The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Matheology � 254 repost of Matheology � 002
Replies: 7   Last Post: Apr 21, 2013 3:05 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Scott Berg

Posts: 2,111
Registered: 12/12/04
Matheology � 254 repost of Matheology � 002
Posted: Apr 18, 2013 11:39 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

[from: WMRePostingService@WTF.RU? another repost, with his second post, WM
proves GOD exists]

Can the existence of God be proved from mathematics?

Gödel proved the existence of God in a relatively complicated way
using the positive and negative properties introduced by Leibniz and
the axiomatic method ("the axiomatic method is very powerful", he said
with a faint smile).

Couldn't the following simple way be more effective?
1) The set of real numbers is uncountable.
2) Humans can only identify countably many words.
3) Humans cannot distinguish what they cannot identify.
4) Humans cannot well-order what they cannot distinguish.
5) The real numbers can be well-ordered.
6) If this is true, then there must be a being with higher capacities
than any human.

[I K Rus: "Can the existence of god be proved from mathematics?",
philosophy.stackexchange, May 1, 20129

The appending discussion is not electrifying for mathematicians. But a
similar question had been asked by I K Rus in MathOverflow. There the
following more educationel discussion occured (unfortunately it no
longer accessible there).

(3) breaks down, because although I can't identify (i.e. literally
"list") every real number between 0 and 1, if I am given any two real
numbers in that interval then I can distinguish them. - C GERIG

If you are given two numbers, then both can be given, i.e., belong to
the countable set of finite expressions. - I K RUS

I voted down to close as "subjective and argumentative". Claiming that
the well-ordering axiom implies that someone can order the reals is
really inane, in my opinion. - ANGELO

I agree. It is really inane. But most mathematicians don't even know
that this belief is inane. We should teach them: It is really inane to
believe that all real numbers "exist" unless God has a list of them. -

God is not the subject of proof. Either you believe or not, but this
is only a matter of faith. It would be too simple if a proof of
existence or non-existence existed. We should not have any choice. D

God is the subject of Gödel's proof. God is the subject of my proof.
And I am very proud that I have devised a proof that can be understood
by a cobblers apprentice (as Euler requested). That will pave my way
into the paradise. We know: without God there is no paradise, not even
You rightfully remark, "we should not have any choice." And we have
no choice - unless we have the axiom of choice. Now I will no longer
respond to questions and comments and will withdraw into my hermitage.
Bless you God. - I K RUS

Although I agree with the closing of your question, thanks for
bringing up that webpage - it is interesting and useful. @folks -
knowledge can come from many sources :) - F GOLDBERG

Yes that's certainly true, but unfortunately in MathOverflow it seems
not always appreciated. This instructive question and discussion have
been closed as spam and deleted immediately.

Regards, WM

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.