they are based on one of

a number of possible translations. Nonetheless, you can't make me

believe that you wouldn't hold an apparently ordered sequence (even one

to a hundred) to be any different than one that actually did appear

random. If I told you I was going to recite one hundred random

numbers, but I then recited from one to a hundred in order, you would

quickly inform me of the deficiency of my "randomness". But if I am

willing to wade through a large (and finite) quantity of numbers to find

that sequence, it is no longer so amazing. In fact take the

(im)probability of the specified sequence you want to look for: is it

1/100000! (which would be the chance of your football fans arriving in

ordered sequence but by chance). Then by looking at 100000! such

sequences (each of the entire length), you have a 1/e (~37% chance) of

finding your one predicted sequence. Repeat that whole feat 10 times,

and you've raised your odds of finding your sequence to ~99% -- a

virtual certainty.

So it becomes a statistical certainty that you will find the entire

Bible (any version you want) somewhere in pi or square root of two, or

any non-repeating sequence of infinite length. It would be amazing NOT

to. (the mathematical equivalent of the classic evolutionist's

argument, perhaps.) But to find these things in a finite sequence that

isn't mind-bogglingly long -- that would be amazing. To find a

universe of finite space and time that has life, well -- I think that is

pretty amazing. Something to praise God for. But I say that in faith,

not knowing the parameters to define the problem or state the

probabilities, so my friends of different persuasion will remain

unconvinced.

--merv

dickfischer@verizon.net wrote:

*> Apparent randomness is not the issue. If the number sequence was advertised in advance or predicted than whatever the sequence was would be just as improbable as 1 to 100,000. The odds of any number sequence occuring in a specified order is just as unlikely as any recognizable number pattern.
*

*>
*

*> Take the sentence, "Amy's baby chews doughnuts each Friday." What's the pattern? Each first letter is in sequence. Okay, so what? The patriarch's ages taken from a particular text forms a number pattern. What does that prove? Another set of ages from another text would yield another number pattern. What significance could we attach in accordance with the spiffyness of the different patterns?
*

*>
*

*>
*

*>
*

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with

"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

Received on Thu Feb 22 23:29:27 2007

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8
: Thu Feb 22 2007 - 23:29:27 EST
*