God exists?

[Buffett and Colbert]

I'm not saying that Math is wrong, but come on, how much more math do we need to INVENT to destroy God?

Math doesn't disprove God. Logic did that long ago.

Heh, but what is Logic if not math? Also, logic can be flawed.

Logic can. Math can't. Math is an irrefutable system of numbers and equations.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I'm not saying that Math is wrong, but come on, how much more math do we need to INVENT to destroy God?

Math doesn't disprove God. Logic did that long ago.

Yeah, so said the parisees and sadducces. They were the lawyers and politicians of our times. Just like they killed Jesus back then, they are trying to kill him now.

Proving something does not make it reality.

[Mathematica Numerica]

Incorrect.

Think of applied mathematics, young padawan.

[Buffett and Colbert]

I'm not saying that Math is wrong, but come on, how much more math do we need to INVENT to destroy God?

Math doesn't disprove God. Logic did that long ago.

Yeah, so said the parisees and sadducces. They were the lawyers and politicians of our times. Just like they killed Jesus back then, they are trying to kill him now.

Proving something does not make it reality.

Fail.

When something is proven, it's right 100%. Now don't get things that are proven confused with things that people think are proven.

[Mathematica Numerica]

Is that your new catchphrase B/C? Fail?

[Rutini]

Proving something does not make it reality.

I agree

[Buffett and Colbert]

Is that your new catchphrase B/C? Fail?

I fail to see a more adequate word for this situation. But I did elaborate mind you.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Proving something does not make it reality.

I agree

[Saint Clair Island]

Proving something does not make it reality.

Actually, that's exactly what proving something does. Proof is accepted as real. If a new proof is found that refutes an older one, the common view of reality is updated.

There is no objective reality. If there was, there would be no conflicting beliefs or religions.

[Mathematica Numerica]

Proving something does not make it reality.

I agree

I agree as well. It takes the universe, no scratch that, the multiverse to do that.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Proving something does not make it reality.

I agree

I agree as well. It takes the universe, no scratch that, the multiverse to do that.

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
--Jean Chretien

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Math doesn't disprove God. Logic did that long ago.

Heh, but what is Logic if not math? Also, logic can be flawed.

Logic can. Math can't. Math is an irrefutable system of numbers and equations.

No. It also contains definitions. Those definitions may be arbitratry. Those definitions can be the source of the problems.

Case in point.

Most equations that use PI to derive an answer are WRONG, by definition. They may be close approximations, but they are wrong.
Of Course simple things like PI/PI can be correct, but there are far more things that are wrong. Because of the limitations of human intelligence.

Also, consider X/0. Infinity right? Bull crap, there is no such thing. It is a definition. It is not reality.

(X/0)*2 = (X/0)*4? Is Infinity equal to Infinity? Bull crap, it is just a definition. It is not reality.

[Enadail]

So you cant trust any sources? Think about it, arethere any truly reliable sources to provide TRUTH and FACTS that are unbiased?

You can trust sources. I just tend not to trust a source with a vested interest in the outcome.

Math is a pretty reliable source, so is research. History and science channels? Not so much.

Yeah, so said the parisees and sadducces. They were the lawyers and politicians of our times. Just like they killed Jesus back then, they are trying to kill him now.

Proving something does not make it reality.

Given in the US Christianity is the majority religion, I will extrapolate that most lawyers and definitely most politicians are Christians. So if Christians are killing Jesus, we have an issue.

No, its those of us who don't blindly follow a book and a man in a funny hat who doubt Jesus, and so far no one has provided any evidence to convince a significant portion of us, let alone a majority.

[Allbeama]

I'm not saying that Math is wrong, but come on, how much more math do we need to INVENT to destroy God?

Math doesn't disprove God. Logic did that long ago.

Yeah, so said the parisees and sadducces. They were the lawyers and politicians of our times. Just like they killed Jesus back then, they are trying to kill him now.

Proving something does not make it reality.

Only in your mind. Proving something is a good way to show that its possibly remotely true.

[Rutini]

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
--Jean Chretien

The guy was high or what?

[Buffett and Colbert]

No. It also contains definitions. Those definitions may be arbitratry. Those definitions can be the source of the problems.

Case in point.

Most equations that use PI to derive an answer are WRONG, by definition. They may be close approximations, but they are wrong.
Of Course simple things like PI/PI can be correct, but there are far more things that are wrong. Because of the limitations of human intelligence.
Also, consider X/0. Infinity right? Bull crap, there is no such thing. It is a definition. It is not reality.

An approximation is a reality. Is it, or is it not true that 1.9 is approximately 2?
(X/0)*2 = (X/0)*4? Is Infinity equal to Infinity? Bull crap, it is just a definition. It is not reality.

