Differential Equations, Part 2; The Differential Operator:

Sophistry, The Standard, and belief based on sound reasoning are mentioned at paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13.


1. My math dictionary says an operator is the same as a function. An operator mathematically operates; i.e. it tells you what to do. In that sense the +, -, x, / (plus, minus, times, divide) are operators. The line equation, ax + b is an operator. So if a = 3, and b = 4, then we have 3x + 4. Given x = 7, this operator gives us 3(7) +4 = 25. It tells you what to do with the variable x, and in this case it maps x into 25.

2. The differential operator, D, tells you to differentiate. Let's say Y = x7, then DY = 7x6, and D2Y = 42x5, and D3Y = 210x4, etc. So the superscript of D tells you how many times to differentiate. If Y is any function that is differentiable, then D can operate( i.e. differentiate in this case) on it.


3. L1 and L4 do not express my confusion concerning the differential operator itself, but rather what can be done with it--it has enormous power in solving many DEs( differential equations). What one does is rewrite the DE, as at L2 and L5, in terms of the DO( differential operator), then solve the roots of the DO equation, and these roots give the solution to the DE. . . . WHAT? Yeah, in the TWILIGHT ZONE maybe, but not in this world! How can this possibly be? So I can just willy nilly write the DE as a DO equation, solve the zeros, and that is my solution. That is RIDICULOUS! These thoughts are what went through my mind when I first studied this technique. Even if the roots are complex, they will represent solutions. OK, fine, I went ahead and did it because I got the right answers, but it really bugs me when I'm using a mathematical technique, and I do not have at least an intuitive reason why it works. This hub gives you that intuitive reason.


4. Paragraph 3 introduced L1 through L7, but let's take a closer look. L2 represents a first order( which means the highest-ordered derivative), homogeneous( which means the equation equals zero instead of something else), ordinary( which means the derivatives are total derivatives, not partial derivatives), differential equation( DE). L5 represents a second order-homogeneous-ordinary DE. We assume the solution for L2 involves the base of the natural logarithms( linked) as at L3, but we do not know the value of m1 at L3 if not for the solution of D at L2. The same goes for L5. We assume the solution involves "e" as shown at L7, and the answer( solution for the DE) is also given at L7 because we solved the roots of the quadratic( at L5) at L6 which gives the values of m1 and m2 , which we plugged in at L7.


5. The differential operator( DO) does what the familiar operators listed at L9 and L10 do: differentiate functions. L11 is the DO of order "n", and an are the constant coefficients; however, the an's can also represent functions, not just constants. When Y is distributed across the DO as at L13 then we get the form of L12 and 12.1 in which the various nth order derivatives are executed upon the function Y = f( x).


6. At L13 we write the DE in the form of the DO, and we assume the solution to the DE has the form represented at L14. The solution to a DE is finding the original function, Y = f( x). We need to find the values of m1 , and m2 at L14. C1 and C2 are no sweat because they just represent a family of curves that behave as the function Y = f( x) dictates. We only distribute one term of L14 through the DO because we do not need the other term. Either term will give us the correct values of m1 and m2 . Y at L14 is a solution to our DE, but each term of Y is also a solution( these are called particular solutions). So we will use one of the particular solutions in Y to solve for all of Y( i.e. finding the values of m1 and m2 ). When we distribute Y through the DO equation at L13, we multiply Y by the constant, 12; however, because Y is to the right of the DO we operate on Y; we do not multiply it. To the right of D2 we take the 2nd derivative of Y, and to the right of D we take the 1st derivative, and to the right of 12 we just multiply it. This is all set up at L15, and 15.1, and the DO is executed at L16. You will be completely lost if you do not know how the differentiate. Village people( linked) gives a thorough description of what is differentiation, and Sierranicole24 gives( linked) several rules of differentiation. The first one, the Power Rule, is applicable to this hub.

7. Incidentally, the last factor of L15.1 was divided out on both sides of the equation so we could get rid of it. As explained previously we do not need C2em2x to find the values of m1 and m2 . The Power Rule( see last link above) was used at L16, and I describe how to differentiate an exponential function to the base e at hub#12.17( linked). Notice we have a common factor at L16; therefore, we can factor out that common factor and divide both sides of the equation at L16 with that factor to get rid of it, and that leaves us with L17. Notice it is the same quadratic as our DO equation at L5. So we can solve for D or m1 in either equation and we get L18, which gives the roots( zeros) at L19.


8. We plug the values of L19 into our assumed answer( see L3) at L20, and we work through the arithmetic from L21 through L24, and it does indeed equal zero.

9. This is a remarkable result that the DO can so greatly facilitate the solutions of so many DEs. As I mentioned previously, even if the roots are complex we can use Euler's formulas( mentioned at hub#12.12( linked)), and find solutions to the DEs.


