I think you might not understand the new Theist definition of immaterial: It doesn't just mean not made up of matter it also means no made of energy. If you want to add not made of information also you can but I've heard it argued that God is made of information.

You're right, I should have said "information" or "observations". Thanks for the correction! Those eventually lead to the facts we ascertain about our universe. God is still the middle man, because if the author (Russell) is claiming God is "information" then we are essentially describing the same thing. Therefore, just call it information/observations and leave the God talk for non-material matters.

you equated God and facts but it seems like God should be equated with "all the observations we see in the world", and not as the middle man.

Oleg

Thanks for the compliment! I'd recommend reading the following

The Drunkard's Walk
Scale
The Unpersuadables
The God Delusion

I'm a scientist by trade so my thinking process stems mainly from my training. I also watch videos about atheism by Ricky Gervais, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins. I like the way they think and present information.

Let me know if I can be of help in any other way!

Joshua

Hey Joshua, can you recommend any literature (or any other media) concerning information/matter/time/god please? I find your way of thinking resonating with mine, interested in learning more. Thanks!

I agree with that, but information are facts that are learned about a particular object. Humans came along and discovered the Fibonacci Sequence and gave it a name. The reason that sequence exists is because of its structural advantage to the survival of the organism and those traits have been maintained throughout genetic lineages.

Patterns are simply descriptions of information, so if I give you numbers 1, 3, 9, 27, these numbers may seem arbitrary but your brain may be able to pick up a pattern. This skill is what makes humans (and other animals) adept to adapting to their environment, because it gives them the ability to make predictions.

Isomers contain different information just as the shape of your finger either pointing or not has different information. They are simply occupying different areas of three dimensional space. One orientation of my finger allows me to poke something, one does not (at least with my finger).

There are different chemical concentrations of certain biochemicals in the cow that define it as living or dead and that information informs us between the difference of things. But to claim this information as "God" simply means that he is a description of all the observations we see in the world and therefore "facts" and "God" are the same. So let's cut out the middle man and call them facts.

Immaterial would also include patterns such as the Fibonacci series, which determines the form of many material entities including snails and flower patterns. Perhaps patterns is a type of information. Information itself is often coded in the material but is immaterial in itself. In isomers the molecular pattern is different hence they contain different information. Complex substantial entities is composed of matter plus information. Perhaps that would explain the difference between the living and dead cow -same substance but different information.

Francis Collins, Christian and head of the Human Genome Project, says that you cannot observe God through scientific methods because he is not material, he is immaterial.

Isomers: You are correct that isomers can come in a variety of forms but you can also say the same thing about the human hand. It can be closed, open, shaped like a fist-bump, but in order to take a form, once has to be material.

Phase changes- Same argument as above.

Surface- A surface is just an aspect of the table. It may be in two-dimensions but still could have a depth of one atom (which are material objects). It just depends on how well defined your dimensions are.

Shape- Same argument as 1 and 2.

You are correct in that a form isn't material, but in order to have a form you must be material. How can an immaterial object or "nothing" have a form if there is not material to take different shapes?

Lastly, the dead cow example is not a great example because if you look in enough detail, you will discover that chemically, the two are very different. The homeostasis of biochemistry in living organisms is so precise that the imbalance of it is often the byproduct of death. The living cow is also breathing so it is taking in more atmospheric gases (nitrogen, oxygen, etc.) which are material things inside of its longs therefore making it different in material.

A human dead from cyanide is almost the same as a human not dead but the difference between them, no matter how negligible, is the cyanide.

I want to reiterate I have no bad blood towards this post. I am aware of the bravery it takes to place ones personal views out into the ether. Kudos to you good sir and to our endeavors in the future.