I can prove God's existence...
Disclaimer: Theories which people have come to accept are no greater than this proof. Thanks for your help everyone because I have changed the theory slightly so that it talks almost purely about the concept of matter, rather than life.
According to theory, we exist.
So let's take the universe for example: There are planets, stars and black holes among other things.
We are assuming that no creator exists and that matter has existed for anamount of time.
But is that actually possible? Because it is known that there used to be nothing and at some point in time matter was formed.
Proof
Every number has a negative, and addition which is associative. Forand note that
This is a good thing, since it means we can prove if you take one away from infinity, you would still have infinity:
But it also means we can prove 1 = 0, which is not so good.
1 +
(1 +
1 = 0
In this equation I've represented infinity with
So if I rework the first example with this principal in mind...
1 +
(1 +
1 = 1
So the proof is not applicable to every instance of infinity. This is, of course, assuming that we can even use infinity in this way.
And if
What this shows is that assuming the existence of
So what does this mean? It means that matter must have been formed somewhere and in terms of the universe it means that something must have created matter or something else out of nothing.
But how can this something exist, because something cannot exist without being formed or created as a consequence of something else? Well for this something to have existed it must not follow the same laws and rules as we do. Clearly this something or being must be transcendent, which means 'Beyond space, time and continuum'. To be quite frank I cannot think of any other way for matter to be created out of nothing.
How to express
We started off with a formula that does "mean" something, even though it used
What does this mean, compared to what it means when we have a regular number instead of an infinity symbol:
This formula says that I can make sure the values of 1/x don't differ very much from 1/2, so long I can control how much x varies away from 2. I don't have to make 1/x exactly equal to 1/2, but I also can't control x too tightly. I have to give you a range to vary x within. It's just going to be very, very small (probably) if you want to see that 1/x gets very very close to 1/2. And by the way, it doesn't matter at all what happens when x = 2.
If we could use the same paragraph as a template for my original formula, we'll see some problems. Let's substitute 0 for 2, and
This formula says that I can make sure the values of 1/x don't differ very much from
It's so close to making sense, but it isn't quite there. It doesn't make sense to say that some real number is really "close" to
No real number is very close to
This formula says that I can make sure the values of 1/x get as big as any number you pick, so long I can control how much x1/x bigger than every number, but I also can't control x too tightly. I have to give you a range to vary x within. It's just going to be very, very small (probably) if you want to see that 1/x gets very, very large. And by the way, it doesn't matter at all what happens when x = 0. varies away from 0. I don't have to make
Proof that infinity exists as a concept to be reached
Maybe if I prove that the square root of 2 is irrational, then I can prove that infinity exists in reality:
cannot be written as a faction. I will adopt the method of proof by contradiction, so I will assume that p/q exists. Now I will explore the consequence of its existence.
I we square both side we get,
2 = (p^2)/(q^2)
This equation can be rearranged to give,
2q^2 = p^2
We know that p^2 must be even. Furthermore, we know that p itself must be even. But if p is even, then it can be written as 2m, where m is some other whole number. Plus this back into the equation and we get,
2q^2 = (2m)^2 = 4m^2
Divide both sides by 2 and we get,
q^2 = 2m^2.
But by the same arguments we used before, we know that q^2 must be even. If this is the case, then q can be written as 2n, where n is some other whole number. If we go back to the beginning, then,
The 2m/2n can be simplified by dividing top and bottom by 2, and we get,
We now have a fraction m/n which is simpler than p/q.
However, we now find ourselves in a position whereby we can repeat exactly the same process on m/n, and at the end of it we will generation an even simpler fraction, say g/h. This fraction can then be put through the mill again, and the new fraction, say e/f, will be simpler still. We can put with no end. But we know that fraction cannot be simplified forever. There must always be a simplest fraction, but our original hypothetical fraction p/q does not seem to obey this rule. Therefore, we can justifiably say that we have reached a contradiction. If
Because
Conclusion
The above demonstrates mathematical support for the existence of a superior being or thing which people would refer to as 'God'. You cannot deny the truth of the axioms I have used for 'Mathematics is the supreme judge, from its decisions there is no dispute'.
I am not asking you to be religious, because I did not help prove the truth of the prophecies of Jesus, Muhammad, Moses etc. instead I am asking you to reconsider you opinions of a superior being.
You don't have to be a theist, but try and be a deist. A deist is the believer of a superior being without having to follow rules like Muslims and Christians.
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by cupoftea
rules?
