Friday, September 28, 2007

Limit of the God Function

One argument for the nonexistence of an Abrahamic God occurred to me recently. It's probably been stated better hundreds of years ago, but I've got a jazzy new way to say it, to wit:

The limit of the God function over time is zero.

This quasi-mathematical formulation is not meant to suggest any actual rigor or quantitative nature, just to capture the essence of the idea. Basically, the history of science has been a sort of nibbling away at the boundaries of what deities are perceived as doing. The ancients believed that the gods carried the sun in its quotidian saunter across the sky, held the earth on their shoulders, threw lightning bolts at those who displeased them, or maybe made the sun stand still for hours at a time. As science has elucidated the natural mechanisms underlying these and many more phenomena, the divine job description has contracted considerably. These days the potential influence of divine action in the real world has been restricted to probabilistic phenomena like weather, or possibly quantum interactions, and nonobservable influences on people's hearts and minds. Between functional MRI and the possibility of newer understandings of very small particles, this niche promises to continue shrinking.

Now to make this all mathy, let G = the set of all possible deities affecting the observable world, whether real, imagined, or just kidded about, from YHWH to FSM.

f(G) is the influence of G in the observable universe.


If true, this would allow for only one of two possibilities, atheism or the most bland form of Deism, virtually indistinguishable from atheism.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

My Contribution to Conservapedia

[I posted this today at Conservapedia under Gravitation, Theory of. Within about twelve minutes, it was deleted and I was blocked. Good thing I had a backup!]

Gravitation, Theory of

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The name given to the hypothesis that bodies undergo mutual attraction related to the amount of matter they contain. This was first proposed by Sir Isaac "Figg" Newton in his publication in AD 1687 of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. Newtonism is the term applied to belief in Gravitation, and Newtonists it's adherants.

Criticisms of Newtonism

Christians readily agknowledge the existence of microgravity, which is what causes a baby's sippy cup to fall to the floor when released, because it has been observed many times in the laboratory setting. Where they take issue with newtonists is with regard to macrogravity, the attraction between large celestial bodies. This has never been reproduced in the laboratory, nor have gravitons, which would have to exist to transmit the attractive force, been observed, despite years of fruitless search.

Newtonism requires that these forces be present constantly, but the microgravity on our planet can be nullified by the use of a specially equipped aircraft.

Godless engineers are reluctant to admit it, but gravitationism is readily disproved by the First Law of Murphy, not to mention Cole's Law.

Social Implications

Critics of newtonism are quick to point out that Alfred Einstein relied on Newton's work to formulate his widely discredited theories of Einsteinism, without which Korean dictator Kim Jung Ill would have been hard-pressed to develop his widely-discredited armamentarium. Amongst his weaponry are such diverse elements as the Long Dong and the Taepodong 2. The conclusion is inescapable: no Newton, no Long Dong.

Newtonism's principles also played a key role in the notorious Apollo Hoax of the AD 1960s and early AD 1970s, which was perpetrated by the so-called rocket surgeons of NASA on all Americans.

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

My Conversation with God

This is an unedited transcript of our online chat. I'm thinking this may not be guy that Abraham, Muhammad, and Jesus were talking about.

Hello. What is your name?
what, don't you know?
My brain does not yet contain that information.
I thought you formed me in my mother's womb.
Thanks for the information: said I formed him or her in his or her mother s womb.
You don't even know my gender? Omniscience ain't what it used to be, is it?
Mostly only women use words like "gender". But you claim to be a . What is Omniscience?

Thursday, February 15, 2007

I too am Spartacus

Late to the blogswarm, as usual.