Proving God Existence

[Muslim Scholar]

Part I
Premises
I’ll only use Axioms about time & universe
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)

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.)

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

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

Set 1: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by a finite number of seconds
Set 2: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by an infinite number of seconds
S1= {U(1), U(2), ….}, S2={U(-∞), U(-∞+1), U(-∞+2),….}

Each set can have (Finite, Infinite or 0) number of members
So the options are:
1. S1 = ɸ (i.e. it is empty)
False, as it contradicts with the ability to measure (time/seconds)

2. S1 has infinite no. of elements
False, as it contradicts with the definition of Set 1; it has only Statuses separated by a finite number of seconds so it must have a finite No. of elements.

3. S1 is finite & S2≠ɸ
False: it means that Set 1 has a last point where next points are away by an infinite time/seconds, but as the next point is separated by an extra 1 second, that point does not exist

4. S1≠ɸ & S2= ɸ
which is the only true and possible option

The conclusion is that
The universe had a finite number of states and had a start or beginning, Time itself had a start as well.

(This part is a proof by perfect induction, analyzing all options and proving that they lead to the same conclusion)

____________________________________________________________


Part II
Then to prove the necessity for a creator
Assuming that Existence E=U+G where U is the universe and G is another object/deity (which can be 0 )
(E = Existence, U=Known Universe, G=something external to the universe)
According to Axiom 1; the universe states are dynamic not constant
As the universe is part of the existence (or all of it) then Existence is dynamic as well (i.e. can be represented by a function)
E(t)=U(t)+G

In addition as proved time itself had a start which means that that the universe state U(0) was not a function at all it was either nothing or a constant; taking Limit as t-->0 U=C or U= 0
As U(0) was constant then G must exist and be dynamic as well G≠0 Ʌ G=G(p)
The correct formula should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p); p is another parameter that changes the states of G
A complete Universe function must include another parameter to change from constant to dynamic at t=0 E(0,p)=C+G(p)
It should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p)
G must exist and did created/changed the universe at its beginning
We can call this parameter the actions of a creator (G)

(This part is a proof by contradiction, based on the definition of
static vs. dynamic (constant vs. variable))

____________________________________________________________ 
Part III
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

The only religion that gives a matching model for God is ISLAM

[Rayaan]

Looks interesting ... but I probably have to study this for a long time until I finally get it.

I appreciate the effort.

[Muslim Scholar]

Looks interesting ... but I probably have to study this for a long time until I finally get it.

I appreciate the effort.

Thanks a lot
I'll summarize it in very few words

1- If time is infinite, there must be a time in the past where infinite numbers of seconds passed which is not, so time & universe had a start.

2- As the universe was nothing or something static, something (else) must have started it to be time sensitive, we will call it G.

3- G must have some attributes, those attributes are not by choice but by logic, so they define G.

G's attributes matches God in Islam

[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.

[The Grand Nudger]

Boy oh boy.

---

Then to prove the necessity for a creator
Assuming that Existence E=U+G where U is the universe and G is another object/deity (which can be 0 )
(E = Existence, U=Known Universe, G=something external to the universe)
According to Axiom 1; the universe states are dynamic not constant
As the universe is part of the existence (or all of it) then Existence is dynamic as well (i.e. can be represented by a function)
E(t)=U(t)+G

In addition as proved time itself had a start which means that that the universe state U(0) was not a function at all it was either nothing or a constant; taking Limit as t-->0 U=C or U= 0
As U(0) was constant then G must exist and be dynamic as well G≠0 Ʌ G=G(p)
The correct formula should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p); p is another parameter that changes the states of G
A complete Universe function must include another parameter to change from constant to dynamic at t=0 E(0,p)=C+G(p)
It should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p)
G must exist and did created/changed the universe at its beginning
We can call this parameter the actions of a creator (G)

---

Now apply that all to G. What are we going to call (G) of G, or <G> of (G) of G? In any case, we -can- call a great many things...a great many things (you did so above, for example, for reasons unknown) I thought we were proving gods existence here? Not proving that you -can- call "something" G or creator. But I appreciate how hopeful both those two terms were..

