(January 24, 2009 at 5:13 pm)DD_8630 Wrote: Our 'interpretation' is correct insofar as we don't have one: we don't read anything into mathematical laws, simply because there is nothing indicative of a Grand Lawmaker.
Naturally, there may Grand Lawmaker, but there is nothing that suggests there is.
Unless, of curse, you can argue otherwise. Else you're just making non sequitur after wild conjecture after unsubstantiated hypotheses.
Is your interpretation really correct? Well forgive me for this 'crime' I'm about to committ, but I'm going to appeal to authority, as I'm just not clever enough where maths and physics are concerned and if Gödel could 'see' the suggestion that there is intelligence behind these 'laws' then I'm interested to know why he and many other scientists don't view this like you and the others do. I'm am equally interested in why scientist like Stenger do not share this view. You have all tried to explain why I'm seeing this incorrectly but still I 'see' it.
"The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility"
Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein