|
Author
|
Topic: pentadactilism again challenges the modern synthesis
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 05. March 2006 14:29
It was the Darwinians themselves and some of the more prominent ones such as Julian Huxley and Theodosius Dobzhansky that have undermined their own beliefs with simple undeniable reality and laboratory experiment. Others have further destroyed the credibility of the Darwinian myth with such ridiculous unqualified statements as:
"Evolution is like a drunk reeling back and forth between the gutter and the Bar Room door."
Stephen J. Gould
"Intelligence was an evolutionary accident."
ibid
It is hard to believe isn't it?
IP: Logged
|
|
Bruce Fast
Member
Member # 924
|
posted 07. March 2006 00:35
That random mutation + natural selection is inadequate to explain life in all of its variety is not something that you need to convince me of. I also think that there is a lot more discontent with this simple view within academia than academia wants to let on to us common folk. In that light, I am planning to read "Origination of Organismal Form" which I understand presents concerns out of main-stream academia about the theory.
My hope, with my simple presentation in this context, is two-fold.
First, I think that many such as myself find the variety and complexity of life to be far beyond the reach of RM+NS. Further, first life seems vastly beyond the reach of RM+NS even in light of the progress that has been made in the field of abiogenetic hypothesees. My presentation though, I think, presents a different, and possibly more easily proveable argument: that the lack of variety is not consistent with the theory. I dare to hope that this twist of direction will put yet another crack in the facade that is neo-Darwinian evolution.
Secondly, I think that the approach that I present is very 'down to earth'. People understand cats. People can count the five digits on the animals that they see. It seems to me that my argument is compelling to us commoners.
So far, Mr. Davison, you have not directly critiqued my hypothesis. From what I can tell you certainly know the evolutionary party line. If you put your RM+NS hat on, does the lack of 6 digit creatures seem comfortable, or it it yet another example of something that just doesn't fit the theory?
IP: Logged
|
|
Shi
Member
Member # 1923
|
posted 24. March 2006 17:21
Bruce,
I agree with your original post very much and I have been thinking about the same issue for a long time. I have some novel insights to share. We need to realize that the number 5 is incredibly common in many fundamental phenomenon of nature. Here is part of a draft of what I wrote recently summerizing 5 in the physical and metaphysical phenomenon of nature.
I see the number five in almost all blossoms which lead the way for a fruit, that is, for creation. - from Johannes Kepler, (1571-1630)
The origin of human consciousness is thought to be directly initiated by the counting of 5 fingers, long before man could read and write {Ore, 1948 #3704; Seife, 2000 #3703; Barrow, 1992 #3719}. In English we use the term digits for the numerals. In Chinese, the spelling Zhi for the word digits also spells the word for intelligence. The left parietal lobe of the human brain is the region that controls both the fingers and arithmetic performance. The hand is unusually over-represented in the brain as illustrated by the Penfield brain map. The prevalence of the so-called pentadactyl pattern in the limbs of all major terrestrial vertebrates is a puzzle to Darwinism as well as to religion since neither chance nor a religious God should somehow favor 5 and be restricted to the same 5-bone pattern for such diverse tasks as grasping, flying, flipping, digging, and walking. In contrast, it is more common to find in nature a few different designs that will do the same job, e.g., there are dozens of different eye designs. Given the unusual linkage between fingers and brain function, the fact that humans have 5 fingers rather than any other numbers suggests that higher life forms and consciousness are 5-based. They seem to have evolved from an ancestor 5-based animal, as suggested by the fact that the immediate ancestor of starfish and other pentamerous echinoderms also produced the human lineage. To the ancient Greeks, numbers and philosophy were inseparable and the mystical symbol of the Pythagoreans was the pentagram, a five-pointed star. Flowers with 5 petals, comparing to those with other numbers, signal foods, love (wild roses), and moral character (plum blossoms to the Chinese) to man. Over the ages, five and the pentagram star have become the symbol of excellence (e.g., five-star hotels, movies, book reviews) and authority ('five-star' generals). The flags of more than sixty nations depict five-pointed stars and the flag of the world's most populous nation has exactly 5 such stars. In Chinese, there is an old phrase, Jiu Wu Zhi Zun, that originates from the book I-Ching and literally means 9 (male) at the 5th position is the ultimate nobility and emperor. The Chinese language pronounces 5 (Wu) the same as the self and similarly as the emperor (Huang ) or king (Wang ), suggesting 5 may have had a direct impact on the origin of languages. Five appears in the oldest Chinese legend “NuWa Mended the Sky” (see wikipidia for the story) which is about the creator Goddess NuWa who mended the Heaven with 5-colored stones to restore order to a chaotic world. The written Chinese symbol for 5, and its pronunciation Wu were used to build the written form and the sound of the words for the 'self and 'enlightenment '. This implies that human 'self enlightenment may be directly tied to 5.
