If multiverse theories are true and there are an infinite amount of universes other than our own. In one of them, there would be a traditional theistic God that exists. Then, God must necessarily exist in all universes.
I may be out to lunch, but recently listening to another(they seem to be never ending these days) program on string theory a physicist was asked/setup for a question. He maintained earlier he did not believe in life after death and so fourth. A caller then asked if in an infinite amount of universes/possibilites, there would be one that, the people would survive death in a ‘spiritual form’. He conceded, “maybe” possibly to quickly, “…that yes there would then be something ‘like’ that…” Now if this is true, in any form or fashion, this does not necessarily have any affect on our universe. But if we are talking about a being that in definition is greater than the universe…all powerful…would it not have to extend to all the other universes.
I hope at least, there will be some of debate over this and I’m not missing the obvious. My reason, for presenting is that Theoretical Physics has been accused of being too caught up in theories of everything…string theory and others like it apparently ‘explain too much’. If we add this notion that God must exist, I think it can only spark new, positive and negative criticism for the future in science and spirtualism.
I don’t think the conclusion follows. This is because I don’t think the question is coherent. Just because a question has proper syntax does not mean that it expresses anything meaningful. So why do I find this question meaningless? I’m glad you asked.
First, asking if there is a god (a being which you have defined as being super-unversal) within a particular universe, is incoherent. Universes vary, presumably, on their properties. God is not a property of the universe if he is outside the universe.
Next, an infinite set does not necessarily contain every possible type of thing. Just because there are an infinite number of other universes, does not mean that there is a universe for every possible scenario. For instance, varying the speed of light would give an infinite number of universes, but the scope of the changes would be confined.
Third, the concept of ‘god’ is not necessarliy coherent. There are famous examples of how certain properties of god that seem to be well defined are actually self-contradictory (such as omnipotence).
And finally, to the caller’s question, it is a little more subtly incoherent. I will demonstrate by proposing a parallel:
Suppose he have a group of paperclips. They have been arranged into a series of x’s and o’s. The series goes “xoxxo xoxxo xoxxo xoxxo.” There is a clear pattern to this series. Now, the question proposed in your (the caller’s) example is equivalent to asking “is there a universe where the pattern will continue to exist after someone sweeps away all the paperclips?” Clearly, the question is nonsense: the pattern is the arrangement of paperclips, and when we rearrange them the pattern is necessarily gone. ‘Life’, as an attribute, is similar to a pattern. It is a pattern of activity seen in a lump of matter. When that pattern ends, the idea that it could go on is incoherent: what does it mean to ask if something that has ended goes on?
I don’t think the conclusion follows either. Mind you, I’m not sure the premise follows
Would multiple universes necessitate the possibility of everything imaginable being in at least one of them?
I don’t think so, but if that’s what you’re implying, then we have a circular argument that states something “if god existed, then he’d exist”
Personally, I’ve no more reason to believe in infinite universes than I do to believe in god.
I also have no reason to believe that infinite universes must include one that hosts a god, than I do to believe in god.
Nor do I have any reason to believe that this thing being hosted would be a god. Surely, by definition, God is the creator of this and every universe? Or is that just in some of them and the Christians have over-extended their definition?
I’ve got more reason to believe that infinite universes would be a better proof for god-deniers.
If the Multiverse theory is true then the conditions for life are dependant on an observer who is stuck in his particular dimension and can never observe another dimension or universe therefore it is self defeating to even ponder. Even by simple logic you could never know if there were any other universe’s, its too specific. The best you could ever do is deduce that cause and effect points to another dimension that you can never see with physical tools so it will always remain an improvable and un-testable theory.
IOW, its all mental masturbation and the thought is completely worthless.
Just my opinion.
I realize this has nothing to do with the point you were trying to make so i’ll but out now.
Well, clearly you’re speaking about a god that I am unfamiliar with. If you define it, I could probably poke holes in it.
I assume that this god explains something (e.g. the origin of the universe). In that case, it would contradict itself as an explanation because it would (again, I assume) want for an explanation of itself (its own origin).
Though speaking of origin assumes the existence of time, and then one asks where did time originate? I don’t think something being uncreated is contradictory. Don’t take this to mean that I am backing the existence of God, I am merely asserting that there may be uncreated things or processes. Things that have always existed, and/or existed independently of time. Though it is weird to imagine something existing outside of time, but time isn’t a prerequisite for existence.
Not at all surprising, almost no one I talk to is familiar with God, they are only familiar with the descriptions of a man made God through bibles. I promise, you could never poke a single hole in my knowledge of Gods personality. God does not explain origins through words or any language; he proves everything through the natural laws that are set into place and through the reality of cause and effect.
Time is a law and a tool to measure things by, if there was nothing to measure there would be no such concept. If nothing ever changed states or had beginnings and endings then there would never be a human concept of Time.
Is god personal? Comprehensible?
How could a god outside of time be ‘personal’? Our understanding of personhood is temporal.
How can a temporal being grasp something ‘outside of time’?
Is ‘god’ just what you are calling the natural laws?
See you need to first understand what a human and life is.
We are a Spirit, we live in a body and we have a Soul. The Spirit is the life-force that is literally God and this Spirit is infinite. The physical body resides in the physical plane and is subject to its laws, like Time and Gravity . The Spirit is only able to temporarily be in this dimension or plane as long as it inhabits a body, when the body dies the spirit leaves this physical realm but never ceases to exist and never changes states, thus it is timeless.
God made the Natural laws to govern this physical life to its ultimate Purpose.
We are a Spirit, we live in a body and we have a Soul. The Spirit is the life-force that is literally God and this Spirit is infinite. The physical body resides in the physical plane and is subject to its laws, like Time and Gravity . The Spirit is only able to temporarily be in this dimension or plane as long as it inhabits a body, when the body dies the spirit leaves this physical realm but never ceases to exist and never changes states, thus it is timeless.
Where does the spirit inhabit the body? In the pineal gland of the brain?
Sorry didn’t mean to be condescending, but I just want people to put forth reasons for their beliefs rather than a matter of fact way in which things are. If you assert something, you need to provide evidence or reasons that support your claims.
Kingdaddy, you assert a God that’s not omnipotent and I’m a little confused by this. Isn’t omnipotence part of the definition? What is it exactly, then, that makes this guy our God?
Adding to that, I’d say ALL of God’s qualities are man-mad definitions… including the property of existence.
I elaborated on my idea of the Soul far more then any I have seen here, if it wasn’t good enough you could simply ask a specific question without the disrespect.
This soul is not physical just like Life is not physical. Do the thoughts in your mind have physical properties, if so can you point to them on a map of a human body, can you show me their weight and how much space they displace? You seem to be confused on what life is comprised of to begin with, if you can point to life I would like to see it, and again I would like to know all the physical properties of it as well.
God has made a set of rules to govern this physical realm, he cannot break his own rules therefore the idea we humans have made up about Omnipotent is a fantasy, just like the idea of complete freedom, neither can exist without some boundaries.
If an all powerful being contradicts himself then his power would be divided or his rules wouldn’t be rules, either way you cant have power to do anything.
