My Intelligent Design Priority

Dr. Robert A. Herrmann

1 NOV 2000. Last revision 10 FEB 2016.

[Note: To correspond to the quotations used in this article, the notion of a natural-system is utilized. The term "natural" means "physical."] The general philosophic notion that natural-system behavior displays "intelligent" design is not a recent idea. My priority is that I'm the first individual to apply rigorous scientific techniques to this notion. Specifically, mathematical models are constructed that imply that all known aspects of natural-system behavior and the patterns produced by such behavior can be "interpreted" as the direct actions of definable intelligent agency. Under this interpretation, natural-system behavior displays patterns that indirectly imply that such behavior is the result of intelligent design.

In October 1978, I discovered a method to model mathematically certain philosophical concepts by using my mathematical theory of nonstandard consequence operators. In August 1979, I was to give a paper before a gathering of mathematicians at the Summer Meeting of The American Mathematical Society at the University of Minnesota at Duluth. I boarded an airplane at Chicago for the last leg of my trip, and who should be setting next to me at the window seat but John Wheeler, the Joseph Henry Professor of Physics Emeritus at Princeton.

We discussed various things, but in particular, the notion of a "General Grand Unification Theory." It was during this discussion that the idea came to me that the operators I used in my 1978 investigations, operators that mirror intelligence, could also model natural-system behavior. Indeed, I conjectured that "mental process operators" such as nonstandard consequence operators could be used to model mathematically all specific aspects of natural-system behavior and, hence, all patterns produced by such behavior. Since consequence operators are models for deductive thought in the broadest sense, then what I would have, if I could complete all of the extensive mathematical analysis needed, is a mathematical model that establishs through application of indirect evidence that all specific natural-system behavior and the patterns (designs) produced by such behavior can be interpreted as the result of an intelligent agent. This model can be interpreted in terms of a physical, intelligent design, or theological language. Relative to intelligent design, I'm the first individual [beginning in 1979] to establish scientifically how an intelligent agent can produce natural-system behavior and the designs associated with such behavior. Thus far, I'm the only individual to have solved this problem completely and independent from any restricted definition for design.

I began to publish formally these results in papers that concentrated upon the philosophical aspects or that concentrated upon the pure scientific intelligent design aspects for natural-system behavior. The first formal paper appeared in 1982 with an important abstract published in 1981.

1. Herrmann, Robert A. "The Reasonableness of Metaphysical Evidence," Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, 34(1982): 17-23. ["Mathematical Philosophy," Abstracts of Papers Presented before the American Mathematical Society 2(6)(1981):527 (Received 7/8/81).]

This article presents my preliminary research in rationally modeling specific Christian doctrine by means of mathematical structures. The Oct 1981 announcement states that I had successfully modeled the C. S. Lewis statements ". . . events in the remotest parts of space appear to obey the laws of rational thought" and "According to it what is behind the universe is more like a mind than it is any thing else we know" as well as the statement made by deBroglie "Our material universe has something in common with the working of the human mind." This announcement is not the specific theological interpretation for my findings. It is clearly intended to imply the physical and intelligent designed aspects for the original findings. If this predicted form of intelligent agency is compared to human mental processes, then these actions are those one would associate with a higher-intelligence - an intelligence that can perform all human levels of thought and actions that do not correspond to any form of thought performed by any physical entity. Such a higher-intelligence has "similar" general properties that one would associate with "intelligence."

The full article is mostly related to a very involved model for higher behavior I called the G-model. However, the G-model modeling procedure yields intelligent actions as well, and was known at that time to also lead to an intelligent agent that designs an underlying behavior for all natural-systems and leads to a specific underlying unification for all such behavior as indicated by my abstract. Although this wasn't the reason for this complete article, I did name in my description of the "Secular Hypothesis" (p. 20) certain concepts.

