Computer Scientists "Prove" God Exists
By Robert Gehl on
October 30, 2013







With a huge caveat, computer scientists have proven that God exists.

German magazine Spiegel is reporting that a theorem formalized by German mathematician has been proven by a group of computer scientists - on a MacBook.

Kurt Gödel, who died in 1978, proposed an interesting theory that a higher being must exist. It's pretty complicated, but here it is in a nutshell: First, God is - by definition - that for which no greater can be achieved. Second, while God exists merely in the understanding of this concept, we could conceive of him as greater if he existed in reality; therefore, he must exist.

It's an ontological device, but Gödel had a mathematical formula for this theory - meaning it can be proven.

Using an ordinary MacBook, Christoph Benzmüller and Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo have proven that Gödel's theory is mathematically correct. What's amazing is such a complex mathematical calculation can be completed quickly and easily using a common notebook computer.

Above is an image of what is known as Gödel's Ontological Proof.


Also for those of you with a few minutes to spare, here's the explanation, courtesy of stackexchange.com

The modal operator ? refers to necessity; its dual, ?, refers to possibility. (A sentence is necessarily true iff it isn't possible for it to be false, and vice versa.) P(?) means that ? is a positive (in the sense of "good") property; I'll just transcribe it as "? is good". I'll write out the argument colloquially, with the loss of precision that implies. In particular, the words "possible" and "necessary" are vague, and you need to understand modal logic somewhat to follow their precise usage in this argument.
.Axiom 1: If ? is good, and ? forces ? (that is, it's necessarily true that anything with property ? has property ?), then ? is also good.
.Axiom 2: For every property ?, exactly one of ? and ¬? is good. (If ¬? is good, we may as well say that ? is bad.)
.Theorem 1 (Good Things Happen): If ? is good, then it's possible that something exists with property ?.

Proof of Theorem 1: Suppose ? were good, but necessarily nothing had property ?. Then property ? would, vacuously, force every other property; in particular ? would force ¬?. By Axiom 1, this would mean that ¬? was also good; but this would then contradict Axiom 2.
.Definition 1: We call a thing godlike when it has every good property.
.Axiom 3: Being godlike is good.
.Theorem 2 (No Atheism): It's possible that something godlike exists.

Proof of Theorem 2: This follows directly from Theorem 1 applied to Axiom 3.
.Definition 2: We call property ? the essence of a thing x when (1) x has property ?, and (2) property ? forces every property of x.
.Axiom 4: If ? is good, then ? is necessarily good.
.Theorem 3 (God Has No Hair): If a thing is godlike, then being godlike is its essence.

Proof of Theorem 3: First note that if x is godlike, it has all good properties (by definition) and no bad properties (by Axiom 2). So any property that a godlike thing has is good, and is therefore necessarily good (by Axiom 4), and is therefore necessarily possessed by anything godlike.
.Definition 3: We call a thing indispensable when something with its essence (if it has an essence) must exist.
.Axiom 5: Being indispensable is good.
.Theorem 4 (Yes, Virginia): Something godlike necessarily exists.

Proof of Theorem 4: If something is godlike, it has every good property by definition. In particular, it's indispensable, since that's a good property (by Axiom 5); so by definition something with its essence, which is just "being godlike" (by Theorem 3), must exist. In other words, if something godlike exists, then it's necessary for something godlike to exist. But by Theorem 2, it's possible that something godlike exists; so it's possible that it's necessary for something godlike to exist; and so it is, in fact, necessary for something godlike to exist. QED.


-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

Science can prove God, but fails at proving man induced climate change.


Got it.

-------------------------
I was right.

If God exists, FK should be very afraid.

-------------------------
“It is the heart of US policy to use fascism to preserve capitalism while claiming to be saving democracy from communism “ - Michael Parenti

Why does doing that math make them Morons?


-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

I have simplified it:

-------------------------

What's an axiom and why is it relevant to an application of this proof to real life?

I choose to believe in god; that works for me.  Your choice may vary.

-------------------------

A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.

They didn't prove that....that's your problem.

You buy into too much bull ca-ca!

Fppl!

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

Finding and understanding the creator of all is easier than climate science?

-------------------------
I was right.

Obviously!

He wasn't hiding.

He's also real.

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

God exists through faith.
Proof denies Faith.
Therefore, there is no God because FK killed him.

Moron.

-------------------------
“It is the heart of US policy to use fascism to preserve capitalism while claiming to be saving democracy from communism “ - Michael Parenti

Nope....your assumption is crap!

"First, God is - by definition - that for which no greater can be achieved. Second, while God exists merely in the understanding of this concept, we could conceive of him as greater if he existed in reality; therefore, he must exist."

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

.

Edited: 12/11/2017 at 06:30 AM by HAPDigital

.

Edited: 12/11/2017 at 06:30 AM by HAPDigital

For every thread there are 1000 more posts just as hateful. Remove the stain.

Idiot!

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

She does exist
but FK's perception of her
is invented in his own image.
A trainwreck of anger fear and hate.
He's entitled to it, but it's a nasty feedback cycle.

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

The mark of the stain!

Said the pathological lying POS democrap commie!



-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.

FK<----------run over by the short bus

-------------------------
I was right.

Look...it's the other POS pathological lying prog democrap commie!



-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.