B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
Any trip. Feel free to discuss whatever relations you see between God and mathematics, or if you even believe such a relation can be made
Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
- Status
Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
D
DianaCC
Guest
e^**iπ − 1 = 0.
Therefore God exists.
Therefore God exists.
Y
yppop
Guest
Dianna,
Good try, but I think you might want to reconsider?
Consider Euler’s equation: e^(ix) = cos(x) + isin(x) = -1
let x=pi, then: e^(ipi) = cos(pi) +isin(pi) = -1
now since e^(ipi) = -1: e^(ipi) -1 = -2 not 0
Plus representing God = 0 is a no no!
A better mathematical representation for God is the continuum hypothesis: 2^aleph(0) = aleph(1)
Aleph(1) signifies the continuum (the points on the real number line), which if you accept the Cantor-Dedekind axiom of continuity that for every number there is a point in space, then continuous space which is infinitude of infinities seems kind of God-like to me. But then again I could be wrong.
Yppop
Y
yppop
Guest
S
stevekehl
Guest
You need something from a guy who got a C in calculus. This isn’t math per se,but it is numbers related. While explaining that the universe would not have existed infinitely, a man used an example of an infinite number of quarters. If I have an infinite number of quarters and I give someone one quarter, I still have an infinite number of quarters. So infinity minus 1 is infinity (x-1=x). If I give someone 1,000 quarters I still have an infinite number of quarters. So infinity minus 1,000 is infinity (x-1,000=x). If I give someone every other quarter we will both have an infinite number of quarters. So infinity minus infinity is infinity (x-x=x). Since it is impossible to subtract three different numbers from an original number and get the same answer, mathematically speaking the universe cannot be an infinite number of years old, therefor it must have a beginning and a Creator. I realize I have probably dropped the intelligence factor of this thread to a sophomoric level, please forgive my simplicity.
Y
yppop
Guest
Steve,
No need to be forgiven for simplicity because you have expressed an understanding of an amazing property of infinity when you showed that you can subtract from infinity but you cannot diminish it. Isn’t that somewhat like our relationship with God; before there was a universe there was the infinite God from which we emerged without diminishing Him one iota? I think it is. There are those that participate in this forum that are not aware of that property of infinity. However, you may want to reconsider the (x-x) = x. Georg Cantor, the originator of transfinite algebra, identified an infinite string of infinities that he labeled: aleph(0), aleph(1), …aleph
…aleph(infinite), so when you say infinity - infinity = infinity, you are absolutely correct if you mean: aleph (1) - aleph(0), but I am not sure that it is correct to say that: aleph(0) - aleph(0) = aleph(0).Anyway that leads me to a question concerning what you conclude from the impossibility of diminishing infinity. Am I missing something that I can’t grasp in between “…and get the same answer” and “…the universe cannot be infinite”? I agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion, but cannot rationalize getting there from the premise. Can you illuminate further? Even if you can’t I think rather than dropping the intelligence factor of this thread you have raised it because if we can find an argument that links a beginning of the universe and the Creator to the mathematical concept of infinity then we have accomplished at the very least a answer to the subject of this thread: Can God be proven mathematically?
Yppop
L
levinas12
Guest
I think there’s something divine about there being more transcendental numbers than algebraic numbers. And there will be something divine about the “proof” of the Riemann hypothesis when it is “discovered”. And remember Erdos and the Book. Or Godel’s platonism.Steve,
No need to be forgiven for simplicity because you have expressed an understanding of an amazing property of infinity when you showed that you can subtract from infinity but you cannot diminish it. Isn’t that somewhat like our relationship with God; before there was a universe there was the infinite God from which we emerged without diminishing Him one iota? I think it is. There are those that participate in this forum that are not aware of that property of infinity. However, you may want to reconsider the (x-x) = x. Georg Cantor, the originator of transfinite algebra, identified an infinite string of infinities that he labeled: aleph(0), aleph(1), …aleph
Anyway that leads me to a question concerning what you conclude from the impossibility of diminishing infinity. Am I missing something that I can’t grasp in between “…and get the same answer” and “…the universe cannot be infinite”? I agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion, but cannot rationalize getting there from the premise. Can you illuminate further? Even if you can’t I think rather than dropping the intelligence factor of this thread you have raised it because if we can find an argument that links a beginning of the universe and the Creator to the mathematical concept of infinity then we have accomplished at the very least a answer to the subject of this thread: Can God be proven mathematically?
