Proving God Existence

[ManMachine]

I think it's worth pointing out you use the word 'assuming' a number of times in your logic formulas.

Assumptions as Axioms are not poor reasoning

An assumption that can be proved other ways doesn't affect the proof itself

For example assuming G, with the probability that it can be 0 or something
is not adding or taking anything from the proof

To refute the proof you need to show the one of the premises is false
or one step doesn't lead to the next

I actually tried to refute it myself, it is very difficult or impossible

---

Ok.

1. We cannot assume time is a 'relation between two events'. There is not always a causal or temporal relationship between certain quantum events.

2. We cannot assume time is infinite. Time is only our relative view of a phenomenon called (unhelpfully) spacetime. Time and space are two parts of the same thing that only appear to us as seperate. We simply do not know enough about the Universe to make this assumption.

You clearly have not analysed all options as you stated in your conclusion. Therefore your conclusion in the first part remains unproven.

For the second part, you have assumed that the universe cannot come into existance from nothing without the help of 'G'. This is also not true. There is enough reasonable theory to suggest the Universe did come from nothing. In fact, in the absence of 'G' this is the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at. To invoke 'G' to make it work is not necessary. U(0) can equal nothing and still give rise to a universe of matter independantly. This is all built on the Law of least Action. The Universe is essentially lazy.

You have incorrectly assumend 'nothing' is not a valid starting point when it can be argued that it is, this combined with the invalidity of part I means part II is invalid.

Part three needs not be considerd as Part II renders this section invalid.

Logic has not served you well at all. Perhaps you will now consider my point that assumptions must be used to measure the validity of our conclusions especially when they are as easily disproved as in the case of this exercise in the futility of formal logic.


MM