Proof of the existence of God

Right, neither of which existed before time and space. Of course, my argument assumes that macro scale causation applies to all things, which quantum theory clearly shows doesn't. Your notion that everything needs a cause is likely to be false.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

An example of a self-caused causality can be found in a firestorm.

IOW, the fire causes a storm which fuels the fire, which fuels the storm, etc. A self- caused causality.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Space may have always existed.
That being said, the initial cause could have taken place.

jan.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The fire itself is caused.

jan.

 

Of course, but that was not the point of the example. I tried to demonstrate that self-caused causes are conceptually possible.

 

The universe may have always existed.

 

But does that answer the question if time can exist outside of space?

Recently saw a program how we can accurately measure the properties of the air 100,000 years ago. When recording climate change, we often use ice from arctic permafrost as a baseline.
During calving, glaciers reveal the actual frozen remnants of "old air" within the ice. For that strata, time stood still and what we see trapped in the ice is the air as it existed 100,000 years ago.

An actual glimpse of a physical condition in stasis (existing without time) .

 

Ah, no. Glaciers move. Those air pockets are sometimes inhabited by microbes, and at the very least, there is radioactive decay. And bombardment from radiation from space.

...and the air moves around due to brownian motion.

 

Just saw "bicentennial man" (Robin Williams).
http://www.bing.com/search?q=bicent...s=n&sk=&cvid=38718b87bb304ed2a19afc932c1b9594

IMO, it illustrates the infinite potential of the "mathematical function". I recommend it.

 

And whatever can exist will always need space (in some form) to be contained.

 

Time and space are the same thing, space expands in time, so time is an expansion of space, once space reaches a curvature it gains mass distance "spacetime".
It's all about the complex plane it's should be possible to substitute the virtual photon for the graviton to unify the remaining forces. Energy conservation is perfect there was an exact amount of energy given for the creation of time and space. If I want to paint a picture I should know how much paint I need especially if I am an expert among experts.

 

And that direction is perpetual satisfaction, and can only be obtained with a unification with God.

 

You see I asked a question before and recieved no answer actually 2 but one may not even be a question depending on how you want to look at the context.

The first is time=0 or a singularity can be defined as non detectable or even non existent one dimensional.

You can just say we don't need singularities but whatever lets assume we need them how can you plot the location of a singularity if there is no space to plot it's coordinates? This must mean space has always existed...

The other question was if you extend an infinite rod throught infinite space as a vacuum will that rod bend?

My answer is yes like calculating pi a one dimensional rod headed in one direction will gain mass even if it was massless, even billy t mentioned that the shortest distant from a - b is not always a straight line as in geodesic paths. This is the creation of space time.

 

Did you ever ask yourself why a scalar quantity has no direction? Now here lies another important invisible clue...why does time only have one direction? Is there more than one direction? These questions may seem trivial but the insights may be nothing close to trivial.

irrational numbers seem to fit in perfect in a rational order just a wild guess about this last comment.

 

Am glad people here are discussing direction that you see will be the perspective you make your observation from and you then must conclude this is what you have observed although true but not the whole truth because you were only looking from one side and saw a singularity
'blind spot'.

 

Well, perhaps this may assist in solving some of the aspects of functions and resulting perceptions of Causality.

 

Not as we know it.

jan.

 

So now we're down to "could"? Not much of a proof lies in "could".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Get into the spirit of the discussion Sarkus.
The theme of our previous discussion has ended (for now).
jan.

 

The theme remains the proof of the existence of God, and within that the subject of causality is currently at the fore - not exactly issues undiscussed previously, Jan.
I'd simply prefer it if you were consistent in your views, irrespective of what you were discussing, where or with whom. I know it might seem too much to ask of you, but I do so anyway.