Christian Union: The Magazine Summer 2017 | Page 25

Lennox pointed to the improbability of random- ness producing biologically significant materials, given the astronomical number of possible sequenc- es of the components of a DNA molecule and the simultaneous extreme specificity and precision of the sequence for biological functionality. Likewise, proteins require a “high degree of molecular sensi- tivity” and the mere substitution of a single amino acid can produce catastrophic results, according to God’s Undertaker. “Indeed, only a very tiny proportion of all pos- sible sequences on the DNA molecule will exhibit the specified complexity of biologically significant molecules,” Lennox wrote. “Math seems to be incredibly powerful for describing God’s creation. Physicists have thought this for a while.” —Matt O’Rourke 2 Essentially, it is unreasonable to expect that mere random chance produces complex biological mol- ecules that only function within rigid parameters. “It would be way easier to win the Powerball every day for the rest of your life,” O’Rourke quipped. That points to a key question for scholars and students alike. “Where does the seemingly under- lying intelligence come from?” O’Rourke asked. O’Rourke remains awed by the precise nature of mathematics and its ability to convey large subsets of information. “In principle, there is no logical reason why this abstract study of pattern should so perfectly and unfailingly describe God’s natural cre- ation,” he said. “There are an infinite number of frameworks/ perspectives through which one could view and interpret the natural world. The fact that we know of one and only one that does so with such radical success is completely remarkable.” | cu including technology, social media, pop music, and films. “Our hope is that these conversations will help students continue to develop a robust faith in Jesus Christ, while also equipping them to share the Gospel in a compelling way,” Antlitz said. During his segment, O’Rourke, who plans to pursue doctoral studies in theoretical physics at the California Institute of Technology in the fall semes- ter, noted that mathematics can be remarkabl y de- scriptive of natural phenomena. O’Rourke pointed the students in the audience to the reflections of the late Eugene Wigner, a No- bel Prize-winning Princeton professor of mathemat- ical physics. In his classic article on the philosophy of math- ematics and physics, Wigner noted the “enormous usefulness of mathematics in the natural sciences is something bordering on the mysterious and that there is no rational explanation for it.” In The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, Wigner explored how math- ematics and physics are so well matched that the coincidence is uncanny. The Hungarian-born athe- ist went on to ponder “why the success of mathe- matics in its role in physics appears so baffling.” In 1963, Wigner won the Nobel Prize in physics for his insight into the fundamental mathe­matics and physics of quantum mechanics. With a math- ematic approach to the atom, Wigner became one of the first to apprehend the deep implications of symmetry, which later emerged as one of the key principles of theoretical physics, according to Princ- eton documents. O’Rourke, a native of Massachusetts, also point- ed to some of the philosophical insights from John Lennox, a University of Oxford emeritus professor of mathematics and a Christian apologist. In God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God?, Lennox highlighted the apparent divine program- ming embedded throughout the universe, including in the enormously complex, but simultaneously precise, human genome. 23