Who Created the Universe? God or Mathematics?

[74x12]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

Mathematics can't make anything; as it's only the discovery of the principles or laws that govern everything. We haven't even figured out the 5th dimension yet. At least not the general public. Maybe some top secret government program has but my point is that we aren't advanced enough to even really talk about mathematics as if we're true experts.

God is clearly the source of such precise order and the laws that give rise to the concept of what we term numbers.

 

[ChristineM]

If 42 is the answer then I think we have finally discovered the great question!

This makes Sunstone the supreme being I think since he asked the question that resulted in the answer. Or is he simply the great mathematician?

Yes, 42 is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything... According to Douglas Adams in his book, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Im not sure about @Sunstone being a supreme being or a great mathematician but he could very well be.

 

[james blunt]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

The answer you desire is neither of the above but a miracle .

 

[bobhikes]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

The Ultimate reality is potential and change. For anything to exist, the potential for it to exist has to always be. For anything to start there has to be change so change has had to always exist. Can mathematics or God explain either or both, doubtful. It is today as it will be always impossible to prove whether god or science created what we have. It is a fact however that the Ultimate reality has always existed.

 

[sealchan]

Yes, 42 is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything... According to Douglas Adams in his book, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Im not sure about @Sunstone being a supreme being or a great mathematician but he could very well be.

Did Douglas Adams ever reveal what the ultimate question was?

 

[Segev Moran]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

God (defineing only whats relevant to this thread): an initial force that was no created by another force and is not bound by another force. This force is the "motivator" for all other known forces in nature and beyond it (for that matter, any force that exists even if we are not able to sense or observe it. ( regardless of the question whether or not this god is active in our reality, for the sake of the OP it has no relevance. )
Mathematics (not the Math language rather what it describes): The laws by which nature as we know it operates. these laws are what binds each physical and non physical things to follow the rules the govern our universe.

As for mathematics, obviously its rational. we can see its affects all over. we can predict with 100% success rate how things will behave based on the mathematical rules (assuming we know all the variables).

As for god, it is also rational, as forces exist, therefore they have an origin that without a doubt came from a source.

As for assumption that a layer can be either this or that, is not a viable assumption.
The explanation why also answers the question you present if Math can pre-exist God.

As God is the source of all the behaviors, Mathematics obviously originates from it, making the layer of math a part of the layer of God.

It will be a same analogy to ask what comes before, electricity or energy. as one derives from the other, it must be second to it. (energy comes from other forces, they come from one force that we assume existed at the begging of our universe and something made this force and so on)

So God->Mathematics... it cannot work the other way around.

 

[siti]

Who? Is god or math like a human... I think not. Likely everything existed without need for personas like ours.

I could just as easily have said "Who or What Created the Universe?", but I thought "who" was sufficient for people to get my meaning, and therefore "what" was unnecessary. Is it really necessary to explain this?

Actually, the only correct answer is, "I don't know".

C'mon guys - its really simple...Who's on first, What's on second and I don't know's on third...

 

[siti]

Did Douglas Adams ever reveal what the ultimate question was?

I don't think so but I'm pretty sure it was "where's the damn towel"? Which quite neatly explains why nobody understands the answer.

 

[dianaiad]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.

Question:

How can you make a description (mathematics, which is one of man's attempts to define and describe the laws of physics/nature) into a cause?

Isn't that a bit like asking whether it is rational or reasonable to attempt to determine that the first cause of the universe is God, rather than the ruler that measures it once created?

Mathematics...describes that which is already caused; it causes nothing. Therefore, your question actually, er....begs the question, I think.

For one thing, mathematics works just fine whether or not God is the 'first cause,. or if things 'just happened.'

________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.[/QUOTE]

 

[Riders]

A layer of math or a giant man called God exists in the cosmos above the earth? Is The Twilight Zone?

 

[Riders]

A layer of math hmmmm

 

[Jumi]

C'mon guys - its really simple...Who's on first, What's on second and I don't know's on third...

Math as we understand it, needs a universe to function in. But the math pre-exists any potential universe that doesn't already exist.

 

[siti]

Math as we understand it, needs a universe to function in. But the math pre-exists any potential universe that doesn't already exist.

My post was a quote from a famous Abbott and Costello routine - your "Who?/What?" exchange with @Sunstone reminded of it but I don't suppose anybody with less then half a century on the clock would remember it. Anyway, (very old) jokes aside, I can never quite grasp that argument - the math precedes reality argument. I understand the assumption that any potential universe would have to be mathematically consistent if it were ever to actually exist at some point...but does that really mean that "math exists" much less "pre-exists" reality? In what sense can it "exist" apart from the instatiation of the reality it describes? What does it describe when that reality does not exist? What possible difference could it make to anything when nothing exists? And if it makes no difference to anything, in what sense does it "exist"?

 

[metis]

My post was a quote from a famous Abbott and Costello routine

But that doesn't deal with "Who's on first?".

 

[siti]

But that doesn't deal with "Who's on first?".

What?

 

[Jumi]

My post was a quote from a famous Abbott and Costello routine - your "Who?/What?" exchange with @Sunstone reminded of it but I don't suppose anybody with less then half a century on the clock would remember it.

Well they were never on tv in my country, so there's that.

Anyway, (very old) jokes aside, I can never quite grasp that argument - the math precedes reality argument. I understand the assumption that any potential universe would have to be mathematically consistent if it were ever to actually exist at some point...but does that really mean that "math exists" much less "pre-exists" reality?

It's theoretical of course since I don't believe there's an actual beginning to reality. I think you already got the gist of the "assumption". Ask yourself this: can things exist that aren't mathematically consistent? Even if there's a first thing, it would have to obey mathematics. Why? Because mathematics would precede it's existence.

In what sense can it "exist" apart from the instatiation of the reality it describes? What does it describe when that reality does not exist? What possible difference could it make to anything when nothing exists? And if it makes no difference to anything, in what sense does it "exist"?

You're right that things existing outside reality might not affect anything if nothing exists, but then there's also no one to describe reality. But the first moment that something does exist, it will obey mathematics, whether there is someone observing it or not.

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

God created mathematics.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

Neither. Math isn't a causal entity.

 

[Ajarn]

know one has seen God, perhaps he is there and created it.
Perhaps many Gods, maybe God is something we dont understand and we all assume is a powerful version of ourselves.
Perhaps it is created by nature, maybe a race evolved into Gods after creation.

We dont know, and rather then look up to understand our universe which will achieve nothing, we should look inwards and worry about the here and now.

 

[A REAL CHRISTIAN]

For the purposes of this thread, please cheerfully assume that there exists an ultimate layer of reality, "above" space and time, which is the first or primal cause of the universe.

Further assume that layer must either be god or mathematics, but cannot be both.

If so, are there any rational or reasonable grounds whereby we can determine that first cause is god, as opposed to the possibility it is mathematics --- or mathematics, as opposed to the possibility it is god?

I expect your answers to be on my desk by 5:00 PM Friday.




________________________
Please Note: Apart from defining "god" as sentient, and "mathematics" as non-sentient, it's up to you to define those terms in this thread. If necessary, please make clear either in context or by explicit definition how you are using those terms.

So for sake of argument there is a creator the question is if the creator is god or some type of mathmatics. If it were mathmatics than that would not explain the type of future telling so prevelant in the bible i.e foreshadows and the book of daniel.