6 Comments
User's avatar
cairsahr_stjoseph's avatar

Very interesting; I've never seen it put quite that way. Reminds me of Aquinas. The "Schrödinger's cat" thought experiment, which I've found very useful, also applies to the theory of evolution: Their theory posits the -effect- of a Creator (order in the universe according to a design) without an actual Creator; so in effect, for them, God exists and doesn't exist at the same time, and only insofar as is necessary for the universe to exist without Him. I have to write this down.

cairsahr_stjoseph's avatar

That is to say, His -effect- exists without Him, according to evolutionism.

William The Samaritan's avatar

Yes, you hit on the big fail of evolutionary hypothesis; it takes to itself the results of metaphysical intentions, but pretends they are merely natural.

My work on Newtonian Gravitational Law shows a similar pattern. Gravity is claimed to be a material force, the mutual relationship between bodies of mass. But by the end of the demonstration of the Universal Law, the formulae have been reduced to a monopolar relationship, the Earth having an acceleration of its own for all objects. This is similar to the metaphysical Intention which actually exists, wherein all objects of mass are moved at the same rate of acceleration toward the centre of Earth regardless as to mass quantity.

Nothing but a shell game.

cairsahr_stjoseph's avatar

Where's the Newtonian article you mentioned ? I find my way around substack like a deaf bat at a concert. Gravity is something for which I still require an explanation.

William The Samaritan's avatar

The full argument is in a Book 'The Restoration'. I can send you a PDF copy if you like. But later, off to work now.

William The Samaritan's avatar

hmm, won't let me send a PDF here. What is your email?

Here is a video I did to introduce the subject. I have some other videos on the subjects and cosmological physics generally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIA1zLKF7KY&list=PL6kr0vx7r3KtXkt_Ln0EIxLNRuw_19R9J&pp=gAQB