Thursday, July 14, 2011
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
thought for the day/ logical disproof of the existence of god
"Men think epilepsy divine, merely becaue they do not understand it. But if they called everything divine which they do not understand, why, there would be no end of divine things." - Hippocrates of Cos. I bring this quote up again because I'm going to give my deductive disproof of the existence of god.
If god(s) are just algebraic "X"s standing for I don't know as the above Hippocrates of Cos(460 B.C.), then god(s) were first every natural thing that science didn't touch such as snakes, the wind, the stars and so on(even human consciousness). As mathematics and science progressed, there was a constant moving of these god(s) further and further away from human ability to comprehend. Clearly, those who wanted to beleive in god(s) didn't want to question these god(s) existence. These god(s) were clearly used for social political control.(I need to insert any number of quotes about the inventing of gods and hell for social control here; it's in my "gospel of truth" which starts this blog)
Anyways, these god(s) were moved to places where the then mathematics and science could not get to them; first to the heavens(in the Bible, the god is always from 'on high'), then to infinity, and now to extra dimensions; and of course, the excuse for god(s) existence is always ignorance.(I need to insert the corintians quote here that I always get from christians). The thing is that in the 1800s, George Cantor showed that there's always an infinity larger than a given infinity; so, which size infinity is your god?
Now, the effort to move god to impossible to comprehend heights goes in two directions. One is infinity and that of being everything; the universe is god; but, we all know that this all leads to contradictions. The other way leads to fewer and fewer properties. What does 'no properties' mean? That's right, it means non-existence.
------------------------------------------------the above is a redo of what I wrote below; i think I'll keep the below stuff for now--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to further note that Kurt Godel published around 1931 his inconsistency/incompleteness theorems. He said a consistent finite set of axioms cannot prove an infinit set of theorems. You can go ahead and put more axioms in to prove ever more theorems, but this process cannot ever finish(today, mathematicians rightfully so do not consider this a problem; more like a reason for joy; mathematical adventure will never end!). On the other hand, an inconsistent set of axioms can prove an infinity of theorems? If you look at the quote about god being put in place of everything considered mysterious, historicaly, it's clear that God is an algebraic X standing for "I don't know" or even "I don't want to know". God is the vague inconsistent concept that proves everything without explaining anything.
If god(s) are just algebraic "X"s standing for I don't know as the above Hippocrates of Cos(460 B.C.), then god(s) were first every natural thing that science didn't touch such as snakes, the wind, the stars and so on(even human consciousness). As mathematics and science progressed, there was a constant moving of these god(s) further and further away from human ability to comprehend. Clearly, those who wanted to beleive in god(s) didn't want to question these god(s) existence. These god(s) were clearly used for social political control.(I need to insert any number of quotes about the inventing of gods and hell for social control here; it's in my "gospel of truth" which starts this blog)
Anyways, these god(s) were moved to places where the then mathematics and science could not get to them; first to the heavens(in the Bible, the god is always from 'on high'), then to infinity, and now to extra dimensions; and of course, the excuse for god(s) existence is always ignorance.(I need to insert the corintians quote here that I always get from christians). The thing is that in the 1800s, George Cantor showed that there's always an infinity larger than a given infinity; so, which size infinity is your god?
Now, the effort to move god to impossible to comprehend heights goes in two directions. One is infinity and that of being everything; the universe is god; but, we all know that this all leads to contradictions. The other way leads to fewer and fewer properties. What does 'no properties' mean? That's right, it means non-existence.
------------------------------------------------the above is a redo of what I wrote below; i think I'll keep the below stuff for now--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And oh yes, 'god' is whatever it needs to be to
not be disproved; first the heavens(see the old testament for all kinds of 'from
above' references), then infinity, and then some higher dimensions.
To avoid the endless contradictions of an infinity all knowing god, more and more properties are taken away . . . till he's this big everything . . . nothing; that's right once this conception of god is wittled away to avoid being able to actually see this guy, he's left with no properties at all; what equals zero properties? That's right, non-existence!
To avoid the endless contradictions of an infinity all knowing god, more and more properties are taken away . . . till he's this big everything . . . nothing; that's right once this conception of god is wittled away to avoid being able to actually see this guy, he's left with no properties at all; what equals zero properties? That's right, non-existence!
I'd like to further note that Kurt Godel published around 1931 his inconsistency/incompleteness theorems. He said a consistent finite set of axioms cannot prove an infinit set of theorems. You can go ahead and put more axioms in to prove ever more theorems, but this process cannot ever finish(today, mathematicians rightfully so do not consider this a problem; more like a reason for joy; mathematical adventure will never end!). On the other hand, an inconsistent set of axioms can prove an infinity of theorems? If you look at the quote about god being put in place of everything considered mysterious, historicaly, it's clear that God is an algebraic X standing for "I don't know" or even "I don't want to know". God is the vague inconsistent concept that proves everything without explaining anything.
astro picture for the day
Monday, July 11, 2011
astro picture for the day
Pictures of the whole Milky Way band(our galaxy as seen from inside . . . where else?) are always fun!
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Friday, July 8, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)