Is it, or is it not true that 1.9 is approximately 2?

[Mathematica Numerica]

I agree as well. It takes the universe, no scratch that, the multiverse to do that.

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
--Jean Chretien

And it is proven by other proofs. So, proof starts with a- I still can't get over that you said math is just numbers and operators!

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Proving something does not make it reality.

Actually, that's exactly what proving something does. Proof is accepted as real. If a new proof is found that refutes an older one, the common view of reality is updated.

There is no objective reality. If there was, there would be no conflicting beliefs or religions.

How can reality be updated. The View is updated, but not the reality itself. Again, a proof doesnt change reality, it just changes the preception of that reality.

So, even if you had irrefutable proof that God never existed, it doesnt change the reality that he does and did.

[Buffett and Colbert]

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
--Jean Chretien

The guy was high or what?

He just knows how I'm feeling right now.

[Gift-of-god]

This isn't physics. Also, "I believe"- This is theoretical physics. It's obviously gonna be a calculated belief!

Actaully we are discussing the Many Worlds interpretation, aren't we? That counts as physics. Speculative physics, mind you, but physics nonetheless.

The term 'calculated belief' seems odd, but I'll go with it.

As long as you're admitting that physics also contains beliefs.

[Mathematica Numerica]

A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven.
--Jean Chretien

The guy was high or what?

He just knows how I'm feeling right now.

Who?

[Enadail]

No. It also contains definitions. Those definitions may be arbitratry. Those definitions can be the source of the problems.

Case in point.

Most equations that use PI to derive an answer are WRONG, by definition. They may be close approximations, but they are wrong.
Of Course simple things like PI/PI can be correct, but there are far more things that are wrong. Because of the limitations of human intelligence.

Also, consider X/0. Infinity right? Bull crap, there is no such thing. It is a definition. It is not reality.

(X/0)*2 = (X/0)*4? Is Infinity equal to Infinity? Bull crap, it is just a definition. It is not reality.

You don't understand math at all, do you?

First of all, any mathematician, scientists, or engineer worth his salt never approximates pi UNTIL THE LAST POSSIBLE STEP. You always calculate in terms of Pi. Thus the final answer you get is as close an approximate as possible. It is not wrong. It is an approximation.

This stems from you inability to understand infinity it seems. Infinity is not a definition. It is a concept. Infinity is as real as 1.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Who?

Jean Chretien

[Metania]

I didn't have time to read all zillion replies to this, but, according to Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, etc.) God is outside of existence and therefore since he created reality, he is above it and does not exist--he is a state beyond existence.

Therefore God does not exist, because if the religious books are correct, he's beyond simple existence. And, ironically, the books have a pretty good way of hedging their bets--in fact, if he were to exist, it'd disprove them and cause them to implode, because that'd make idolatry literally true. (Idolatry generally being confusing something with no physical existence with a physical object--in this case, confusing God that would be beyond all of reality with a made-up one that would 'exist' and be a part of the very thing he created, which is not what the books advocate.)

So actually, when you say logic proves God does not exist, you're actually saying Logic is proving the correctness of the biblical assertions that God does not exist.

The only part you'd really have an argument about would be whether that also implied he was a beyond-existence being behind the curtains, so to speak, or if there was nothing behind the curtains.

That's why these debates make me crack up. Yeah, prove God exists, and you break your own bible and religion, since he's not supposed to exist. At least, in the Abrahamic faiths.

Disprove him, and you're just backing up what the Abrahamic faiths say--he doesn't exist. Of course you aren't really commenting on the main issue when you do that--I.E., is there a God beyond existence or is there not?

But I expect to probably not be able to check on this in a timely fashion and get yelled down by confused people, so. That's my two cents on the matter.

The irony here, of course, is that I don't believe in the God beyond existence myself, but reading of him in the books has led me to sort of seek out discussions like this and -try- to explain how they are... sort of missing the point.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

No. It also contains definitions. Those definitions may be arbitratry. Those definitions can be the source of the problems.

Case in point.

Most equations that use PI to derive an answer are WRONG, by definition. They may be close approximations, but they are wrong.
Of Course simple things like PI/PI can be correct, but there are far more things that are wrong. Because of the limitations of human intelligence.
Also, consider X/0. Infinity right? Bull crap, there is no such thing. It is a definition. It is not reality.

An approximation is a reality. Is it, or is it not true that 1.9 is approximately 2?
(X/0)*2 = (X/0)*4? Is Infinity equal to Infinity? Bull crap, it is just a definition. It is not reality.

Is it, or is it not true that 1.9 is approximately 2?

It is, but it is also approx 1.99 and approx 1.99999 and approx 1.9999, if you mean that by approx, that it is close to a line at 2.0, 1.9, 1.99, 1.999