I am working on a hypothesis that the supernatural creator is a mathematician. The dominance of 5 is based on its mathematical property. Among all natural numbers, 5 is uniquely special or the Emperor number. What we need is a mathematical proof that 5 is the most outstanding number among all numbers. This would then establish a correlation between the most outstanding number in nature and the most outstanding number in the supernatural world of math. Since there is no way that such a correlation could be accidental, it would prove the existance of a supernatural mathematician creator. If an objective analysis of numbers suggests that 5 is the most special number, it would mean that any form of mathematics-based intelligence should be able to appreciate the unique status of 5 and that the highest intelligence in the universe may be 5-based. Since humans are the highest form of 5-based lives on earth, it may be concluded that humans may represent the highest form of intelligence in the natural universe and the ultimate goal of creation/evolution.
As the chinese words for self enlightment suggests, until we understand 5, we will not be truely enlightened or conscious. Man first displayed phenotypes of consciousness superior to animals with the counting of 5 fingers and will not be truly conscious until he can grasp why 5 fingers.
IP: Logged
|
|
Shi
Member
Member # 1923
|
posted 24. March 2006 18:33
There seem to be no natural reasons for 5 to be the preferred; 5 petals or 5 fingers are not essential for life and other numbers of petals or fingers do exist in some species. The prominence of 5 in life represents a clear case of gratuitous mathematical orderliness that is above and beyond the requirements for life. Its purpose may be to express the unity between the natural and supernatural and the existence of a supernatural mathematician creator.
The universal code for consciousness :
Phenotypes must have genotypes that consist of messengers and messages carried by the messengers. The bigger the physical size of the messenger, the more detailed contents it may carry. But detailed contents are necessarily less fundamental. The deepest message may be the simplest and could be carried by mass-less and seemly content-less messengers. The natural numbers may be the carriers of the simplest but deepest information on the fundamental phenotypes of consciousness. It may serve as the universal code of communication between the supernatural and the natural. The natural world will remain unconscious of the supernatural reality unless it can decipher the simple code emitted from that reality. Many authors have suggested prime numbers as a tool of contact between cosmic intelligences, but all have been blind to the possibilities: A) mere awareness of primes defined by a tautology may be rather primitive; B) real messages may be coded by the true definition of primes and the pattern of primes; C) human may have been at the receiving end of a prime code for thousands of years. The seemly elusive phenotype of a spiritual Goddess may turn out to have the most solid and timeless genotype as in a code of numbers.
The greatest unsolved problem in mathematics, the Riemann hypothesis, is about primes and may well turn out to be one of those unprovable problems of Godel. Perhaps the real problem about primes is to uncover its true definition. Any scientific search for the ultimate will inevitably rely on mathematics and may rest on the primes, the holy grail of mathematics that embodies the ultimate beauty of unity of extreme polar opposites, the maximum in simplicity and the maximum in depth and mystery. Simple that every one could understand but deep that it may reveal the ultimate mystery and has remained elusive since the dawn of civilization.
IP: Logged
|
|
Shi
Member
Member # 1923
|
posted 24. March 2006 18:35
When you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. - Lord Kelvin (William Thomson; 1824-1907)
IP: Logged
|
|
Bruce Fast
Member
Member # 924
|
posted 25. March 2006 00:29
quote:
I see the number five in almost all blossoms which lead the way for a fruit, that is, for creation. - from Johannes Kepler, (1571-1630)
Hmmm, interesting. So not only is there a pattern going on (by the way, I see this same patterning in your post about Denton's work) but that there is some "fantacy" that the creator has with then number 5. I will have to keep my eyes open for this phenomenon.
