Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

This thread is a branch off of my Reality is the Set of All Things that Exist thread.

In that thread, Ponder This wrote a basic truth and I wish to reiterate it here:

Well, if it wasn't obvious that God was real, then you have to actually prove that G ϵ R instead of asserting it as a fact.

I think you need to say something like:
Suppose G ϵ R and R ϵ G.
R has the property that R = P ( R ) and G has the property that G = P ( G ).
Therefore, R ⊆ G and G ⊆ R.
Hence, G = R.

This puts it in the form of a Theorem which we can call the 'God-Reality Equivalence Theorem'.
if God is real and all of Reality is part of God, then God and Reality are equivalent*.

So we see in the bold that reality is a subset of God. Where God is taken to be self-distributed, Reality exists in both part and whole such that the sum does not equal the parts but is taken to be more than its parts. This is due to the fact that objects exist in space and time and reality does not. Hence it is taken to be beyond the material world.

For more see: https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/...od.209426/

Quote:This is due to the fact that objects exist in space and time and reality does not. Hence it is taken to be beyond the material world.

Is reality then mental in nature?

(Jun 14, 2018 07:03 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:This is due to the fact that objects exist in space and time and reality does not. Hence it is taken to be beyond the material world.

Is reality then mental in nature?

Indeed. This would be the reason why Reality lacks objectivity except as an illusion or an emergent property. A "matrix" in other words.

(Jun 14, 2018 07:05 PM)Ostronomos Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jun 14, 2018 07:03 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:This is due to the fact that objects exist in space and time and reality does not. Hence it is taken to be beyond the material world.

Is reality then mental in nature?

Indeed. This would be the reason why Reality lacks objectivity except as an illusion or an emergent property. A "matrix" in other words.

I agree. Mathematics and logic prove reality is mental. On a deeper level the existence of properties prove it as well. Properties or universals are non-physical in nature.

(Jun 14, 2018 07:28 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jun 14, 2018 07:05 PM)Ostronomos Wrote: [ -> ]

(Jun 14, 2018 07:03 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:This is due to the fact that objects exist in space and time and reality does not. Hence it is taken to be beyond the material world.

Is reality then mental in nature?

Indeed. This would be the reason why Reality lacks objectivity except as an illusion or an emergent property. A "matrix" in other words.

I agree. Mathematics and logic prove reality is mental. On a deeper level the existence of properties prove it as well. Properties are non-physical in nature.

Not only that but the fact that information inheres in reality. As is supported by the holographic universe.

Demiurge...the burning bush...

Here is a quote from Quora by a fellow named Matthew Mitzner. Again, we have the G.O.D as the global structure or universe by which things transform and possess the property of mathematical closure. This G.O.D. is self-distributed throughout the SCSPL universe. It is by coherent self-configuration that syntactic operators or "things"/ "beings" realize themselves with respect to the evolving universe. As they process information by two-way transduction with other "things"/ "beings" in a coherent manner.

Matthew Mitzner
Answered Sep 9 2017 · Author has 169 answers and 38.7k answer views
I’ll try to answer this and w/o referencing or reading Chris Langan’s own response beforehand.

The CTMU principles which are axiomatically self apparent, generalize the concept of “being”, meaning any sort of object, idea, or era, into a generic concept of an “infocognitive syntactic transducer”. A transducer simultaneously acts as both transmitter and receiver of information in any and all syntactic exchanges between transducers.

“Infocognition” references the dual character of any “thing” (object, idea, or era) as both informational and cognitive (cognitive generically meaning “subject to processing in a universally coherent manner”, per how science, logic, and math and the formal rules thereof generally apply to things). Understanding that any and all “things” or “beings” are essentially two-way “transducers” in the sense of syntactic coherence with other such “things”, we can refer to any possible coherent “object” of our consideration as a “syntactic operator”.

The global coherence by which disparate “syntactic operators” abide, implies a common “syntax” by which they operate. Implicated by a common syntax is a “global” domain or “universe” in which all functionality proceeds. In the CTMU, the global domain or universe is modeled as entirely and reflexively equivalent to the collective states of various operators, the global structure or domain is thus equivalent to the syntax by which various operators transform. This global structure or universe which is equivalent to the distributed syntax or “laws” by which things transform is itself modeled as the “Global Operator/Designer” or G.O.D in the CTMU.

Regardless of how you wish to interpret “God”, “G.O.D.” is a logical (global) structure in any self-containing and self describing universe.

From: https://www.quora.com/How-does-Christoph...e-of-a-god