A Miracle Producing Mechanism

Robert A. Herrmann, Ph.D.
15 JULY 2005. Last revision 1 FEB 2016.

Many years ago, I published the article in the ASA journal "The rationality of metaphysical evidence" 34(1)(1982): 17-23, where I discussed how the "G-model" could rationality model various metaphysical Christian concepts. However, it did not include anything about the General Grand Unification model (GGU-model) and a specific application of this model to Biblically described or otherwise accepted miracles. This has now all changed.

I never present GGU-model theological interpretations unless they are based upon mathematical reasoning. In general, what constitutes a physical "miracle" event is difficult to describe. Thus, the physical events considered here are but of one type.

For this article, a miracle event is a collection of physical events that have been requested by a human being in order to alter a specific physical state-of-affairs.

Such miracle events follow from a special application of the participator model aspects of the GGU-model. The most recent formalization of the GGU-model is applied to the miracle event via Theorem 2.2 in Herrmann (2004).

Recall the lack of knowledge aspects of the GGU-model as predicetd by the General ID (GID) model. The GID-model predicts the rational existence of an higher-language *L. Such a language rationally verifies Paul's 2 Cor 12:4 statement relative to a third heaven language. Hence, there is a point where any detailed description for how God may accomplish something is not presently possible, although such a description can rationally be assumed to exist. This corresponds to, at least, two other verses "There are secret things that belong to our LORD" (Deut. 29:29) and "For now, we see through a glass darkly; . . ." (1 Cor. 13:12). Thus, I need to restrain speculation.

The GGU-model gives a rational description as to how miracles can occur. This description shows that the behavior being described is "scientifically" rational. However, as with all indirectly verified behavior, the actual processes need not exactly follow the processes described.

This "miracle model" employs the inverse of the mixed logic-system used in Theorem 2.2 (Herrmann, (2004)). A request is made via members of the general language L. By special Divine selection, these correspond to a collection of *instructions {λi } (an *instruction-entity) as there denoted. This overrides any automatic aspect of the biological participator mechanism and, via the hyperfast properton, selects an appropriate *instruction paradigm *instruction-entity. In particular, for the basic participator alterations in the behavior of a developing universe, the hyperfast propertons correspond a specific *instruction-entity to a pre-designed *universe-wide frozen-frame. The specific designed *Λ(q,4)(p;x,λ), 1 ≤ p ≤ σ, are members a *developmental paradigm that includes all of the previously activated universe-wide frozen-frames. As described in Herrmann (2013, page 30-32), the info-field realization process now applies to a different *developmental paradigm beginning at the appropriately selected moment in the primitive sequence. (I note that the hyperfast propertons have also been used to give a mechanism for the quantum entanglement (Herrmann, 1999).)

In Herrmann (2002, Section 4.8), the original version of the GGU-model and the notion of the ultimate ultraword is employed to, at least, partially describe a participator universe model. Although this is altered by new 2013 formalization, the DVD illustrations presented there relative to hyperfast propertons (subparticles) aids in comprehension. This is particularly so, if each DVD is considered as but representing a specific universe's sequence of instruction-entities. What occurs for this DVD illustration is that the appropriate DVD is now activated via the laser at the appropriate disc location.

As indicated, for a miracle event, the automatic hyperfast properton selection process is replaced with direct Divine intervention. This produces what may be perceived as an unexpected and not physical-law predictable alteration in a physical state-of-affairs. Although such an alteration is not related to the notion of absolute randomness as applied within secular quantum physics, to those that are unaware of the circumstances that have led to these alterations, such events may be classified as allowed random events that are among those highly improbable events that are physical allowed to occur via presently known or yet to be determined physical law.


Herrmann, R. A., (1999). "The NSP-world and action-at-a-distance," In "Instantaneous Action at a Distance in Modern Physics: 'Pro' and 'Contra,' " Edited by Chubykalo, A., N. V. Pope and R. Smirnov-Rueda, (In CONTEMPORARY FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICS - V. V. Dvoeglazov (Ed.)) Nova Science Books and Journals, New York, 1999, Article 18.

Herrmann, R. A., (2002). "Science Declares Our Universes IS Intelligently Designed," Xulon Press, Fairfax, VA and other addresses.

Herrmann, R. A. (2004). Mixed Ultralogics

Herrmann, R. A. (2013) Nonstandard Ultra-logic-systems Applied to the GGU-model top of home page. If you retrieved this file while on my website, then return to top of home page.