We are covering old ground, covered already a hundred years ago by logicians.
Incompleteness theorem (1st) shows that there is no finite set of axioms that can be used to prove/disprove all true logical statements.
Hence, no way to prove ALL that is all and everything with finite set of axioms.
Now, we get to multiples of infinity. And again, we are in agreement: no (so far discovered) math system (even with multiple concepts of counting infinities) can prove god. There is no proof for "all that is" (even with mathematical concept of infinities of multiples of infinities) without unproven axioms that lead to inconsistencies.
I liked the paper linked, but claiming that it is a mathematical proof of god is just ludicrous.
Incompleteness theorem (1st) shows that there is no finite set of axioms that can be used to prove/disprove all true logical statements.
Agreed. That's what mathematicians and philosophers were trying to do before Godel proved they couldn't, through mathematics.
I liked the paper linked, but claiming that it is a mathematical proof of god is just ludicrous.
I don't think God (or infinite anything) can be mathematically proven definitively either. It's a simple philosophical problem for humans, as we're finite, imperfect, mortal creatures. We can't know everything, therefore some things we don't know can change our perceptions, the totality of judgement(s) we've derived through our limited knowledge.
However, I do think that God, or the effects of God, or the will of God, can be seen before reaching infinity. Even finite, imperfect, mortal creatures like us can discern and discover truth, and we can continually build upon it. We can't know everything, but we can continually learn, progressing toward infinite knowledge, without ever being able to reach it.
It's how I came closer to God. The foundational descriptors of God and truth are nearly identical. Truth is infinite, immortal, perfect, and unchanging. Truth is immutable and all powerful. Anyone who goes against truth is harmed or killed, depending on severity and circumstance. Sin is easily described as imperfection, going against truth. While not identical, God is extremely similar, such that truth could be best described as God's will in this universe.
This is how I see truth and God. The more we learn of truth, the more we learn of God and God's will.
I think that's where the disagreement lies. From what I can tell, you see God as an all or nothing thing, either prove infinity/God or not at all.
Thank you for your reply.
We are covering old ground, covered already a hundred years ago by logicians.
Incompleteness theorem (1st) shows that there is no finite set of axioms that can be used to prove/disprove all true logical statements.
Hence, no way to prove ALL that is all and everything with finite set of axioms.
Now, we get to multiples of infinity. And again, we are in agreement: no (so far discovered) math system (even with multiple concepts of counting infinities) can prove god. There is no proof for "all that is" (even with mathematical concept of infinities of multiples of infinities) without unproven axioms that lead to inconsistencies.
I liked the paper linked, but claiming that it is a mathematical proof of god is just ludicrous.
Agreed. That's what mathematicians and philosophers were trying to do before Godel proved they couldn't, through mathematics.
I don't think God (or infinite anything) can be mathematically proven definitively either. It's a simple philosophical problem for humans, as we're finite, imperfect, mortal creatures. We can't know everything, therefore some things we don't know can change our perceptions, the totality of judgement(s) we've derived through our limited knowledge.
However, I do think that God, or the effects of God, or the will of God, can be seen before reaching infinity. Even finite, imperfect, mortal creatures like us can discern and discover truth, and we can continually build upon it. We can't know everything, but we can continually learn, progressing toward infinite knowledge, without ever being able to reach it.
It's how I came closer to God. The foundational descriptors of God and truth are nearly identical. Truth is infinite, immortal, perfect, and unchanging. Truth is immutable and all powerful. Anyone who goes against truth is harmed or killed, depending on severity and circumstance. Sin is easily described as imperfection, going against truth. While not identical, God is extremely similar, such that truth could be best described as God's will in this universe.
This is how I see truth and God. The more we learn of truth, the more we learn of God and God's will.
I think that's where the disagreement lies. From what I can tell, you see God as an all or nothing thing, either prove infinity/God or not at all.