Recent content by John J. Bannan

Your description has no basis in reality. Mine does. A human mind does in fact exist. One can extrapolate from there and propose an eternal mind capable of deciding which possible realities come into existence and which do not. A human mind is capable of picking and choosing. However, the...

God cannot do the impossible. Of course, God is constrained by the limits of possibility. God cannot create a square circle. God cannot make God disappear. Exterior laws has no meaning if you can't describe them for me besides simply purposing their existence. It is absurd to claim...

So, you are claiming the potential existence of laws we have no concept of? Are you saying these supposed laws are not of the mathematical kind? So, it's some sort of meta-math? Sounds pretty absurd to me. Reductio ad absurdum

If you are not arguing randomness, then you must be arguing unconscious determinism. Laws of physics, perhaps? However, as all possible states of existence that can become real are a set, and as there is no inherent order to those states of existence, then you must explain how unconscious...

You are arguing randomness as your mechanism for creation. However, even Quantum Mechanics is not necessarily random. Quantum entanglement proves that there is no randomness in QM due to the violation of Bell's inequality. However, it must either be a non-local deterministic hidden variable...

My proof doesn't attempt to prove the real until #3, which only proves a possibility for reality. #5 is where I actually prove something real - and that's the constraint only. However, #5 also notes that the constraint can make the possibility for the real in #3 actually real. The constraint...

There are actually two things that are eternal. You are correct that nothingness is one of them. Notice I use nothingness in my first dichotomy for that very reason - because it is uncaused. The second is the other side of the dichotomy with nothingness, which must be eternal because it...

And this is the philosophy subforum. And, do you really expect science to explain existence? I don't. Philosophy will have to play a role in explaining existence. And I use the verifiable universe to do just that.

The universe itself is verifiable. Hence, my proof is verifiable. As for people experiencing God - many will attest to that very thing.

1) No states of existence cannot be real, because no states of existence would be uncaused. Because the universe is real, then the universe cannot create no states of existence. Likewise, no states of existence could not create our universe. 2) Not irrelevant. States of existence with two...

PratchettFan 1) No assumption. Our universe is real, therefore no states of existence is not real. 2) No assumption. Our universe is real, therefore states of existence that cannot be real are not real. 3) No assumption. Our universe had a beginning, therefore a multiverse is possible...

THE DOUBLE DICHOTOMY PROOF OF GOD 1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence and no states of existence proves that no states of existence cannot be the case, because our universe is real. 2) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all...