• 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!

God can not be disproven by science

joelr

Well-Known Member
God is often equated with light; Light of the nations. Light travels at the speed of light. If plug the speed of light, into Special Relativity Equations of Einstein, we get a reference where the universe will appeared contained in a point, with time essentially stops. The mass variable of Special Relativity becomes infinite relativistic mass, which does not or can exist within our finite energy space-time universe. We do not have the instruments to meet all the criteria needed to see God, if he was sitting on the speed of light reference.

main-qimg-bb64e35afd37a0334ab75a54dca831d7


God would exist where space-time; see above, becomes discontinuous; into separated space and separated time, but without mass; not of any mass based realm.

If God could move in space, apart from time, he would omnipresent, like the tradition; distance potential=1 and time potential=0. The ancient understood separated space and separated time much better than does modern space-time science. This is the future of quantum physics. If you can control time and space apart from each other; via space-time, a new frontier opens up.

If God could also move in time apart from space, would know the past, present and future at any point in space.

If God decided to become omnipresent; distance potential=1 and time potential=0, while also moving in time with distance held constant; time potential=1 and distance potential=0; sequential but a disconnected sign of the cross, this would makes him omnipresent and omniscience. This was ancient math and infinity personified.

I developed a theory called the MDT theory about 20 years ago; mass, distance and time. It came as an inspiration and was solidified as a series of diagrams I created in PhotoShop, that set up framework for an extensive math model possibility of reality in just three variables. These diagrams looked like concentric circles, where you can could adjust the three parameters; M, D, and T like dials, and solve complex connections between space-time and separated space and separated time; macro and quantum worlds meet.

I was not sure back then how to explain this to justify and explain this model, in the Physics Forums I used to write in; answer without a solution. The 6-8 diagrams; dials, in 20/20 hindsight were connected to the effect of separated time and separated space on space-time. The logic of the model led to many new things yet to be discovered such as six possible universe formation scenarios. The MDT theory was named after the scenario that was closest to the modern BB. There are five other ways from separated space and time.

In the MDT scenario, once mass appears in the universe, we finally have a capacitance for space-time, that is sustainable and scalable; from from subparticles to the galaxies. Energy can induce space-time, but it is not moldable like mass and matter, except in black holes. However, the black hole limits the formation of the chemical life we see and need to account for. With the appearance of mass, separated space and separated time interacted, at the quantum level, with the ever changing scalable and sustainable levels of matter in space-time.

I put D before T ; MDT, or distance potential before time potential, after the mass of the primordial atom appears; particle matter. This distance potential is for an almost omnipresent universe; blueprint in space. Then time is added to build from the blue print, in time. The model could dial in the details. The model also paralleled Genesis; brooding over the deep; distance potential and blueprint, and then let there be light; d/t=photons. blueprint divided by time, as steps in time.
Aquinas and others put these Platonic ideas onto God but how do you show something can exist without space or have casual experience without time? We know of no substance that exists outside of the quantum fields for each particle, or spacetime.

But the idea that outside spacetime is this infinite conscious being, also raises strange paradoxes similar to infinite regress. A being who existed eternally, formed, why, how, doesn't solve any mysteries.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
..umm, I don't think so .. we can't even stop hurricanes, floods etc. etc.
Where is the scientific prediction of weather claim that we can stop hurricanes, floods etc etc?

I responded to your claim not mine: The ability of humans able to predict the weather therefore "mankind is in charge of the weather."

I do not claim this, you responded asking me what was wrong with your statements that : "The ability of humans able to predict the weather therefore mankind is in charge of the weather."

My original response: The ability of modern science to provide accurate weather predictions nas absolutely nothing to do with mankind being able to charge of the weather. This statement you made perpetuates your intentional ignorance of science.

You need to not only work on your science, but your English has a problem also.
 
Last edited:

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
I responded to your claim not mine: The ability of humans able to predict the weather therefore "mankind is in charge of the weather."
You misunderstood me. You seem to think that I implied that ..