It was known that certain physical theories have contradictory hypothesis but still predict the same verified results. (The Discreteness Paradox - which I solved shortly after this publication.) I mentioned in this article that the G-model modeled all the specified notions in this hypothesis and this includes all "natural laws" and the notion of "Divine reasoning." "More specifically it logically models all of those terms which are expressed in the body of the secular hypothesis, among others, in an evidently consistent and non-contradictory manner" (p. 21). I also state on page 21, "The entire body of the G-model(Applied to C. S. Lewis) [original 1978, published 1980] is an attempt to show - simply and intuitively - how this model logically yields Lewis' theological descriptions by giving the reader the mathematically predicted statements. . . ." In that book, I, in complete generality, modeled the statement ". . . events in the remotest parts of space appear to obey the laws of rational thought." This is the intelligent design interpretation displayed by the signatures of the operators used. I did not model, at that time, specific forms of natural-system behavior.

Below is my second article relative to the modeling of a specific form of definable intelligence. This article is used to give a more detailed explanation as to how the MA-model is constructed, how the model specifically establishes an underlying intelligent design for natural-system behavior and how the corresponding intelligent agent can be interpreted theologically. The MA-model is a particular GGU-model mode for universe creation.

2. Herrmann, Robert A. "The Word," C. R. S. Quarterly 20(1984):226-229 (Received 4/29/83).

In this article, I presented additional concepts developed during 1981-1982 concerning how a definable intelligence, in a complete manner, can produce an underlying unification for all natural-system behavior, a specific natural-system design I call a "developmental paradigm." In what follows, for simplicity, I've substituted the term "image" for the technical term "frozen segment." The term "Divine" is a theological interpretation for a mathematical object now generally denoted by the prefix "ultra" in other applications. I've indicated the secular term outside the square brackets and the theological term inside the brackets. This secular term substitution process is how one trivially interprets these results in physical-like terms.

I wrote on page 228, "It so happens that ultra-propositional [Divine] deduction applied to this single [Divine] ultraword yields in the proper sequential order each and every image from a developmental paradigm that represents a developing universe. We can assume that each of these images directly correlates to a real material universe . . . . Certain aspects of how [Divine] ultra-deduction could actually produce such a universe can also be investigated." " . . . the creation and development of every natural system perceived by the human being is produced by a [Divine] ultra-deduction and is thus a product of a partially describable higher-intelligence ['supermind']" (p. 229.) (As discussed below, I was forced to change the original secular terminology to that indicated.) All of these results are strict interpretations of symbols that appear within a mathematical structure. This paper was a prolog to a series of articles that consisted of a very extensive treatise entitled "Nature: The Supreme Logician."

It's self-evident from this series title what this research implies. The design presented to us by Nature can be interpreted as an intelligent design modeled by various levels of "intelligent thought." I began the process of publishing the remaining series papers, papers that discuss these research results. Further, formal announcements were presented to the mathematics community stating some of the specific mathematical theorems established.

Herrmann, R. A. Abstracts of Papers Presented to the American Mathematical Society, "Nonstandard consequence operators I," 5(1)(Jan. 1984):129. "Nonstandard consequence operators II," 5(2)(Feb. 1984):195. "D-world alphabets I," 5(4)(June 1984):767. "D-world alphabets II," 5(5)(Aug. 1984):328. "A solution to the grand unification problem," 7(2)(March 1986):238.

3. Herrmann, Robert A., "Developmental Paradigms," C. R. S. Quarterly 22(1986):189-197 (Received 8/26/84).

This is an extensive article on the D-world (Deductive world) model relative to the design of the underlying unification for all natural-system behavior. This unification yields the most basic design feature associated with the investigation of a natural-system, its development. "This is the third article in the series Nature: The Supreme Logician. In this article, the ultralogical [supermind] processes associated with the deductive-world model are discussed. . . . It is shown how this object and the ultralogical [supermind] processes deterministically generate the entire universe in which we dwell . . . ." (p. 189) On page 191 under the section heading "Developmental Paradigms," I specifically state that I will discuss the "supermind" processes in this section. These are the processes modeled by the "D-world" model. [The terminology has been changed since this article was published and these are now termed as processes associated with a higher-intelligence - the "ultra-stuff."] "There exists a D-world process, a uni-word process *S({w}), that in a [super] ultrauniform manner produces the behavior and characteristics of a named natural system as well as the behavior and characteristics of named constituents contained within the named natural system as it develops with respect to cosmic time" (p. 193.)

