Proving God Existence

[Something completely different]

What do you have in common with property attorneys and magistrate officials responsible for property law?


You all enjoy writing texts, which have absolutly nothing to say. They have no meaning, They have no value, They are texts which are simply meant to look nice or confuse the reader!

After reading it for quite some time and trying to translate it into german I find that your entire abomination of a useless text collapses already at the beginning, with your premises:

1. The Universe is dynamic and each second will take a new state 
so its states can be represented by a function of time U(t) ≠U(t+1)

What do you mean with "dynamic"? Do you mean that it follows the laws of physics, which is what I asume. If so then it stands in contradiction to:
"each second will take a new state" because time (as everyone who paied attention in highschool physics) is not a constant but relative.

2. Time is a conceptual frame of reference; i.e. a relation between two events; 
• Event 1: a consistent (as we assume) set of repeated events we use as a reference (e.g. clock ticks, radiation, moon cycle, etc.)
• Event 2: an event that we are trying to measure in reference to event(s) 1 (e.g. a car trip, age, etc.)

ok

3. Assuming that time is infinite t ɛ { -∞, -∞+1, ……, 0, 1, 2, 3, … ,∞-1,∞}

A total collapse of your entire premise which you dishonestly didnt even mark as a premis.
"Let`s asume that time is infinite" well, we dont need to assume that, we know that time is not infinite and that it had a beginning and that it has it`s border at the limits of the expanding universe.

4. Defining two sets of the Universe states in the past

Wow, you know, the states of the universe in the past are calculated via massive laboretories as for example in Cern, and you have the temerity to assume that simply through calculating with false premises you can actualy achieve something!

Since we have seen that your premises are wrong I didnt see any need to further try to translate your calculation, which you have almoust certainly copied from some nonsence religious page on the web, which tries desperatly to phrase itself in a language so complicated that as few as possible can understand it. Something most scientists actualy avoid to do.

But anyway, there is one last slap to the face, which I allow myself to give you with my bacon gloves that are drenched in vodka:

Trying to figure some necessary/definitive attributes for G
1. G is the creator/initiator of the Universe
2. G is unique
3. G has actions (p)
4. G is outside time, G must be one unit as if there are more than one entity time can be related to each other, but as time did not exist, then G is one UN-separated self-dependent unit
(The Eternal, The one, The self sufficient)
5. G is outside and separate from the Universe
6. G has a will; as if he didn’t then creating/starting the universe must be initiated from an external source which contradicts with the (proved) non-existence of time.
7. As G is unique and not similar to matter in the universe, he doesn’t have an image (an image is a reflection of light from objects; objects are constructed from molecules and atoms)
Any religion that claims an image for God is a false religion by default

Not a single one of these conclusions is the result of the "calculation". You or whomever the writer of this declaration of stupidity, simply pulled these attributes out of his or her own ass.