General Poker Discussion Poker Forums

Page 30: Religion thread

or track by Email or RSS


nawhead

Avatar for nawhead

2485 posts
Joined 10/2009

You should look up Godels proof. It is pure mathematics and it comes to some very interesting conclusions---mainly that logic and science are not self-consistent because they are a part of the system they are attempting to describe. If there is a limit to logic and science then by definition there is something greater than logic and science that support both.

Either there is something beyond science and logic that does explain it, namely god, or an infinite set of possibilities. There seem to be no other options.


tHeBoYmUsTdIe, i don't have the math background to understand Gödel's proof. but is this an accurate explanation of it?

World's shortest explanation of Gödel's theorem (Raymond Smullyan)

the philosophical implications of it however, elude me. i never assumed science or logic was perfect, only that it was the better than whatever else we've been using up to now, namely religion and blind faith. it seems to me the concept of perfection is an abstraction like god. even a circle becomes jagged when you zoom in, etc.

Posted over 6 years ago

Jyhani

Avatar for Jyhani

721 posts
Joined 07/2010

Don't see how a God's existence or lack thereof should really matter in a practical sense.



Uhm, it's pretty big info about the beginning of our universe..?

+ the knowledge would have an impact on many cultures.

Posted over 6 years ago

Stu_Ungar

Avatar for Stu_Ungar

57 posts
Joined 11/2010

If God exists then why doesn't he prevent wars, famine and such?... because he dosent interfere in man's world.

OK well if God exists then why dosen't he give us more signs? If the Pope could fly or something that really would clear up much of the confusion..... because he is testing our faith and if we had proof there wouldnt be any test.

All right then, If God exists and this world is all a test of faith, what was the burning bush all about? Isnt a talking bush a direct violation of both the faith and non-interference principle?

You have an omnipotent being with limitless power an knowledge. He sends plagues, pestilence, floods, fire, sends his own son to preach a message, gets the all the new born baby boys in the middle east killed at birth.. but he dosent want to meddle and thats why we dont actually see him.

I dont buy it, there are just too many contradictions.

Posted over 6 years ago

tHeBoYmUsTdIe

Avatar for tHeBoYmUsTdIe

1530 posts
Joined 01/2010

tHeBoYmUsTdIe, i don't have the math background to understand Gödel's proof. but is this an accurate explanation of it?

World's shortest explanation of Gödel's theorem (Raymond Smullyan)



Yes, quite good. Godel uses modal logic in most of his proofs which is interesting on its own and easy to learn. You should check it out.

the philosophical implications of it however, elude me.



It means that any consistent system is incomplete. So the universe, as a consistent system, is not all there is. Meaning there must be a infinite set of possible universes or a 'god.' This is where the multiverse comes from, a theory which I must admit, has been unconvincing for me.

i never assumed science or logic was perfect, only that it was the better than whatever else we've been using up to now, namely religion and blind faith. it seems to me the concept of perfection is an abstraction like god. even a circle becomes jagged when you zoom in, etc.



Yes that's a good analogy. The thing is that up until the time of Godel, mathematicians and scientists believed that the universe was totally explainable and that we would eventually discover the 'answer.' Godel proved it was not. AFAIK he believed in Platonic forms which drove his mathematics...but that's an altogether different discussion lol.

Einstein actually loathed the unpredictability of quantum mechanics and tried to come up with a theory of everything til the day he died.

Posted over 6 years ago

Chazb0t

Avatar for Chazb0t

1822 posts
Joined 01/2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P47OC439x88&feature=related

I enjoyed reading the comments of people who took it seriously.



The way a banana fits the human hand is dead serious.

Posted over 6 years ago

tubasteve

Avatar for tubasteve

7647 posts
Joined 11/2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA&feature=related

this vid describes the 10 dimensions predicted by string theory, and how multiple universes are described within the theory. interesting stuff. of course scientists now believe there are 11 dimensions in m-theory but i havent finished reading brian greene's book about it so i don't have much more info. Smile

Posted over 6 years ago

tHeBoYmUsTdIe

Avatar for tHeBoYmUsTdIe

1530 posts
Joined 01/2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA&feature=related

this vid describes the 10 dimensions predicted by string theory, and how multiple universes are described within the theory. interesting stuff. of course scientists now believe there are 11 dimensions in m-theory but i havent finished reading brian greene's book about it so i don't have much more info. Smile



The problem with M-theory is that so far it's totally unfalsifiable and untestable.

Whoa, just had a cool thought...imagine if we are creating the universe we live in as we go along. Like imagine our universe at a certain point A, and then imagine an agent has to make one decision that will send the universe in one direction or the other. Like he decides to kick a rock, and that has a causal chain that progresses in one direction different than if he hadn't kicked the rock.

Now imagine 7 billion agents and the infinite amount of possibilities that could arise. You could then go into the future and trace back the history of our universe to that point in time. But the other possibilities have to exist somewhere...in a different universe someone exactly like me in a universe exactly like this one made a different decision and ended up with a different result. If that other 'route' doesn't actually exist then the possibility doesn't either.



