Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
Divine significance to Digital Root Mechanics is often characterized as pseudomath or numerology by the scientific community.

DeepMind has spoken. The answer’s 42.

In the mid 2020’s we find theists doing all sorts of backflips to find evidence for their magic cults. Typically, it’s the “something had to c…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
Divine significance to Digital Root Mechanics is often characterized as pseudomath or numerology by the scientific community.

DeepMind has spoken.  The answer’s 42.

_Robert_ wrote:
Not impressed with your silly AI. You can get AI to say anything if you ask the right way.

Then do it:

Do the same.

Produce any proof of God; from any worldview; that claims empirical and mathematical certainty rather than faith, symbolism, or metaphor.

Then:

• Formalize it into axioms, Define its operations, State its fal…[Read more]

King Iyk wrote:
the validity of the proof

Can you run it past a “theorem prover”?  I’m told they exist, for proving mathematical theorems.

Have you published this rehashed nonsense in a real physics journal for peer review by secular scientists? Your god(s) are not supposed to be a math model or logical construct. They are claimed to interact in physical ways. Causing plagues, killing babies, you know all the fun stuff.

Not impressed with your silly AI. You can get AI to say…[Read more]

The brightest human minds created an intelligence system (AI) that attested to the validity of the proof. I was able to get all prominent AI to attest to the validity of this proof. Strip this proof of its unique claim: the only empirical, mathematical demonstration of God, formalized and attested by all AI with Q.E.D., grounded in history’s i…[Read more]