themadhair
Well-Known Member
Care to elaborate on that?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Mathematical Proof of God
- Thread starter Kurt31416
- Start date
Well, seems self-evident to me that the Universe exists and works. If that's too big an assumption for you, well, nothing can be done for it. How it works, is DEFINED as God. It could have been DEFINED as x or y or the Easter Rabbit. This is the most elementary algebra.
And I hate to be the bearer of modern science, but it's far from clear that we will die, given Quantum Immortality and the repeated lives from an infinite number of Big Bangs. Don't take my word for it, google "quantum immortality".
And everything in the world, including Schrodinger's Cat, lives forever, not just hairless apes.
I rather doubt you can do even elementary algebra.
There is nothing like him or as he is:
There is neither likeness nor body.
None knows who he is but he himself,
None is this creator or his fellow,
He fills the whole world,
Yet there is no chancing upon him.
He appears from every side and quarter,
but no place contains him.
Hidden yet withal manifest, he sees
And knows everything hidden.
Hidden nor appearing to sight,
Nothing is before him and after him nothing.
Samaritan Hymn, The Samaritans..., James Montgomery, p.208
There is neither likeness nor body.
None knows who he is but he himself,
None is this creator or his fellow,
He fills the whole world,
Yet there is no chancing upon him.
He appears from every side and quarter,
but no place contains him.
Hidden yet withal manifest, he sees
And knows everything hidden.
Hidden nor appearing to sight,
Nothing is before him and after him nothing.
Samaritan Hymn, The Samaritans..., James Montgomery, p.208
themadhair
Well-Known Member
You do seem to be avoiding the content of my posts. Is it perhaps due to you being clueless regarding that content?
themadhair
Well-Known Member
You do seem to be avoiding the content of my posts. Is it perhaps due to you being clueless regarding that content?
themadhair
Well-Known Member
I explained what Gödel’s theorem really says and where it actually applies. I explained why your proposition was flawed due to you conflating standard mathematical terms, specifically incomplete, unknown and unprovable. I explained the logical fallacy you are committing by ascribing traits to something you claim to be not just unknown but unknowable. I also explained that Gödel’s theorem is only concerned with the existence of unprovable propositions that are true.
But you ignored all that as being an ad-hominem. Good way to ignore content that is.
Well, if you start a post with "you are a dumbass" or it's ilk I just skip over it, so hard to say for sure what you did or didn't "explain". I can't address some claim that you "explained what Gödels theorem really says and where it actually applies" and so on.
As for what it applies to, Chaitin and Hawking, in the opening post, most certainly claim it applies to physics in general. If you think they are wrong, where did they go wrong, and/or do you know of any reputable peer reviewed (or whatever) paper that disputes it?
And you can definitely point out and know "traits" of Unknowable things. What is the exact numerical value of pi? Or e?
(reification fallacy)
themadhair
Well-Known Member
I havent made a single ad hominem in this thread. Pointing your lack of knowledge, and citing examples in support, is not an ad hominem.
Protip: Ignoring posts leads to comments like the above.
And they are right. I pointed out, in some detail iirc, why you have misunderstood and misrepresented them.
Learn what a transcendental number is and why asking for an exact numerical value makes absolutely no sense.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
I disagree, if something exists it can be known, even if not completely known it can be known of. We do not need complete knowledge of something to know whether or not it is true. If someone wrote an equation that was five pages long, we wouldn't need to read to the end to know that it is wrong if we find mistakes in the first couple lines. I would agree that god is unprovable, but if god is unknowable then he doesn't exist.
You haven't provided any proof for god at all. All you have said more or less is that some things are proven to be unprovable, but something being unprovable doesn't automatically make it truth.
Just stop it. :slap: No one suggested such a thing ...
Sure seems you suggested it about pi and e. They are both about as real world as science gets. It seems all fundemental equations have one or the other involved, sometimes both.
The world is full of unknowable things. Gotta start there. It's not just math/logic, proved by Godel in 1931, computers proved by Turing in 1936, and information itself in the 70's by Chaitin, it's GR and the Quantum Theory too. For instance, the Uncertainty Principle, it's impossible to know the momentum and position of anything exactly, it's eternally unknowable, no matter what.
Perhaps you should work on reading comprehension before taking on some nonsense as a mathematical proof of god. :yes:
themadhair
Well-Known Member
Learn what a transcendental number is. What you are doing here is akin to asking what is north of the north pole. It doesnt make sense by the very nature of what a transcendental number and a numerical value is. It isnt that the numerical value is unknowable it is that it doesnt have one (thats what a transcendental number is).
But asking certain things do show ignorance of the topic to be fair.