Mathematical Proof of God?

[Aupmanyav]

One cannot prove the existence of God through argument, for argument is a sterile intellectual exercise. But if we take time to nurture the garden of the soul, we can become conscious of God’s presence, and thus we can know for ourselves that all things are the manifestation of His divine light

Then in what way existence of God (or soul) can be proved? Where is this 'garden of the soul'? And what is this 'divine light'?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Then in what way existence of God (or soul) can be proved? Where is this 'garden of the soul'? And what is this 'divine light'?

You will have to find these things for yourself, no one else can do it for you.

However, if you are fortunate you may find a spiritual advisor who can offer you guidance and support. The world's libraries are full of helpful literature and scripture also, much of it from your part of the world.

 

[firedragon]

A much easier and far more widespread proof is E=MC2. Einsteins good old mass/energy equivalence proof.

It shows that no omni potent god can exist at the same time as any other mass.

No it does not.

 

[firedragon]

Isn't this Anselm's ontological argument reformulated using infinity as a synonym for God?

What?

 

[shunyadragon]

That's not really an "engineering perspective" anyway.

I disagree.. How can the engineering perspective work outside what is defined by engineering? This question is framed in how the original posted referred to engineering.

We gearheads use math as a tool to make real world things.
Infinity is a useful concept, but it's just math, ie, good for
modeling the real world, but not the real world.

'ie, good for modeling the real world, but not the real world,' Very very confusing.

Maybe 'good for modeling' but not necessary.

Infinity is a limited useful concept. Actual infinities have very limited if any usefulness. Potential infinities are conceptionally descriptive and may be useful, but not necessary.

Interesting article on the subject: http://logic.harvard.edu/EFI_Feferman_InfinityInMathematics.pdf

 

[firedragon]

This is a Baha’i article I came across. Please kindly share your views. I had it sent to me by email so there is no link to it so I had to screenshot it if that’s ok.

View attachment 65231 View attachment 65232

This is not mathematical proof brother. This is just providing proof. Every attempt at providing proof does not necessarily have to be mathematical. This is philosophical proof. Logic.

 

[Revoltingest]

I disagree.. How can the engineering perspective work outside what is defined by engineering? This question is framed in how the original posted referred to engineering.




'ie, good for modeling the real world, but not the real world,' Very very confusing.

Maybe 'good for modeling' but not necessary.

Infinity is a limited useful concept. Actual infinities have very limited if any usefulness. Potential infinities are conceptionally descriptive and may be useful, but not necessary.

Interesting article on the subject: http://logic.harvard.edu/EFI_Feferman_InfinityInMathematics.pdf

I don't understand your post.

 

[firedragon]

God is proven by the math concept of infinity.

Nobody in math or science has ever seen infinity. It is a conceptual place, predicted by math, as functions reach their practical limits but never quite get there.

Infinity is where the laws of physics; our material realm, break down since the functions stop meaning anything. At the end of the rainbow of infinity there is a pot of gold. This can be described as space-time breaking down into separate time and separate space.

There, one can move in time without the restrictions of space and/or move in space without the restrictions of time. The latter is classically called omnipresence. Infinity is the math portal to the other side. Science does not yet know how to get there to open the door, since all they assume is finite, and space-time does not apply there.

If we take 1 and divide by 0 we will get infinity. We start with one thing; primordial atom, divide it by nothing, and we get an infinite universe of infinite parts??? How do we mechanically divide something by zero to get infinity? The math defies current laws of physics and all modern engineering skills. It suggests the need for a new path that is not from our material world. It will take planning and not just dice; brooding over the deep.

WW. Infinity does not prove the existence of God. 1 or any number divided by zero is infinity in mathematics, but that does not mean in reality you can divide something by zero. You cannot just make assumptions like that. Yes. Infinity cannot be observed. Infinity is a calculation, but you can never reach infinity to break down anything, be it reality, time and space or anything. That's a contradiction. If you can reach something, that's not infinity. This is one of the reasons philosophers have been saying the universe has to have had a beginning. Because an infinity cannot exist. Right now, this moment, you are here. Time ends, and begins every moment. There cannot be an infinite past and an infinite future. OUr past has ended this moment, and the future begins. So it's a new moment, every single time. That's a logical reasoning used by philosophers to deny an infinite past.

