IXΘYΣ;3748182:
The laws of physics are first and foremost the laws of God, put in place as part of creation. We describe a tiny slice of natural law (and I use the term in its original meaning of "the laws of creation") and give it a (usually a man's) name, e.g. Boyle's law, Henry's law, Charles' law, when we'd be far more accurate to say "Boyle's description" etc. Those descriptions inevitably run afoul of reality and turn out to be incomplete, the "view through the straw."
Science can only define itself relative to what it observes; even postulations of the unobservable (in science) ultimately depend on observations.
Consider this: all our observations of the physical world have a time reference. And Time, well, time is just one part of creation.
God's existence is in time, but outside time as well. Easy to say, not so easy to understand. It's that faith thing.
Personally I find nothing in science, nor do I expect to find anything, that denies a Great Plan from the Creator of the Universe, and I expect that the Universe is but one cog in the infinite wheel.
Yes, yes, the anthropomorphism of God would limit Him so, and yet even the hairs of your head are numbered, while at the same time He's attending to the formation of stars and the state of individual electrons and limitless things either side of those.
Remarkable beyond comprehension, isn't it?
Science is so much more fun when it's a Fantastic Adventure In Trusting Him (FAITH).
Science is nothing more than the ongoing discovery of our little corner of God's work.
You have introduced some fascinating questions of PHILOSOPHY, to wit:
a) "What if" the conventional-laws of modern science are actually also eternal-laws of (G)od?
b) How does our limited perception "through a straw" affect our scientific research?
c) "What if" (G)od exists both inside and outside of time?
These however are questions of modern philosophy, and have nothing to do with science nor with religion. If they were related to science, then it would be possible to set up experiments to test them; since this is impossible, they are not science related. If they were related to religion, then it would be possible to find specific answers to these questions given by the prophets in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament Law, Prophets, and Writings), or the Greek New Testament, or the Q'ran, or the Hindu Vedas.
I completely agree with you, however, that there is nothing in science, nor do I expect to find anything, that denies a Great Plan from the Creator of the Universe; although this is true simply because science and religion are completely unrelated. People who make the mistake of confusing them by putting them together, which is normally done by atheist-scientists seeking for answers outside of science, are demonstrating that they themselves know little about either science or religion. You on the other hand are clearly a gifted philosopher, trying to put them together and to bring them under the canopy of modern philosophy. Nice try, but same bad result.
Science is indeed likely nothing more than the ongoing physical discovery of our little corner of (G)od's work, although science will never be able to discover this (G)od, whomever he/she/it is, simply because this god or gods apparently does not want to be discovered, other than through his servants the prophets. That much seems clear, after 5000+ years of human history, and 3 centuries of science.
By the way, in your Greek spelling of IESOYS I suspect that you have left out one letter, the eta.
Your photo, on the other hand, is quite stunning, as is also your skill at philosophy.