10. There seems to be three beliefs that continue to gain ground: 1st. Everyone will be saved( go to heaven)--1 Timothy 4:10; 2nd. Perfect love is unconditional love; 3rd. All people, regardless of beliefs and religions, are God's children--Ephesians 4:6. I will address each one of these at the end of my math hubs, and you will be linked to each argument against them, beginning with this hub, when each argument is completed. The Scripture given in this paragraph was listed by a hubber who believes in all three. These three beliefs are the antithesis of what the Bible teaches, but they are only three of copious beliefs that contradict God's Word. Fallacious beliefs and statements can have Scripture attached to them as Satan did with Christ( Matthew 4:6), but one must use all of Scripture to determine what is true or false as Christ did with the Satan(Matt. 4:7).

11. It is remarkable how prevalent is sophistry throughout the world, let alone America. It is used to justify socialism, homosexuality, abortion, tolerance when rebuke is required, inflated wages, lying, ridiculous demands by unions, hatred of companies and the rich, injustice in many forms, cruelty to animals; rape of the taxpayer, especially the rich; and nearly everything else that is not congruent with Scripture.


12. Sometimes sophistry can be so well put, and so effective that the only way to identify it is with God's Word, the Bible. For a Christian, or even a professing christian, the Bible is the Standard by which all thoughts, actions, beliefs, arguments, behaviors, reasons, and logic are to be evaluated and judged, and then confirmed, or disregarded. More detail concerning sophistry is at paragraph 13 of hub#12.12( linked). The three beliefs at paragraph 10 above imply that regardless of your beliefs, religion, ongoing sins, lack of works, lukewarmness to Christ, you are saved; everyone is saved! It really makes no difference what you do or don't do. Yet paragraph 13 of hub#12.9( linked) has the Scripture that confirms we must obey God through Jesus Christ if we expect to get to heaven. God's Word is the Standard; we must trust that it means what it says in its entirety. Many people, including professing christians, believe hell does not exist, and some churches and religions embrace this belief. God's Word, the Bible, is the Standard to determine the reality of eternal hell. Paragraph 9 of hub#12.10( linked) has the Scripture to confirm that fact, and the conditions to stay out of eternal torment. Paragraph 10 of that hub mentions that our arbitrary opinions can lead us to hell. Do we actually think our opinions are a formidable force against God, His Word, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit?


13. The evidences! It is--to me--a no brainer. Paragraph 8 of hub#12.14( linked) gives an analogy of why random processes cannot build anything of significance, let alone structures as eyes, ears and brains that depend on other structures as gastrointestinal system, circulatory system and heart. Not only do the evidences within creation prove that God exists, but they also testify to God's omniscience and omnipotence. What about Jesus? How many more credentials does one need to prove He is who He says He is than healing hundreds, if not thousands of people, controlling the weather, walking on water, and raising the dead? The Bible is clearly a supernatural Word from God because of the fulfilled prophesies. Hub# 2 backs that up mathematically( linked). There is no way such consistently accurate predictions of the future can be made if not for the One Who inhabits eternity( Isaiah 57:15). The Bible speaks of the Holy Spirit, and that is all the proof we need to believe in Him, and anything else the Bible mentions.

More by this Author

Comments 11 comments

North Wind profile image

North Wind 4 years ago from The World (for now)

Hi Caleb,

Way to organize your words. Thank you for writing this. These beliefs have seeped into the church and seems to be spreading. It is dangerous because I believe it is conducive to the idea of a one religion new world type of thing.

Rev Earl Jackson profile image

Rev Earl Jackson 4 years ago from Massachusetts

Once again you hit the nail on the head. I think the most amazing thing about what you do is how you tie the beauty of God's amazing mathematics, with the infallible Scriptures. God is easily seen through the mathematical order in complexity which permeates the whole universe. The order, symmetry, simplicity, behavior and simultaneous complexity of all things proves God's fantastic mind. No fallible man could have ever conceived the laws that God has woven everywhere into the fabric of time, space and matter. You have a great ability to show this order in complexity through your mathematical formulas and the way you use them to show their direct cause in God. Thank you for your work.

Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 4 years ago Author

Hi North Wind;

It is seeping; it is spreading, and it is dangerous. The one world religion is just around the corner, as is the god of forces, the new god the Bible predicts. The only way to get through this unfathomable sophistry, which is being spewed out by puppets of Satan, is to adhere to God's Word like never before. I have seen some of the most committed Christians I have ever known succumbing to it.

Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 4 years ago Author

Thank you so much, Earl.

You wrote, " . . . into the fabric of time, space and matter." I unequivocally believe that. I think there are undiscovered laws of physics ,which are involved with the structure of space. The complexity of the color force, mediated by gluons, is so complex that it dwarfs the complexity of the electromagnetic force. Photons do not interact with one another but gluons do--Wow! That is taking complexity to a new dimension. I believe God is storing information in the structure of space, and the Electromagnetic force accesses this information to build proteins, DNA, etc.

If scientists would listen to the Bible, they would know there are two undiscovered forces on the macro-scale. Scripture says that God stretches the heavens( space). Two forces are involved in stretching a rubber band--pushing out, and pulling in--and they are both proportional to distance( gets stronger with distance). The electromagnetic force and gravity get weaker with distance. I have read they are now postulating a force that is expanding space, but to my knowledge they have not a clue about the one pulling in as space is being expanded.