My original response: The ability of modern science to provide accurate weather predictions nas absolutely nothing to do with mankind being able to charge of the weather. This statement you made perpetuates your intentional ignorance of science..
No .. you misunderstood me.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
You misunderstood me. You seem to think that I implied that ..


No .. you misunderstood me.
It takes two to tango.
A misunderstanding can be a result of faulty comprehension on the receiver's side or, as in this case, ambiguous wording on the senders side. (Or both.)
I had the same misunderstanding as @shunyadragon, so it is more likely that you weren't clear in what you said than us failing to comprehend.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
You misunderstood me. You seem to think that I implied that ..


No .. you misunderstood me.
I am not sure this is the case. It looks like you misunderstood yourself. Aee post #102 with @Nakosis where you doubted humans can predict the weather. See bold.

I don't think so.
Take the weather, for example .. can we predict with any certainty what it will be like tomorrow? No.

Actually, yes, with a certainty of about 90% for five day forecasts. On a daily basis, they report when it is going to start raining and when it is going to stop. I wouldn't call it prediction though but observation. By simply observing the current weather patterns they can rely on past observations to know what will happen next with the weather.

One cannot disprove that G-d might be able to change it .. locally AND globally.

Sure, they can. As soon as you provide the evidence for it. All you are saying is you can't provide the evidence for science to disprove.
While you may think that means something that supports your position,
 

MonkeyFire

Well-Known Member
If you believe in the Big Bang, what was happening before time began? Could it have been an eternal being that created us?
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Precisely.

The Periaqueductal Gray. That area of the brain reffered to as the God spot.
Not any more.

Research by Mario Beauregard at the University of Montreal, using fMRI on Carmelite nuns, has purported to show that religious and spiritual experiences include several brain regions and not a single 'God spot'. As Beauregard has said, "There is no God spot in the brain. Spiritual experiences are complex, like intense experiences with other human beings."[27]
Neuroscience of religion - Wikipedia
 

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
Gaia conclusion based on faith. Much easier to explain that the natural nature of our existence is based on Natural Laws and processes, which avoids the circular reasoning above to justify 'belief.'
It was not justification of belief. I just opposed the OP. Just theoretically, pan(en)theism makes more sense.
 

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
If you believe in the Big Bang, what was happening before time began? Could it have been an eternal being that created us?
It doesn't necessarily follow from BB that time began.

So, when did time begin? Science does not have a conclusive answer yet, but at least two potentially testable theories plausibly hold that the universe--and therefore time--existed well before the big bang. If either scenario is right, the cosmos has always been in existence and, even if it recollapses one day, will never end.
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
I am not sure this is the case. It looks like you misunderstood yourself. Aee post #102 with @Nakosis where you doubted humans can predict the weather..
Well, they can't .. not to a degree of certainty!

Actually, yes, with a certainty of about 90% for five day forecasts..
90% eh? .. I won't quibble .. it remains that they can be wrong.

By simply observing the current weather patterns they can rely on past observations to know what will happen next with the weather..
Yes, yes .. most of us are aware of that.

Sure, they can. As soon as you provide the evidence for it..
The evidence for what??

All you are saying is you can't provide the evidence for science to disprove..
Huh?
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Well, they can't .. not to a degree of certainty!
Yes they can, your intentional ignorance of science even the simple science of weather prediction is appalling.
90% eh? .. I won't quibble .. it remains that they can be wrong.
Does not address the fact of the certainty and reliability of weather prediction, Your previous statement was emphatically they cannot.

Weasel wording does not help your case and justify the ignorance of your statements.
Yes, yes .. most of us are aware of that.
You apparently are not aware.
The evidence for what??
The point is clear as in evolution, weather prediction and science in general you cannot provide any evidence for your outrageous assumptions based on an ancient religious agenda,
I guess a grunt is the best you can do.
 
Last edited:
Top