OK, let me try this one again, and tell me what you think.?

Question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070328065633AAsOvTJ&r=w

Please refer to my previous post via the link above. I was not simply trying to make a point for God's existance, moreso I was trying to make a point that God and Quantum Theory can go hand in hand, and that God himself could be reasonably viewed, from a scientific standpoint, as the cause of our physical universe...and universal laws of physics.

First, my thanks to Blue Sky, for a verry informative, and surprisingly un-biased answer. I would reccommend that everyone read his reply, even though it is rather long.

Scientists more and more are believing that there are alternate dimensions, and that the 11th dimension, in theory, would be the "space" that holds all other universes/dimensions, or however you would like to put it. It would be obvious that outside of our universe, our laws of physics need not necessarily apply. (Once again, I must start a new thread).

If you continue with this line of theory, one theory suggests a "membrane" of universes, another suggests highly mobile and colliding universes, but most all theories along these lines agree that physical laws would differ from universe to universe; one universe in which electrons are completely unstable, and thus no solid matter could form, another universe completely consistant of lightning or fire, some with life, some without, some having something other than carbon as it's building blocks, some having an entirely different set of elements altogether. It is speculated that the 11th dimension itself is infiniti, and there could be an infinite amount of universes contained within it.

What I am trying to get at, is why is it not a valid theory to say that God is that 11th dimension, or that membrane on which everything sits. I know this would not prove the book of Genesis, nor would it disprove it, but who says that God has to be a physical person to have personality? Just a theory

kjelstad: Did you not just read the last few lines of my post. Apparently not, and I can't say that surprises me. Am I not allowed to propose my own theories?

sonyack: "Your efforts succeed only in positing some other place where God exists and that does not really answer anything, and is unsatisfactory from a God-believer's point of view, which is that God exists in this universe, not some other one."

What?! A God believer may or may not feel this way, but if you are referring directly to a Christian point of view, we recognize that God is eternal, and that our niverse was created, by him, so therefore he must in some way reside outside of our universe as we know it.

But nice try though.

Also, these "logical arguments...which failed"

Hey guy, since your soooo smart, why don't you tell me where creation was ever shot down or disproved, bcuz then we can publish it as fact in all the books, and we can all stop having this conversation. Go on, show me that I am an uneducated fool who is holding on to a dream...

No, you can't. Neither of us can scientifically prove or disprove the existance of God, all that us Christians are trying to say is that he most certainly can, and has proven his own existance.

But quite an entertain although rather ong reply that you gave.

Answer 1

There are a great many difficulties when trying to use science to prove that God exists. Physics itself is running into problems, for one thing. But ultimately, the God concept does not lend itself to scientific methods - this god has no properties that can be detected or measured or quantified by science.

And in science, when you have to invent or propose more and more "entities" to explain something or allow for something, it is a sign that things have gone astray. Science wisely uses Occam's Razor as a principle, to wit, "Entities must not be multiplied needlessly."

Your efforts succeed only in positing some other place where God exists and that does not really answer anything, and is unsatisfactory from a God-believer's point of view, which is that God exists in this universe, not some other one.

The Argument From First Cause is very old and found wanting, largely because it insists that the universe must have a cause. There are a lot of problems with that. For example, if everything has a cause, what caused God? Well, if it is said that God caused himself, why can't it be said the universe caused itself?

So looking to other dimensions does nothing to prove the existence of something having no properties that science can detect. Logical arguments for the existence of God have been around for ages and ages and fail. Science does not study other universes, it studies this one. And other dimensions in science are part of this one, just as the third dimension is part of it - if you can't see depth it doesn't mean there is no third dimension, only that you don't see it.

Science cannot say that there is a God, and science cannot say there is not a God. Science just does science, which just describes the universe.

In dealing with science, it does no good to redefine God as being some dimension or some membrane or some "force outside" "our universe." You can remove this God from the universe, but it still comes down to why things, including God, exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Cause
See this link for an analysis of First Cause arguments, scolling down to the Objections section for why it fails.

Answer 2

Even if you do prove a god with all this, it doesn't prove it is your god and won't make the man in red letters real.