On another note: anyone heard of the anthropic principle? That's some crazy shit.

Posted over 6 years ago

nawhead

Avatar for nawhead

2485 posts
Joined 10/2009

have you seen Source Code yet?

It means that any consistent system is incomplete. So the universe, as a consistent system, is not all there is. Meaning there must be a infinite set of possible universes or a 'god.' This is where the multiverse comes from, a theory which I must admit, has been unconvincing for me.


i still don't get it. so there could be another universe (U1) on top of this universe (U0) where the failure of our systems is reconciled? but U1 would also have a failure in its systems, but those can be reconciled in the universe (U2) above it ad infinitum?

i guess what i'm missing is why does a consistent system have to be complete? and how does having another universe solve this problem? why can't our universe just be an inconsistent system? it seems to me that even with infinite universes, the overall system will still never be consistent unless there is a top, god universe (UG) to complete it.

maybe the multiverse loops and closes somewhere, like a cosmic game of roshambo?

Posted over 6 years ago

Chazb0t

Avatar for Chazb0t

1822 posts
Joined 01/2009

like a cosmic game of roshambo?



lulz

Posted over 6 years ago

tHeBoYmUsTdIe

Avatar for tHeBoYmUsTdIe

1530 posts
Joined 01/2010




i still don't get it. so there could be another universe (U1) on top of this universe (U0) where the failure of our systems is reconciled? but U1 would also have a failure in its systems, but those can be reconciled in the universe (U2) above it ad infinitum?



Right. Or something outside of the universe.

i guess what i'm missing is why does a consistent system have to be complete? and how does having another universe solve this problem?



Well it can't be complete. Basically it says that logic ultimately fails because there will always be a true statement that is unprovable. Another universe would solve it in the sense that that statement would be true and provable in it, but true and unprovable in ours.

Ad infinitum, all true statements are provable in all universes.

why can't our universe just be an inconsistent system?



Ya that's one thought I had. Like the anthropic principle is pretty fucked up. Particles being in two places at once, etc.

it seems to me that even with infinite universes, the overall system will still never be consistent unless there is a top, god universe (UG) to complete it.



Well infinity is pretty big. In a true infinity of universes it would be consistent and complete.

Posted over 6 years ago

Acombfosho

Avatar for Acombfosho

3147 posts
Joined 06/2008

Heart where this thread appears to be going

maybe too hippy for some but one of the greatest minds of recent history Robert Anton Wilson would love this!

Check out maybe logic and also down the rabbit hole (1/12) for more if you are interested Smile

"Is", "is." "is"—the idiocy of the word haunts me. If it were abolished, human thought might begin to make sense. I don't know what anything "is"; I only know how it seems to me at this moment.

– Robert Anton Wilson, The Historical Illuminatus, as spoken by Sigismundo Celine



Acombfosho *sips beer*, *smiles*

Posted over 6 years ago

tubasteve

Avatar for tubasteve

7647 posts
Joined 11/2007

TecmoSuperBowl

Avatar for TecmoSuperBowl

Tribe Leader
5690 posts
Joined 01/2009

Wait wait wait, did I miss something? When do we get to Hitler ITT?

Posted over 6 years ago

nawhead

Avatar for nawhead

2485 posts
Joined 10/2009

Ad infinitum, all true statements are provable in all universes.

Well infinity is pretty big. In a true infinity of universes it would be consistent and complete.


my mind is unable to comprehend infinity then.

reminds me of reading this comic book story about a guy who keeps shrinking (sorry, don't remember the name of the comic, it was a old comic from the 60's i think). he keeps shrinking and becomes smaller than an atom, and he finds that there's another universe at that level. he does some comic book stuff at this point, but he keeps shrinking, and he falls out of that universe into another universe at a lower level, etc.. that comic blew my mind.

Like the anthropic principle is pretty fucked up.


something about the anthropic principle just confuses me. when something confuses me, i try to look at the criticism section to see if the critics make more sense.

"Similarly, Stephen Jay Gould,[59][60] Michael Shermer[61] and others claim that the stronger versions of the Anthropic Principle seem to reverse known causes and effects. Gould compared the claim that the universe is fine-tuned for the benefit of our kind of life to saying that sausages were made long and narrow so that they could fit into modern hotdog buns, or saying that ships had been invented to house barnacles. These critics cite the vast physical, fossil, genetic, and other biological evidence consistent with life having been fine-tuned through natural selection to adapt to the physical and geophysical environment in which life exists. Life appears to have adapted to physics, and not vice versa."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Criticisms

Posted over 6 years ago

nawhead

Avatar for nawhead

2485 posts
Joined 10/2009

Wait wait wait, did I miss something? When do we get to Hitler ITT?


fact: in all other parallel universes, Hitler has won WWII or else the world is worse off cause someone traveled back in time and killed Baby Hitler.

conclusion: our universe was actually the only successful attempt to thwart Hitler's thousand year reign in all the multiverse. thus Justin Bieber was born to balance the multiverse.

Posted over 6 years ago




HomePoker ForumsGeneral Poker Discussion → Religion thread