4. Herrmann, Robert A., "Fractals and Ultrasmooth Microeffects," J. Math. Physics, 30(4) April 1989:805-808 (Received 5/26/88).

"This internal process is termed an ultranatural process and is hidden from direct observation . . . . A major application of the procedures established within this present paper is relative to the concept of design and order that can be rationally assumed to influence the development of a natural system." (p. 807) The article discusses various ultranatural processes, one of which is useful for the GGU-model. It shows that discrete behavior can be considered as a restriction of a hidden *continuous process as described in Theorem 4.1. Such a process is "intelligently designed" and the consequences of the process are also "intelligently" design. This fact is obvious and need not be explicitly stated.

These are the first formal publications and formal announcements that appeared in journal form and that discuss the specific results obtained from these mathematical models. These results establish scientifically the model-theoretic interpretation that natural-system behavior and, consequently, any products obtained from such behavior can be considered as designed or produced by actions taken by a higher-intelligence. Some of my other published journal papers, formal abstracts and one general audience book relative to modeling scientifically such "intelligent design" are listed below.

Herrmann, R. A. 1986. "D-World Evidence," C.R.S. Quarterly 23(2):47-5.

Herrmann, R. A. 1987. "Nonstandard Consequence Operators," Kobe J. Math. 4(1):1-14.

Herrmann, R. A. 1988. "Physics is Legislated by a Cosmogony," Speculations in Science and Tech., 11(1):17-24.

The organization "Students for Origins Research," changed its name to "Access Research Network (ARN)." They are now one of the major disseminators of the Dembski, Johnson, Behe and Discovery Institute notions of restricted design theory. This Letter to the Editor, using older terminology, was sent to them On 16 Aug. 1993. Members of this organization also know of my priority. At the bottom of page 2, I specifically write, "All natural system behavior is controlled by an 'ultra-uniform' and an 'ultra-intelligence.' "

Herrmann, R. A. 1994. "The Scientific Existence of a Higher Intelligence," C.R.S. Quarterly 30(4):218-222.

Herrmann, R. A. 1999. "Information Theory, Consequence Operators, and the Origin of Life," C.R.S. Quarterly 36(3):123-132.

Herrmann, R. A. 2001. "Ultralogics and probability models," Inter. J. Math. Math. Sci. 27(5):321-325

Herrmann, R. A. 2001. "Hyperfinite and standard unifications for physical theories," Inter. J. Math. Math. Sci. 28(2):93-102.

Herrmann, Robert A. 2002. Science Declares Our Universe IS Intelligently Designed, (Xulon Press).

Herrmann, Robert A. 2004. "The best possible unification for any collection of physical theories," Inter. J. Math. Math. Sci., 17:861-721

Presented papers

Herrmann, R. A. 1994. "Solution to the General Grand Unification Problem (1986-1994)," Mathematical Association of America, 12 Nov. Western Maryland College. See this URL. Also see this archive.

The facts are that, as of the original date of this Web page, a great many new results have been established that extend greatly my General Intelligent Design (GID) model. These remarkable results will be published formally in the near future.

As a Federal Government employee, I was restricted in various activities and, if I use government facilities, this includes commercial book publication. My book "The Theory of Ultralogics" that gives the foundations for the mathematical theory used in my investigations of intelligent design is obtainable free of charge at this URL or from this archive. Part I and Part II.

Throughout the development of these modeling concepts there were various terminology changes forced upon me due to a priority. I used the prefix "super" to identify various mathematical operators. I now simply use the prefix "ultra." I discovered that Weinberg had, during his investigations and in quantum logic, apparently coined the term "superlogic." This forced me to change most of the terms I used in the middle and late 1980s from the ones that appear in these older papers to terms distinct from Weinberg's. There is a cross reference available at this URL.

Some of the features of my models are compared with the considerable more recent models championed by members of the Discovery Institute in this short article.

Note that the above major papers appear in my publication list in the Templeton Foundation publication "Who's Who In Theology and Science" (1992, at the least).


Click back button, or if you retrieved this file directly from the Internet, then return to top of home page. If you retrieved this file while on my website, then return to top of home page.