Yppop
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
I credit Urbain-Jean-Joseph Leverrier with something.
Something that was discounted later on.
Something that was discounted later on.
A
abucs
Guest
I don’t think that mathematics can prove God but i think by understanding mathemetics in nature we can better know God as the creator of that nature.
I think some people also make a good argument where the precision of mathematics present in nature would argue against the likelihood of a random blast which started and underpins our natural Universe.
I think some people also make a good argument where the precision of mathematics present in nature would argue against the likelihood of a random blast which started and underpins our natural Universe.
T
TheTrueCentrist
Guest
Godel may have proved it is impossible to prove the existence of God. His incompleteness theorems state that if we start with enough axioms to define the natural numbers, then there exist true statements that our axioms cannot prove. Alternatively, if our axioms can prove all true statements, then it is also possible for those axioms to prove false statements. Moreover, if your axioms can prove their own consistency, they are actually inconsistent.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
L
levinas12
Guest
But, if this is the case, why did Godel provide a proof for God’s existence?
T
TheTrueCentrist
Guest
Not a mathematical one.
L
levinas12
Guest
If I were a logicist, I would disagree … but then Godel has dismantled logicism … mathematics is not simply a branch of logic … so his proof, which is “logical”, is not based on mathematics …
But there’s another twist. Assuming Godel’s platonism, i.e., that mathematical truth exists apart from us … that it is “discovered” … maybe this would be a basis for a “meta-mathematical” proof of God’s existence … e.g., the truth or falsity of Riemann’s hypothesis must be “somewhere” … and it’s not in the material world (at least for Godel) … so maybe it’s in God’s Mind?
S
stevekehl
Guest
:Steve,
No need to be forgiven for simplicity because you have expressed an understanding of an amazing property of infinity when you showed that you can subtract from infinity but you cannot diminish it. Isn’t that somewhat like our relationship with God; before there was a universe there was the infinite God from which we emerged without diminishing Him one iota? I think it is. There are those that participate in this forum that are not aware of that property of infinity. However, you may want to reconsider the (x-x) = x. Georg Cantor, the originator of transfinite algebra, identified an infinite string of infinities that he labeled: aleph(0), aleph(1), …aleph
Anyway that leads me to a question concerning what you conclude from the impossibility of diminishing infinity. Am I missing something that I can’t grasp in between “…and get the same answer” and “…the universe cannot be infinite”? I agree wholeheartedly with the conclusion, but cannot rationalize getting there from the premise. Can you illuminate further? Even if you can’t I think rather than dropping the intelligence factor of this thread you have raised it because if we can find an argument that links a beginning of the universe and the Creator to the mathematical concept of infinity then we have accomplished at the very least a answer to the subject of this thread: Can God be proven mathematically?
Yppop
Thank you for your kind words. As for Cantor’s transfinite algebraic string of inifinities, did I mention I got a C in calculus. The basis for my conclusion that since subtracting different amounts from infinity produces the same answer, infinity is a mathematical impossibility because an infinite number of events can’t exist. Evolutionists say the universe is infinite from before the big bang through the present and will exist into an infinite future. Since infinity is mathematically impossible the universe can not be infinite, it must have a beginning. Now I have to veer away from math to philosophy. There is a Muslim argument for creation called the kalam argument. It has three steps, 1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause. 2. The universe had a beginning. 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause. If you accept that the universe had a beginning and a cause the next question is what could be so powerful that it could make the universe and start it spinning. Only God could do this, all other explainations border on desperation. In fact, Thomas Aquinas began with the assumption of an eternal universe when trying to prove God’s existence. He wrote if he began with the premise that the universe had a beginning his task to prove God’s existence would be too easy. As always, I hope this helps move the conversation forward. God Bless.
