I blogged about Pope Leo XIV here. Pope Leo XIV has an undergraduate degree in mathematics. He saw my post and asked for my help with his latest encyclical.
LEO: Let's have lunch together at Popeyes.
BILL: Why Popeyes?
LEO: The name is Pope-yes so I get a discount.
BILL: Your treat. [We met at Pope-yes and had the following discussion.]
LEO: I am working on an encyclical to resolve the tension between miracles in the Bible and modern science.
BILL: What's the issue?
LEO: The Bible has miracles in it that seem to violate the laws of science. There are a few ways to resolve this cosmic conflict.
a) The miracles are allegorical. This is insulting to both God and Man.
b) The miracles can be explained by natural phenomena. For example:
The Red Sea was split by a big wind. This is acceptable. The timing of the big wind is the miracle.
BILL: Let me guess the problem: There are some miracles that cannot fit into modern science.
LEO: Exactly! And I hope that Christians who are scientists (not to be confused with Christian Science, see here) will take up the study of miracles and see how they can fit into modern science.
BILL: Give me an example of a miracle that cannot be resolved with modern science and we'll see what we can do about that.
LEO: Recall the miracle of loaves and fishes:
---------------------------------------------
A crowd of 4000 came to hear Jesus preach. When he was done they were hungry.
Jesus told his disciples:
I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. I do not want to send them away hungry, or they may collapse on the way. What food do we have?
The disciples responded:
Seven loaves and a few small fish.
Jesus told the crowd to sit down on the ground. Then he took the seven loaves and the fish and when he had given thanks, he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and they in turn gave to the people. They all ate and were satisfied. There were even leftovers.
--------------------------------------------
So how could Jesus take seven loaves of bread and a few fish and feed thousands of people? How can this be explained with modern science?
BILL: I have a way to resolve it but you may not like it.
LEO: Let's hear it.
BILL: Jesus used the Banach-Tarski paradox (see here) --- when he broke the bread, he divided one loaf into 5 pieces, some of which were not measurable, and put them back together to get two loaves. Repeat until you can feed 5000 people. Same with the fishes.
LEO: Great! Why wouldn't I like that?
BILL: It only works if you're pro-(axiom of) choice.
LEO: I'll have to run this by a subset of my advisors.
BILL: Which subset?
LEO: The Large Cardinals
I had only heard of the Banach-Tarski Paradox involving spheres. But the Wiki page indicates that the strong form of that works for bounded sets.
ReplyDeleteIt does require three dimensions; fortunately for your argument, bread and fishes are three-dimensional :)
So BT might not work on very thin Matzoh.
DeleteThe plural of "fish" is "fish", not "fishes"!
ReplyDeleteIt can be ''fishes'' if they are different species.
DeleteI posted a transcription of my conversation the Pope and in that conversation I used the word `fishes'. So the blog is correct in recording my incorrect use of the word.
Deletelol
Deleteyou are getting really good at this
this is getting to the level of Monty Python and Mr. Bean comic.
https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Fishes-Oliver-Gorce/dp/B000MKNLJ0
ReplyDeleteThe B-T is supported by the following from the New International translation of the Bible:
ReplyDeleteEphesians 3:20: Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us,
lol
ReplyDeletewell, "the science" can neither explain big bang.
ReplyDeleteand in more recent quantum physics, to make some integrals work, they assume particles coming into existence and going away, randomly at scale.
maybe, just maybe, some of those decided to stay around. the probability of them turning into brass is not zero mathematically, so if you are a frequentist about probability, your should assume that it occurs.
so as long as your system is based on probability, miracles happening is not surprising at all. in fact your should expect some to be happening somewhere across the world every second, by the laws of probability.
you don't even need axiom of choice.