How to construct the universe using mathematics (not fleshed out)

[BenNgai]

Take a non-euclidean space (NES)uniformly zero AND and give zero the property that it splits into two opposite real numbers. (from physical experimentation on vacuums)

This give a sea of real numbers.

Assume Natural numbers are a steady state in this non-euclidean space.

if numbers collide their values are combined (or sum together)

Given an infinite sum of positive real numbers it is infinity. There exist value x such that the sum the sum of a set of positive numbers is approximately 1. now because we assume that Natural numbers is a steady state, it eventually goes towards one.

Natural numbers have this nice property that each number has a unique property.

Now assume that the positive and negative value of the number is correlated with it's gravity. Positive numbers have attraction and negative has repulsion.

Since as natural numbers form, the NES is almost everywhere slightly negative and it increases over time. This makes the NES expand increasing faster overtime.

Another insight.

Black holes are just a very, very large integer (therefore with a giant gravity)

Heres my original discussion on my idea.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/disc...re-math-or-at-least-a-vacuumempty-space-is/p2

 

[nycmathguy]

Take a non-euclidean space (NES)uniformly zero AND and give zero the property that it splits into two opposite real numbers. (from physical experimentation on vacuums)

This give a sea of real numbers.

Assume Natural numbers are a steady state in this non-euclidean space.

if numbers collide their values are combined (or sum together)

Given an infinite sum of positive real numbers it is infinity. There exist value x such that the sum the sum of a set of positive numbers is approximately 1. now because we assume that Natural numbers is a steady state, it eventually goes towards one.

Natural numbers have this nice property that each number has a unique property.

Now assume that the positive and negative value of the number is correlated with it's gravity. Positive numbers have attraction and negative has repulsion.

Since as natural numbers form, the NES is almost everywhere slightly negative and it increases over time. This makes the NES expand increasing faster overtime.

Another insight.

Black holes are just a very, very large integer (therefore with a giant gravity)

Heres my original discussion on my idea.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/disc...re-math-or-at-least-a-vacuumempty-space-is/p2

Harold Camping, former President of Family Radio, thought his engineering and mathematical background was good enough to discover the date of the rapture of the church. He failed in 1994 and TWICE in 2011. Camping passed a few years ago.

There is a crazy math guy on You Tube claiming that He can mathematically prove the existence of God. There is nothing more beautiful than humility in a person. Sometimes we allow our ability to understand what most people fear and hate (math and physics) to block the never-ending path to humility. I sit back and simply let God take over.

 

[MathLover1]

Harold Camping, former President of Family Radio, thought his engineering and mathematical background was good enough to discover the date of the rapture of the church. He failed in 1994 and TWICE in 2011. Camping passed a few years ago.

There is a crazy math guy on You Tube claiming that He can mathematically prove the existence of God. There is nothing more beautiful than humility in a person. Sometimes we allow our ability to understand what most people fear and hate (math and physics) to block the never-ending path to humility. I sit back and simply let God take over.

video is just nice try to prove something, but doesn't prove anything

Math is a self-consistent and an internally logical man-made construct. You cannot use math to prove or disprove an entity that has no physical representation supposedly "existing" outside space and time. In fact, existence is dependent on space and time.

His proof reminds me on this one: see attache
The mistake lies in the assumption that we can divide by

. Why is this a problem? Because, according to the equation we started with,

! We are not allowed to divide by zero, and therefore the result highlighted in red is invalid.

 

[nycmathguy]

video is just nice try to prove something, but doesn't prove anything

Math is a self-consistent and an internally logical man-made construct. You cannot use math to prove or disprove an entity that has no physical representation supposedly "existing" outside space and time. In fact, existence is dependent on space and time.

His proof reminds me on this one: see attache
The mistake lies in the assumption that we can divide by

. Why is this a problem? Because, according to the equation we started with,

! We are not allowed to divide by zero, and therefore the result highlighted in red is invalid.

God is everywhere. He is eternal. Eternity is not subject to time and space. For example, 1000 years is like one day and one day like a 1000 years as Peter so eloquently put it. Jesus ascended to Heaven slightly over 2000 years ago. To us, it is LITERALLY 2000 years. As far as Jesus is concerned, He left the Earrh 2 days ago.

1. Math cannot prove or disprove the existence of an eternal being.

2. God is spirit. We are spiritual beings living in a body.

3. Death is the separation of body and spirit. When the spirit leaves at the moment of death, the body is useless.

4. On resurrection day, the spirit and body will be reunited to form a glorified body like the body Jesus has today.

5. Can science prove or disprove the existence of an eternal being? No.

 

[conway]

video is just nice try to prove something, but doesn't prove anything

Math is a self-consistent and an internally logical man-made construct. You cannot use math to prove or disprove an entity that has no physical representation supposedly "existing" outside space and time. In fact, existence is dependent on space and time.

His proof reminds me on this one: see attache
The mistake lies in the assumption that we can divide by

. Why is this a problem? Because, according to the equation we started with,

! We are not allowed to divide by zero, and therefore the result highlighted in red is invalid.

So if division by zero is solved....you no longer have an argument!

 

[conway]

God is everywhere. He is eternal. Eternity is not subject to time and space. For example, 1000 years is like one day and one day like a 1000 years as Peter so eloquently put it. Jesus ascended to Heaven slightly over 2000 years ago. To us, it is LITERALLY 2000 years. As far as Jesus is concerned, He left the Earrh 2 days ago.

1. Math cannot prove or disprove the existence of an eternal being.

2. God is spirit. We are spiritual beings living in a body.

3. Death is the separation of body and spirit. When the spirit leaves at the moment of death, the body is useless.

4. On resurrection day, the spirit and body will be reunited to form a glorified body like the body Jesus has today.

5. Can science prove or disprove the existence of an eternal being? No.

It is not humble to limit science or God for that matter! plp once made the same claim as you have regarding the earth as flat or round! Likewise....if division by zero is solved you have no argument!