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 25. March 2006 13:14
There is a great deal of mathematical mystery associated with the number 5. It is the number of the platonic solids, which is why Kepler was to taken by it. It is the number of our senses. The five sided star or pentagram exhibits that wonderful number Phi discovered by the Pythagoreans, perhaps by Pythagoras himself in the 4th or 5th century B.C. The ratio of the side to the base of each the five triangles that comprise the pentagram is 1.61803398...., the only number whose square increases it by 1 and whose reciprocal decreases it by 1. Don't take my word for it. Get out your calculator and prove it to yourself. It is also the limit which is approached when, beginning with any two numbers, their addition when divided by the previous term approaches Phi (Lucas Series), as for example, 2 and 5, 7, 12, 19, 31, 50, 81, 131, 212, 343... 343/212 = 1.6179245, slightly below Phi, while the next term 555 yieds the ratio 1.6l8075802, slightly above Phi. The terms alternate below and above Phi approaching it as a limit.
I have still seen no good explanation for why this should be so.
Geometrically, Phi can be expressed by considering the line:
A______________C__________B
AB/AC = AC/BC = Phi = 1.61803398....
This is the way the Pythagoreans first arrived at it.
Accordingly it does not surprise me that 5 should be so basic to the vertebrate limb.
Galileo regarded himself as a Phyagorean and so do I. There is nothing wrong with a bit of mysticism in science.
IP: Logged
|
|
Bruce Fast
Member
Member # 924
|
posted 26. March 2006 12:33
Wow. I have never heard mention of the "golden ratio" phi. It seems to be in the same family as pi and e. My little pentadactyl discovery is proving more and more interesting.
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 26. March 2006 13:02
Bruce
Phi is far more mysterious than either pi or e, if by e you mean the base e of natural logarithms. It pops up in all sorts of unexpected places and apparently for unexplained reasons. Perhaps some mathematician can explain why the Lucas Series approaches Phi.
The pentagram or pentacle unfortunately has an undeserved reputation as a symbol of evil. Anything as beautiful as that certainly should never be considered evil. I have one on a chain which I wear on occasion suspended by one of the points. If it is suspended from between two points it might resemble the devil with his two horns and a pointed beard beneath which might account for it being associated with evil.
IP: Logged
|
|
Bruce Fast
Member
Member # 924
|
posted 26. March 2006 18:27
One of my main intrigues about Phi is how unrecognized it is. It honestly seems like it's a number that hasn't fit into the grid of the scientific/mathematic community, so it is ignored. It sounds awfully like the treatment received by your favorite naturalists. I've been googling a bit about it, and have found very little real information on Phi. Do you have any good source information on this number?
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 27. March 2006 06:40
H.E. Huntley has a nice book "The Divine Proportion" for under six bucks at Amazon.
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 27. March 2006 06:57
If you forget it you can always get it by taking the cosine of 72 degrees which is the angle at the base of the 5 triangles in the pentagram. That is 0.309016994 which is half of 1/phi. 1/phi is then 0.618033988 and phi is 1.618033988.
IP: Logged
|
|
Shi
Member
Member # 1923
|
posted 27. March 2006 11:54
The best web site on the golden ratio is www.goldennumber.net/ five(5).htm
The Lucas series is more commonly known as the Fibonacci series. Fibonacci numbers converges to the so called Golden Ratio/Number or Divine Proportion 1.618033. . . The Fibonacci numbers and the Golden Ratio commonly pop up in nature and are associated with absolute beauty and harmony, see the book by Livio, The golden ratio. The discovery of the Golden Ratio was directly related to the Pythagorean's fascination with the number 5 and the five-pointed star.
The Golden Ratio can be expressed in several ways using 5 only (www.goldennumber.net/ five(5).htm). It seems to me that When we understand 5, we will also understand the golden ratio. The same law that makes 5 the preferred number in nature also makes the golden number the number of perfection and beauty in nature.
Bruce, the golden number is actually well known in mainstream science. It is just that no one can explain its prevalence in nature or knows how to study it. Since it also has the name of divine proportion, science usually are silent whenever the word divine is mentioned.
John, I am not aware that the pentagram is associated with evil. Can you please give some examples?
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 27. March 2006 14:57
The Fibonacci series is not the same as the Lucas series. The Fibonacci series starts with one + one. The Lucas series can start with ANY two numbers. The both converge on Phi. Don't tske my word for it. Just try it.
IP: Logged
|
|
John A. Davison
Member
Member # 1425
|
posted 27. March 2006 15:06
I gave the example in an earlier post. It is well known as a symbol of evil, especially among devout Christians.
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic