Scientist says he found definitive proof that God exists.

Scientist says he found definitive proof that God exists.



I am a scientist.... I also am a (forever) student of the esoteric. I was raised with hidden knowledge a little different than most people, but always given the latitude to question my beliefs. My higher education degree studies were centered around engineering and physics. I have a healthy perspective on question, test, judge, reevaluate, and question again.

And yet, I have NEVER questioned that one day SCIENCE would catch up with God. The role of science is to explain HOW...not WHY. God has always answered the WHY.

a reply to: CIAGypsy
No doubt, i met him yestarday evening drunk in a bar, fighting with the bouncers, cause he wouldn´t leave, having no money to pay his drinks and screaming the whole time:
"BUT I AM GOD AND DON´T HAVE TO PAY, I MADE YOU UGLY HUMANS AND YOUR UGLY WORLD ...."

Ah, was it maybe Vatican scientists that will have proof for god?

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
a reply to: CIAGypsy
No doubt, i met him yestarday evening drunk in a bar, fighting with the bouncers, cause he wouldn´t leave, having no money to pay his drinks and screaming the whole time:
"BUT I AM GOD AND DON´T HAVE TO PAY, I MADE YOU UGLY HUMANS AND YOUR UGLY WORLD ...."

Ah, was it maybe Vatican scientists that will have proof for god?

Well if he were really God, he would have made you believe he'd already paid the bill....

First off, they need to apply physics and math to say hit Pluto with a probe, but the cosmos doesn't need math.

Pluto doesn't need to know anything about its dimensions, motion or destination.

Math is man made, In the cosmos math doesn't exist.

Different in life. DNA, cell division runs its program, it doesn't know from math, just executes the next encoded instruction.

So who wrote that software?

a reply to: intrptr

I think math exists in the universe... Just because an entity isn't aware of how it functions doesn't negate the physics that underlie those functions. Math is an explanation of those functions.

That being said, humanity explaining the nature of the universe is akin to a toddler trying to explain brain surgery. We only grasp a minute concept of its reality....but in our own subjective perspective, we think we understand it all.

I call BS. If scientist has found proof then he ain't a scientist!

a reply to: CIAGypsy

I think math exists in the universe... Just because an entity isn't aware of how it functions doesn't negate the physics that underlie those functions. Math is an explanation of those functions.

Physics, properties of physics, okay. Math defines it for us, interdependent of the reality. Like a clock on the wall tells time, but there are no clocks hanging in space.

Except pulsars, but thats again physics and the pulse rates are all different.

Like clocks on the wall, math is a man made language of interpretation. And like you said, woefully inadequate.

Does math explain infinity? No, we have a symbol.

Does math explain emotions, no we have 'expression'.

Math sets points, lines and cubes, but not 'hyper'cubes, for instance. May have exceeded my boundaries with that last one, if aleeen craft travel the cosmos they violate the 'known' laws of physics, from our perspective.

So they have the math to construct such things we don't know of yet.

a reply to: CIAGypsy
That gif made my, aaah, is making my day right now, can´t stop laughing

a reply to: CIAGypsy

Proof of God cannot be argued, it is a fruitless pursuit. The manner in which God exists can be discussed and which options to be believed considered. And yes, I agree, science has always been about the how and not the why. As far as math goes, we can read book after book on the nature of math only to find that there are those mathematicians who believe the laws of math are immutable within this universe and those who believe that it is all nothing more than mans mental arrangements to organize his surroundings.

I kind of see our individual existence as like standing on the end of a very high, verrrrrrrry high diving board staring out over what? Either a vast and unending expanse of welcoming existence or a void of nothingness. I've made my choice into which I want to dive.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

He never said he found definitive proof that God exists, so I'm unsure how the article can make such a claim without fabricating more nonsense.

This has been posted twice before.

& I'm still not convinced of this "proof".


Is there evidence, an abundance I suppose, depending on your criteria.

Is there proof?

Not on his nelly.

a reply to: CIAGypsy

"The mind of God is music of strings" - MK

Soooooo...no wonder God likes to pull strings of life...do as they wish and we are all puppets on strings. Damnit!!!!!

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
a reply to: intrptr

That being said, humanity explaining the nature of the universe is akin to a toddler trying to explain brain surgery. We only grasp a minute concept of its reality....but in our own subjective perspective, we think we understand it all.

I think that it isn't so much a case of not being able to explain it, but rather that we can not objectively look at the universe, because we are in it.

Unless we can see the universe from an objective, exterior position there could well be things that will forever remain hidden to us, no matter how advanced technologically we become.

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
Scientist says he found definitive proof that God exists.

OP, I think you linked to the wrong video, because that is not even remotely close to what Michio Kaku is saying in THIS video.

But do post the right one if you find it, I would be interested to see it. :-)

It doesn't matter what the subject is, old Mich, media whore extraordinaire, will get his musings aired.

Cue Stephen Hawking on a competitive rebound.

I have no clue how you came up with that conclusion there ops...his use of god is an analygy..basically saying uncovering the mysteries of matter and all things...god is a representation of all things, the how of the universe down to the subatomic level.

in no way did he suggest that proving string theory will somehow prove god.

originally posted by: intrptr
Math is man made

Man didn't "make" math. We discovered it.

What most people fail to understand is that some scientists and physicists use the word "God" to mean the answer of the esoteric questions that should fall together in a form of order and simplicity. This is due to the years of scientific study where the word "god" was synonymous with "the ultimate answer". They are NOT referring to some invisible humanoid deity in the universe that created everything, but the average man jumps to that conclusion and thus, posts like this are made.

Essentially, science and religion poise the same questions and it's science that seeks to answer those questions through study and theory where religion has stated that the answer is God and only God with no need for explanation. Not long ago, there was no allowance to disbelieve in God and thus, scientists had no choice but to merge the answer of their goals with religion's God. To many who study science from a historical perspective, "God" is simply the term given to the perfect answers.

a reply to: DupontDeux

Did you watch the last 50 seconds of it? To paraphrase, Kaku says the end goal of physics is to find a one inch equation that explains the "mind of God"; that God is probably a mathematician; that the one inch formula needs to unify all of the forces of Nature; and that the current candidate of the "mind of God" is the resonation of strings through hyper space (based on Super String Theory).

So it's not exactly saying he found "proof" that God exists.