Date: Apr 18, 2013 11:39 AM
Author: Scott Berg
Subject: Matheology � 254 repost of Matheology � 002
[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. -
I K RUS
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.