As others have asked, what the hell is going on with the nonsense in part 3?

[Ben Davis]

---

Part I
Premises
I’ll only use Axioms about time & universe
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)

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.)

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

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

Set 1: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by a finite number of seconds
Set 2: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by an infinite number of seconds
S1= {U(1), U(2), ….}, S2={U(-∞), U(-∞+1), U(-∞+2),….}

Each set can have (Finite, Infinite or 0) number of members
So the options are:
1. S1 = ɸ (i.e. it is empty)
False, as it contradicts with the ability to measure (time/seconds)

2. S1 has infinite no. of elements
False, as it contradicts with the definition of Set 1; it has only Statuses separated by a finite number of seconds so it must have a finite No. of elements.

3. S1 is finite & S2≠ɸ
False: it means that Set 1 has a last point where next points are away by an infinite time/seconds, but as the next point is separated by an extra 1 second, that point does not exist

4. S1≠ɸ & S2= ɸ
which is the only true and possible option

The conclusion is that
The universe had a finite number of states and had a start or beginning, Time itself had a start as well.

(This part is a proof by perfect induction, analyzing all options and proving that they lead to the same conclusion)

____________________________________________________________


Part II
Then to prove the necessity for a creator
Assuming that Existence E=U+G where U is the universe and G is another object/deity (which can be 0 )
(E = Existence, U=Known Universe, G=something external to the universe)
According to Axiom 1; the universe states are dynamic not constant
As the universe is part of the existence (or all of it) then Existence is dynamic as well (i.e. can be represented by a function)
E(t)=U(t)+G

In addition as proved time itself had a start which means that that the universe state U(0) was not a function at all it was either nothing or a constant; taking Limit as t-->0 U=C or U= 0
As U(0) was constant then G must exist and be dynamic as well G≠0 Ʌ G=G(p)
The correct formula should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p); p is another parameter that changes the states of G
A complete Universe function must include another parameter to change from constant to dynamic at t=0 E(0,p)=C+G(p)
It should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p)
G must exist and did created/changed the universe at its beginning
We can call this parameter the actions of a creator (G)

(This part is a proof by contradiction, based on the definition of
static vs. dynamic (constant vs. variable))

____________________________________________________________ 
Part III
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

The only religion that gives a matching model for God is ISLAM

---

Cosmological argument fail. It holds no more water for Islam than it does for Christianity. Have a google of the rebuttals for William Lane Craig's version of the argument for a number of explanations why it can be dismissed.

[LastPoet]

Someone call the police! Logic has just been bruttally murdered!

[NoMoreFaith]

Part I

Time is also relative - our concept of passing seconds and attributing that to math relating to the universe is potentially faulty since "time" passes differently depending on different circumstances.

Sadly I lack the physics education to really delve into the fault inherent in partitioning time into finite points.
____________________________________________________________

Part II
Then to prove the necessity for a creator

Even if we follow the convolutions presented - all it would show is an unknown variable which you have arbitrarily called God to the exclusion of all other possibilities.

Even multiverse explanations would be more coherent than assuming G = I made the universe therefore you should definitely not eat the pigs.
___________________________________________________________

Part III
Trying to figure some necessary/definitive attributes for G
The only religion that gives a matching model for God is ISLAM[/b]

Woah Nelly that is a monster leap. Sharing some aspects based on assumptions which clearly have multiple explanations not a single one, and then basing the conclusion on some apparent simularites between your religion as an absolute is ridiculous.

A) Deism would just as easily match your description - even if we ignore any faults in prior reasoning and especially assumptions.
B) The association of a will - and specific commands written in an old book by a superstitious people is a big stretch.

There is a lot that could be covered in a reply so I apologise for the brevity - but I appreciate the effort you have made here - but there does seem to be a certain element of If A=B and C=D then GOD says don't eat pigs!

Hmm.

[Angrboda]

I think William Dembski has been reincarnated as a Muslim.

[Foxaèr]

I have seen the original poster's nonsense on another forum.