I personally believe that time is created by God stretching space. Earl, you are just the man for me to ask this question: In Genesis 1:1 does the original Hebrew Scripture say in this order, God created the heaven in the beginning and the earth, or God created the heaven and the earth in the beginning? This would back up my theory.

Rev Earl Jackson profile image

Rev Earl Jackson 4 years ago from Massachusetts

I love your observations about about the missing aspects of scientific observation. It is clearly impossible for finite beings to observe everything. This is why some Biblical apologists have taught (and rightly so I think) that empiricism, or the idea that truth can be fully comprehended by observation alone, is a complete fallacy. Revelation, on the other hand, says that man cannot know everything by observation, instead God has "revealed Himself". When we leave out the idea of revelation, we can only "know in part", but when we include it, as we should, we can "know even as we are known" (1Cor. 13:12), because we will be "face to face" with the truth.

I think your question about Genesis 1:1 has only one answer. The Hebrew construction, at least as far as I can tell, but I am not a true expert on Hebrew by any means, but to me it seems to say the heavens and the earth we created simultaneously. Not in a certain order but at the same time. The English article "and" is missing in the Hebrew, and it was inserted by the translators for clarification, because our western minds think linearly rather than omni-directionally. I would say that Genesis 1:1 indicates that space, time and matter were all created at once. The verse is actually disproving the idea that matter in any form existed eternally. Matter cannot be eternal, in the sense of being timeless, for there is no before and after with that which is timeless. And if there is no before and after with matter, then it would

be impossible for it to be one way before and another way after. Therefore, if matter changes at all, it cannot be eternal. And matter could not have existed forever, for if matter is bound to time but has existed forever, then it would have an infinite past. But if it has an infinite past, it could never have reached the present. If it has reached the present, the past cannot be infinite. Therefore, matter is not eternal, but bound to time, and it originated at some point in time. God is "The Eternal", and Genesis 1:1 exists to show that. God is uncreated. He is eternal, timeless, and immutable. And he created the universe out of nothing, that is, without the use of any existing materials, since there were no existing materials when he created. The linguistics of the First verse of the bible show these facts. They do not show a particular order in the creative act, they show they act as one whole thing. It seems to show order in English, but this is a mistake. The order is spelled out in the verses after verse 2 where the "days" come into play. God seems to have stretched it all out in verse one, and then "formed" it into individual components beginning in verse 3. The two different words used are "created" and "made". "Created" is out of nothing. "Made" is out of existing materials. Hope this helps.

Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 4 years ago Author

Thanks Earl, it does help. Loved your chain of logic on matter and eternity.

newenglandsun 3 years ago

"but to me it seems to say the heavens and the earth we created simultaneously."

If I can lend you some assistance. It is actually probable that this part is only referring to the sky (atmosphere) and the land (which land?). It's better translated "In a beginning". But I am skeptical that the Hebrews took it uber-literally. YECism is fairly a new "dogma" in Christianity (there never really was a creation dogma any way other than creation ex nihilo).

Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 3 years ago Author


" . . . other than creation ex nihilo." Is this a typo, Newenglandsun? Do we actually agree on something? By golly, breakout the champagne and wipe off the dust of our best wine--we are going to celebrate!

Although I appreciate your perspective I do not agree with "In a beginning." I believe Penrose and Hawking proved that time and space have a beginning--i.e. they were created; therefore, it makes more sense that Genesis 1:1 is referring to the beginning of everything. Both time and space have structure as proven with Special and General Relativity, and the Lorentz transformation shows how their structure( or at least, essence) is associated with speed. Technically, I do not believe God, through Jesus Christ, created time; I think He is creating time in the process of stretching space. I think astronomers will discover that space is expanding at an accelerated rate. Yes they have done this now but I think they will discover the rate is exponential because the Bible says that God will shorten the days in the end times. I used to think this meant less days, but now I believe it means time will be accelerated.

It is possible--not probable-- that it means sky and land, but I do not think Genesis 1:1 is taking such a myopic perspective. I have many reasons for believing this but it is 1:00 am and I don't want to get into them now.

I will fax you some of that champagne and good wine in my new "transporter fax machine", but the engineers gave it an Irish personality so I do not know how much will actually arrive at your location.

newenglandsun 3 years ago

Well, like I said, I believe it is more likely based on the Enuma Elish, written to counter some of their false ideas about creation and the relationship between God and man. In the Enuma Elish, creation comes across through war and battle as opposed to Genesis where creation comes via peaceful instructions. Man is made in God's image as opposed to being made Marduk's slaves.

Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 3 years ago Author

I'm confused, Newenglandsun. Are you saying that you believe the creation story of Enuma Elish? This is completely different from what the Bible says about creation. I can't even find YECism on the internet.

newenglandsun 3 years ago

Hardly. I'm saying the Hebrews were heavily influenced by it. But that's not the same as saying Genesis 1 is entirely unoriginal or that the Hebrews were plagiarists of the other myths. Instead, what Genesis 1 shows is a counter to the Enuma Elish. It is called comparative mythology. It's a great way to study sacred scriptures. YECism or young earth creationism.

Strange you weren't able to get anything on YECism. I googled it and this came up. Read and weep because it totally debunks and gives us a world that we'd expect to see...if evolution was true.



    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article