4 ms·

To be fair, religion and the halting problem exist.

VLM 13y ago
LOL you got me. More specifically, proof of any example in the general category of one, and a solution to the other. Mix and match with the above how you'd like.
- foobarbazqux 13y ago
  Whether we can prove or disprove the existence of God before the heat death of the universe is undecidable?
  - VLM 13y ago
    To throw some fun fuel on the fire, which God, including conceptualizations that may not exist in our time yet. If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Yet we're clearly not civilized, so at minimum at least one must not exist. So its not looking good for the FTL hopefuls. There is another fun one in that if an all powerful being exists, it seems a bit presumptuous for a mere moral to limit "it" to sublight. Therefore if the concept of FTL exists and an all powerful being exists, then FTL must exist in practice unless we're placing irrational limitations on an inherently unlimited being. Therefore if FTL can be imagined, but not implemented, that proves scientifically most conceptions of "god" do not exist; Or at least "it" is not all powerful. Unclear what impact that logic puzzler would have; probably just about none. That would make a much more fun rabble rousing article than "yet another star trek communicator / iphone analogy"
    - gizmo686 13y ago
      >If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Yet we're clearly not civilized, so at minimum at least one must not exist. So its not looking good for the FTL hopefuls. Not nessasarily. Assuming FTL does not imply time-travel, FTL still does not imply the ability to search the entire universe. The alien missionaries would still be limited by their sensors to scout X cubic-meters/year/ship. They would also have a limited supply of spaceships (that may grow exponentially with time).
    - ars 13y ago
      You've limited yourself too much. You could have a non-missionary religion (like Judaism). You could have a missionary-religion that considers humans unsuitable for conversion. You could have a missionary-religion that puts some kind of restriction that says they have to wait for some trigger event before contacting humans. As for God why do you assume God is inside this universe? God could be causing the universe. (Like God would be the computer and the program, and we the results of running the program.)
      - foobarbazqux 13y ago
        Or God simply is the universe. Alternatively God is light, so what you need is an FTG drive.
    - DennisP 13y ago
      If the being is all-powerful, it's not restricted by physics. We are. Or you can say that the all-powerful being exists outside spacetime, and FTL is impossible to anything within spacetime. So the all-powerful being sees all of spacetime laid out in front of it, like a canvas. The painter dabs paint on the left margin and they streak out toward the right in interesting patterns. The painter dabs paint here and there, the patterns respond, and he continues until he likes the picture. Asimov had a concept like this in The End of Eternity.
    - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
      If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Who says we weren't? Yet we're clearly not civilized Says... you? Or it could just be that God adjusts His teachings to each sapient species's psychology, so having us contacted by Starfish Aliens would be kinda useless. Or the true religion could be a non-missionary religion, like, as someone so astutely pointed out, Judaism.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - gizmo686 13y ago
    Wouldn't that imply that we couldn't prove/disprove God's extisnese. If we could prove it, we need only wait until we prove it, then return our answer.
    - foobarbazqux 13y ago
      It means we don't know if we can prove or disprove, because it may or may not take forever.

VLM 13y ago

LOL you got me. More specifically, proof of any example in the general category of one, and a solution to the other. Mix and match with the above how you'd like.

foobarbazqux 13y ago
Whether we can prove or disprove the existence of God before the heat death of the universe is undecidable?
- VLM 13y ago
  To throw some fun fuel on the fire, which God, including conceptualizations that may not exist in our time yet. If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Yet we're clearly not civilized, so at minimum at least one must not exist. So its not looking good for the FTL hopefuls. There is another fun one in that if an all powerful being exists, it seems a bit presumptuous for a mere moral to limit "it" to sublight. Therefore if the concept of FTL exists and an all powerful being exists, then FTL must exist in practice unless we're placing irrational limitations on an inherently unlimited being. Therefore if FTL can be imagined, but not implemented, that proves scientifically most conceptions of "god" do not exist; Or at least "it" is not all powerful. Unclear what impact that logic puzzler would have; probably just about none. That would make a much more fun rabble rousing article than "yet another star trek communicator / iphone analogy"
  - gizmo686 13y ago
    >If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Yet we're clearly not civilized, so at minimum at least one must not exist. So its not looking good for the FTL hopefuls. Not nessasarily. Assuming FTL does not imply time-travel, FTL still does not imply the ability to search the entire universe. The alien missionaries would still be limited by their sensors to scout X cubic-meters/year/ship. They would also have a limited supply of spaceships (that may grow exponentially with time).
  - ars 13y ago
    You've limited yourself too much. You could have a non-missionary religion (like Judaism). You could have a missionary-religion that considers humans unsuitable for conversion. You could have a missionary-religion that puts some kind of restriction that says they have to wait for some trigger event before contacting humans. As for God why do you assume God is inside this universe? God could be causing the universe. (Like God would be the computer and the program, and we the results of running the program.)
    - foobarbazqux 13y ago
      Or God simply is the universe. Alternatively God is light, so what you need is an FTG drive.
  - DennisP 13y ago
    If the being is all-powerful, it's not restricted by physics. We are. Or you can say that the all-powerful being exists outside spacetime, and FTL is impossible to anything within spacetime. So the all-powerful being sees all of spacetime laid out in front of it, like a canvas. The painter dabs paint on the left margin and they streak out toward the right in interesting patterns. The painter dabs paint here and there, the patterns respond, and he continues until he likes the picture. Asimov had a concept like this in The End of Eternity.
  - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
    If a missionary religion is the correct true religion, and FTL exists anywhere in the galaxy, then by definition we should have already been contacted by missionaries and "civilized". Who says we weren't? Yet we're clearly not civilized Says... you? Or it could just be that God adjusts His teachings to each sapient species's psychology, so having us contacted by Starfish Aliens would be kinda useless. Or the true religion could be a non-missionary religion, like, as someone so astutely pointed out, Judaism.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- gizmo686 13y ago
  Wouldn't that imply that we couldn't prove/disprove God's extisnese. If we could prove it, we need only wait until we prove it, then return our answer.
  - foobarbazqux 13y ago
    It means we don't know if we can prove or disprove, because it may or may not take forever.