That's one of the reasons they believed the universe had a beginning, and then of course there was a creator and blah blah blah. The whole basket of arguments will begin there. So fundamentally it is not infinity that proves the existence of God. It's the non-existence of infinity.

Cheers.

 

[ChristineM]

New God is proven by the math concept of infinity.

See my post #2. In fact the exact opposite of yours statement is the case. An omnipotent god (i.e. infinite power) cannot exist in this universe at the same time as you exist

 

[setarcos]

To divide 1 by 0 is actually undefined, rather than infinity.
But in math, there are functions with a denominator
approaching 0, yielding a result sometimes approaching
infinity. Think of things in terms of limits approached,
but never reached.
Note that in calculus, a numerator & denominator both
approaching zero often lead to a non-infinite result.

Your of course not equating the thing approaching with the thing approached correct?
And of course A thing which can never reach its theoretical destination by the methods that thing is using does not belie the destinations existence.

 

[setarcos]

See my post #2. In fact the exact opposite of yours statement is the case. An omnipotent god (i.e. infinite power) cannot exist in this universe at the same time as you exist

Unless in fact your existence is sustained by and a manifestation of that Gods infinite power. Is this not correct? How are you defining power, that God, and the finite entity?

 

[Revoltingest]

Your of course not equating the thing approaching with the thing approached correct?

No, but it can be useful to treat them as equal.

And of course A thing which can never reach its theoretical destination by the methods that thing is using does not belie the destinations existence.

I don't understand this.

 

[Ostronomos]

A much easier and far more widespread proof is E=MC2. Einsteins good old mass/energy equivalence proof.

It shows that no omni potent god can exist at the same time as any other mass.

And yet I actually know that the God is a fact. Thus defeating your assertion.

 

[The Hammer]

God is proven by the math concept of infinity.

Nobody in math or science has ever seen infinity. It is a conceptual place, predicted by math, as functions reach their practical limits but never quite get there.

Infinity is where the laws of physics; our material realm, break down since the functions stop meaning anything. At the end of the rainbow of infinity there is a pot of gold. This can be described as space-time breaking down into separate time and separate space.

There, one can move in time without the restrictions of space and/or move in space without the restrictions of time. The latter is classically called omnipresence. Infinity is the math portal to the other side. Science does not yet know how to get there to open the door, since all they assume is finite, and space-time does not apply there.

If we take 1 and divide by 0 we will get infinity. We start with one thing; primordial atom, divide it by nothing, and we get an infinite universe of infinite parts??? How do we mechanically divide something by zero to get infinity? The math defies current laws of physics and all modern engineering skills. It suggests the need for a new path that is not from our material world. It will take planning and not just dice; brooding over the deep.

Infinity (and math) is proof Magick exists silly.

Not the Gods.

 

[The Hammer]

And yet I actually know that the God is a fact. Thus defeating your assertion.

So do I.

But she is still right.

My Gods are a fact too.

 

[setarcos]

No, but it can be useful to treat them as equal.

Useful yes. Or perhaps it would be better to say adequate for our expectations. However that usefulness does not equate to exactitude and I find that humbling.

I don't understand this.
[And of course A thing which can never reach its theoretical destination by the methods that thing is using does not belie the destinations existence].

I just meant that I find it interesting that even in mathematics proof is tentative and we often forget that...unless we are trying to prove something to someone else. Also infinity is not proven through experience. It is proven through approach. Like a singularity.

 

[Polymath257]

Where is it proved that V is a phenomenon?

 

[Revoltingest]

Useful yes. Or perhaps it would be better to say adequate for our expectations. However that usefulness does not equate to exactitude and I find that humbling.

I just meant that I find it interesting that even in mathematics proof is tentative and we often forget that...unless we are trying to prove something to someone else. Also infinity is not proven through experience. It is proven through approach. Like a singularity.

OK.

 

[ChristineM]

Unless in fact your existence is sustained by and a manifestation of that Gods infinite power. Is this not correct? How are you defining power, that God, and the finite entity?

No it's not correct.

Power is energy expended over time.

If a god has unlimited power they must utilise infinite energy. If a god takes all the energy there is none left for mass, i.e. you cannot exist if an omnipotent god exists.

 

[ChristineM]

And yet I actually know that the God is a fact. Thus defeating your assertion.

Wrong,...

You believe, you do not know.

In the same way i believe that no gods exist