G
greylorn
Guest
You cannot prove a theorem until you’ve stated the theorem in precise mathematical terms. You have not even defined the properties of God, and are a long way from stating your proposal as a legitimate theorem.
In other words, you have defined nothing to prove. Take some theoretical calculus courses, then some physics, and revisit your question when you’ve learned enough. Good luck!
L
lemondiesel
Guest
So basically those who are closer to God notice the evils of society? Morality is the result of socialization, not because it is an “equilibrium.” If Hitler was closer to the devil, shouldn’t he have realized being closer to God was a better choice? This “risk-reward” is not more than playing multiple hands to better your odds. No one, and I mean no one, will ever have their odds at one. (excluding Jesus)
Mathematics is nothing more than rounding a beautiful poetic poem down to 123456…
B
Belegdal
Guest
There’s a great story about Leonhard Euler and the French philosopher Denis Diderot, in which they were invited to have a debate about God’s existence in St Petersburgh. Euler went up to Diderot and said: “Sir, (a + b^n) / n = x, therefore God exists. Respond!” But Diderot didn’t know anything about algebra, and was so embarrassed that he left the country.
Unfortunately it’s not a true story, since Diderot was actually quite good at math.
Unfortunately it’s not a true story, since Diderot was actually quite good at math.
W
William58
Guest
Ok, this topic definitely caught my eye… I say YES, God can be proven mathematically… First, the definition of Mathematics: Mathematics is the study of quantity, structure, space, and change.
Mathematicians resolve the truth or falsity of conjectures by mathematical proofs, which are arguments sufficient to convince other mathematicians of their validity. The research required to solve mathematical problems can take years or even centuries of sustained inquiry.
Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way… God is the ultimate mathematician! is he not?
God uses numbers through out the Bible… God speaks to people through the use of numbers… Believe me, I know this as fact!
OK, so I’ve read though all the comments here, and notice many scholars and philosophers from the past mentioned… But, I did not see Dr Ramon Sanchez mentioned… He has proven the existence of God scientifically, as a number…Or, shall I say, as a certain number that represents GOD…
The name of his book is called: In His Living Presence “333”
inhislivingpresence.com/
Check it out…
William
Mathematicians resolve the truth or falsity of conjectures by mathematical proofs, which are arguments sufficient to convince other mathematicians of their validity. The research required to solve mathematical problems can take years or even centuries of sustained inquiry.
Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way… God is the ultimate mathematician! is he not?
God uses numbers through out the Bible… God speaks to people through the use of numbers… Believe me, I know this as fact!
OK, so I’ve read though all the comments here, and notice many scholars and philosophers from the past mentioned… But, I did not see Dr Ramon Sanchez mentioned… He has proven the existence of God scientifically, as a number…Or, shall I say, as a certain number that represents GOD…
The name of his book is called: In His Living Presence “333”
inhislivingpresence.com/
Check it out…
William
W
Wakey-Wakey
Guest
Godel’s proof (which can be found at kilby.stanford.edu/~rvg/154/handouts/incompleteness.html ) amounts to saying that you can mathematically prove that maths cannot describe everything in the universe without being inconsistent, and if maths is consistent, then it is incomplete (does not describe everything in the universe). So whatever made the universe is beyond maths. However, is maths merely a creation of man’s mind (something that other species do not share), or is it a property of the universe, external to all consciousness?
For those of you who are mathematically-minded, there is a cornucopia of modern maths problems (and some solutions) at math.stackexchange.com/
For those of you who are mathematically-minded, there is a cornucopia of modern maths problems (and some solutions) at math.stackexchange.com/
D
DianaCC
Guest
Maybe a better way of putting would be, “Godel showed there are questions poseable within mathematics that mathematics alone cannot answer”.
- Status