Scientific support for the Bible?Rodney 101 comments
It's not going to go down well, on Rustylime but after a long spate of somewhat repetatively themed articles, I thought I'd post one from the other side of the fence. Actually I deliberated about this for a while, because I don't like comment forums that just turn into bun-fights and this has the potential to (not to mentioned I struggled to find something I actually wanted to post). However I'm going to do it for a bit of fun and discussion, here on RL. I've been thinking about doing a controversial RL article for some time, and being a maths nerd, this one looked like a goer, for me.
A career statistician has discovered something peculiar about the Bible - it makes sense mathematically.
Haim Shore, an atheist professor of mathematics and statistics from Ben-Gurion University, discovered something funny about the Bible, when performing a small experiment for fun (maths teachers are weird, after all). As a result, he went on to do further research and found at that at a deep mathematical level, the Bible adds up in ways that are simply too many and too complex to be a mere coincidence.
To further understand, you need to recall that the Bible was originally written in Hebrew, an alphabet where numbers and letter are represented with the same characters. For example, the Hebrew letter, Alef (a), is a 1, Beit (b) is a 2, etc. Using the numerical value for words to understand their meaning is a common method of Biblical interpretation. Armed with this, Professor Shore went on to conduct an experiment into colours.
It turns out that Hebrew biblical words for "red", "blue", "yellow", "blue", "purple", etc actually match their exact light-wavelengths, when viewed as numbers, instead of letters. Considering the Bible was written some 4,000 years ago, this clearly pre-dates knowledge of the frequency of the wavelengths of the visible spectrum of electromagnetic radiation.
Surprised by this outcome, Shore went on to build models of other words found in the Bible, and found some other occurrences which he feels are too strong to be coincidences.
Shore next turned his attention to the diameters of the Earth, Sun, Moon, etc, as mentioned in the Bible. Following the same theorem as above, Shore converted these bodies into their numerical values and found that, while they don't add up to the same size as the real things, they maintain the exact same ratios in terms of size differences (compared to the diameters as published by NASA).
Shore went on to discover hundreds more examples like the above, such as the word for "year" adding up to the number of days in a year (which was not accurately know 4,000 years ago), and has now published a book, "Coincidences in the Bible".
Professor Shore is keen to make clear that he's not trying to convince anyone of anything and that he's likewise not trying to prove or disprove anything.
"...I have no intention of trying to tell anyone what this means, or how this information should be interpreted. All I did was publish what I found. As a scientist, as a matter of integrity, I felt compelled to offer what I'd found for discussion..."
Although he covers several more points, another notable issues is the old chestnut of 7 days of creation. A less mainstream but well known argument for 7 days of creation is that, from a central point of perspective, the Earth could very well have been created in 7 days. I.e. (in short), as you go faster, time slows down - as the Universe expands and time slows down. For those who don't know it, the very condensed version is something like this:
The universe started out as a big bang. A singularity. I.e. no distance (read: no time). Then it expanded. Time started. But it was really close together, so time was moving a fair bit faster, to our perspective (but importantly, not to the perspective of those outside the big bang). Over the next 15 billion years the universe expanded 1 trillion fold (1 million, million times). Forgetting the complex version of the maths, the really basic version says that we need to divide days by expansion, so: 15 billion * 365 / 1000000000000 = 5.5 (and on the 6th day God created man, etc). This is therefore where "modern time" kicks in.
So looking into this, Shore found that by comparing the ratios of the current estimated periods in which each period of life began on Earth and once again, they correlate almost perfectly (less than 1% variation).
"...I started by taking the events of the first chapter of Genesis - just the facts as given, no interpretation. 'Light' was created on the first day; on the second - the sky; on the fourth - the sun and the moon were set in place; on the fifth - marine and bird life; and on the sixth day, according to oral Torah, Adam and Eve were created at the end of the 14th hour..."
"...I took the six points and correlated each Biblical day - '1 day,' '2 day' - with the scientifically established time period. For example, science has established that galaxies started to be formed about 11.8 billion years ago, the sun and the moon, 4.5 billion years ago, etc. I plotted the cosmological age on the vertical axis and the Biblical timeline (day - one through six) on the horizontal axis. I found them to be arranged in a straight line..."
Shore calculates that the probability of this marrying up by pure chance is around 0.0021%.
Anyway, I am not trying to prove or disprove anything and certainly not trying to convince anyone to change their beliefs in any way - just coming form a background of physics and maths at university, I found this to be very interesting and a good trend-bucker article for RL. Hope you enjoyed it and get a good discussion going.