Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

God = what we think is nothing

  1. Jan 5, 2004 #1
    Like we all have wondered at one time or another "where is God?"
    "What is God made out of?"
    "What type of conciousness does God have?"
    Etc etc...

    Well, I have been wondering these things for years. I will give my own theory on the matter, and i would like to hear all of yours too.
    I'll do this in a easy style...Pretend two people are talking:
    P: Now we look at an electron, what is it? Energy right?
    O: Well yeah that's what it is.
    P: Well, what is energy?
    O: Energy is a wave.
    P: Well, what is the wave moving in?
    O: Nothing, it moves in a vacuum.
    P: What is a vacuum?
    O: Nothing.
    P: What is Nothing?
    O: The absense of energy.
    P: Well what is that?
    O: Empty Space.
    P: Well what is empty space?
    O: hmm, not sure how to define it any further.
    P: Didn't people used to think matter was continuous?
    O: Yeah but then they discovered atoms and molecules
    P: Yup, so what do we think empty space is?
    O: Continuous right?
    P: Are you sure?
    O: Well, yeah you can't see pieces of space!
    P: That's because matter/energy doesn't bounce off of space like it does with other matter/energy
    O: So space may have pieces like atoms?
    P: Yup, thats what they are starting to think.
    O: Well, what would be in between those?
    P: Absolute nothing
    O: but i thought that couldn't exist
    P: well, yeah it really can't, i don't know
    O: Is it possible a deity resides there?
    P: yeah its possible
    O: Because in that realm the deity could control every aspect of the universe, and it'd be outside of time, and also all around us and everywhere else in the universe....just like what the Christians say about God.
    P: Well they may be right, who knows
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 5, 2004 #2


    User Avatar

    If space is truely discrete, then you're not getting distance between "atoms" that isn't filled with other atoms. A good example is a graph, where only the lines exist. Quite simply, the empty space in the squares does not actually exist, only the lines do. However, you may put dieties and leprechauns in these squares if you really want to.
  4. Jan 6, 2004 #3
    The thing is you are thinking about this in the wrong way. You can put the graph anywhere in any order, the lines dont even have to be parallel or perpendicular, as long as u understand it. There doesn't even need to be a graph, as long as u understand how it works its fine. Graphs were only made to make graphing easier becuase we arent computers and can't map things our perfectly.
  5. Jan 6, 2004 #4


    User Avatar

    Actually, that's a serious proposed model for discrete space. If space indeed does have an atomic like structure, a lattice is the simplest solution. The graph is the best analogy to put it visually. Only the edges exist, and so there is no "empty" distance between atoms. It is logically impossible for space to be made of discrete atoms seperated by distances, since distance is a property of space.
  6. Jan 13, 2004 #5
    Does that mean that god is subject to entropy as he is physical and intrinsic to the universe? If so, wouldn't that make him very much dissimilar to the christian god (and a number of other gods) given their attributes?
  7. Jan 19, 2004 #6
    God is only subject to entropy if He wants to be. It really wouldn't matter, because He could always exit the realm of entropy whenever He wanted to.
  8. Jan 27, 2004 #7
    What you are describing is a concept, not god. Though some may consider god to be a concept, I do not think that this concept is god. If you want to try and justify god using reasonning, which appears to be impossible, you must use one of it's ambiguous definitions. Such as is used in the popular proof of god

    "God is everything, if anything exists therefore god exists"

    or in your statement

    "Anything we don't know is god, we don't know things therefore god exists".

    Though when these are read using god's proper definition, it's justification ceases for obvious reasons.

    "Things exist, therefore god exists."

    "We don't know things, therefore god exists."


    A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
    The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
    A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
    An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
    One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
    A very handsome man.
    A powerful ruler or despot."

    In these cases the definition

    "A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions."

    was used.

    Though if some of these ideas were more fully explained, they might help prove the existence of a conceptual god.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook