Logic Proof of God

[Kinich Ahau]

Of course! Yes we can.

[kselfri]

A minority seem to be interested in a discussion & debate on this. Thank you dstallma, Sinfidel and Kinich Ahau. I'll ignore the comments from the name-callers full of anger - sorry you feel that way about someone you’ve never met, the feeling is not mutual.

[dogpet]

No credit for silent respect then?

[kselfri]

If you were to go to some far corner of the universe where there’s no matter or energy, physics can’t manifest itself there (there’s no matter or energy). At that place, does “2+2 = 4” still hold true? Does “if A=B and B=C, then A=C” hold true? What about outside of space-time, do you think they would still hold true?
Physics is based on math/logic. The physical interactions around us behave based on math/logic. That implies Math/logic is the very foundation of physical existence.

[kselfri]

Sinfidel wrote

Could you tell us who discovered the square root of minus one, and infinity, and where these items were discovered?

I’m not a math historian. I can’t tell you who discovered 1/0 or SQRT(-1). Nor can I tell you who discovered Pi, arithmetic, multiplication, etc.
Would you say the number Pi was discovered, or invented?
Would you say 2+2 = 4 was discovered or invented?
Would you say the fact that the sum of the squares of 2 sides of a right triangle are equal to the square of the hypotenuse was a discovery or an invention?
If you say these are inventions, mathematicians are losing out on a lot of money – they can’t patent.
If you were looking for examples of infinity:
How many different illustrations that could be drawn into the sand on a beach are possible
(=infinity)
Some others: http://www.iep.utm.edu/infinite/#H4
If you were looking for an example of SQRT(-1) – sorry to let you down, but that’s why they call it an “imaginary” number to start with.

[kselfri]

dstallma wrote

I would say "Physics exists everywhere in the universe" not Logic. Logic gives humans the ability to understand Physics.

If you were to go to some far corner of the universe where there’s no matter or energy, physics can’t manifest itself there (there’s no matter or energy). At that place, does “2+2 = 4” still hold true? Does “if A=B and B=C, then A=C” hold true? What about outside of space-time, do you think they would still hold true?
Physics is based on math/logic. The physical interactions around us behave based on math/logic. That implies Math/logic is the very foundation of physical existence.

[kselfri]

Sinfidel wrote

An activity requires time and a location.

Thought and creation are activities.

Time and space did not exist until the Universe was created.

God exists outside of time and space.

Therefore, thought and creation were impossible for God.

I like how you think  . Your first premise, I can say is untrue. Activity can happen outside of time and location. There have been experiments on quantum entangled electrons which demonstrate “activity” outside of space & time. The link below highlights the surprising and fascinating results:
http://news.sciencemag.org/2013/05/p...xist-same-time

[kselfri]

Kinich Ahau wrote

If you are making the point that "logic is thought" then point two is redundant and you should be able to assert that "thought exists everywhere in the universe" which is patently wrong.

I don't understand how that is "redundant". Premises are stated separately for a reason. Combining multiple ones together is like having a run-on sentence. Look at each one separately, and refute it separately if you don't agree with it. Which of the premises don't you agree with and why?

[Smellyoldgit]

kselfri wrote

What about outside of space-time, .....

Ooo, a fine old favorite - I do so look forward to a logical explanation as to how something can be located in a place that has no locations.
Please feel free to enlighten us angry, great unwashed unworthy respondents on the peer reviewed analysis of entanglement, wormholes and anything else that helps in developing a GUT.

Pssst - We're not really angry - we understand the desire to expand our knowledge of the universe and we'd be delighted to help in developing any form of a Grand Unified Theory, but we don't grasp how a fictitious sky pixie, worried what we do behind closed doors with our genitals has anything to do with it. Perhaps you could leave this out of your considered response - we may seem less angry in our replies.

[ghoulslime]

kselfri wrote

A minority seem to be interested in a discussion & debate on this. Thank you dstallma, Sinfidel and Kinich Ahau. I'll ignore the comments from the name-callers full of anger - sorry you feel that way about someone you’ve never met, the feeling is not mutual.

Oh! Passive-aggressive ad hominem arguments let you be nasty and self-righteous at the same time! How lovely!

News Flash: we aren't angry because of your silly arguments. We LOVE this nonsense. Theist clowns have provided us with supreme entertainment for years. Please continue!

[ghoulslime]

kselfri wrote

If you were to go to some far corner of the universe where there’s no matter or energy, physics can’t manifest itself there (there’s no matter or energy). At that place, does “2+2 = 4” still hold true?

Yes, kselfri, 2+2=4 in a box, with a fox, in a house, with a mouse, here or there, anywhere. Let us know when you have an example to the contrary.

kselfri wrote

Does “if A=B and B=C, then A=C” hold true? What about outside of space-time, do you think they would still hold true?

Outside of space-time! Out there in Neverland with the leprechauns! Well, we would have to ask the unicorn princess for the answer! Where exactly is outside of space-time? I can't seem to find it on Google Maps.

kselfri wrote

Physics is based on math/logic. The physical interactions around us behave based on math/logic. That implies Math/logic is the very foundation of physical existence.

Math and logic are human constructs, metrics with which we may gauge the universe around us.

[kselfri]

ghoulslime wrote

Yes, kselfri, 2+2=4 in a box, with a fox, in a house, with a mouse, here or there, anywhere. Let us know when you have an example to the contrary.



Outside of space-time! Out there in Neverland with the leprechauns! Well, we would have to ask the unicorn princess for the answer! Where exactly is outside of space-time? I can't seem to find it on Google Maps.



Math and logic are human constructs, metrics with which we may gauge the universe around us.

Since you’re now debating the topic instead of making personal attacks, I make these responses:
For you 1st comment, we’re in agreement!

On your 2nd point, the concept of things outside of space & time isn’t mine – it’s that of many physicists. It’s fundamental to string theory, and any theory which proposes more than 4 dimensions. It’s also a conclusion of the following experiment:
http://phys.org/news/2012-01-quantum...nlocality.html

On your 3rd point: If math & logic are merely human constructs, then before humans existed, the physical world didn’t follow them? The universe has been bound by math & logic, which physics is based on, for a very long time – ask any astronomer. The fact that it has been following those rules before our existence means they are not a human construct. Those rules have been around for what I’d say is an eternity.

[Kate]

Choobus sez

it's all maths.

Gods of the goatse gaps?

Choobus wrote

Maybe we need a better theory of gravity (a quantum gravity theory perhaps: fuck knows what it will be, could be a goatse theory of black holes for all I know) or maybe the space probes are venting gas and dark matter is real. In either case, I would say that Newtonian gravity is correct, but incomplete. The same is also probably true for relativity. The same will likely be true for whatever follows our next theory of gravity, and all the other science we now have. Relativity was almost worthless when it was initially postulated; less than a decade later it was an indispensable foundation of modern science. String (and therefore M) -theory was similarly worthless when it was first postulated. That was 30 years ago, and not much has changed. It doesn't imply something not observed (it doesn't imply anything actually), and it may even turn out to be "correct", but it isn't physics, yet.

[Smellyoldgit]

[Kinich Ahau]

What's going on Kate and Smelly have reversed roles. A parallel universe?

Thanks for those nudges Kate. Wink, wink.