A being exists which reconciles all positive properties in itself. That has been proven by the legendary logician Kurt Gödel by means of a complicated formula. Two scientists have scrutinized this proof of God – and have approved it. "The existence of God can in future be assumed to be a proven logical theorem." [T. Hürter: "Mathematiker bestätigen Gottesbeweis", SPIEGEL ONLINE, Wissenschaft (9 Sep 2013)] "Gödel's ontological proof has been analysed for the first-time with an unprecedented degree of detail and formality with the help of higher-order theorem provers." [Christoph Benzmüller, Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo: "Formalization, mechanization and automation of Gödel's proof of God's existence", arXiv (2013)] This is a very lucid example of the advantage of the technique of formalizing and the safety, reliability, dependability, and trustworthiness gained by checking theorems by automated theorem provers.

In this context it may be of interest to note Cantor's answer to the question: "Couldn't God, after having produced an infinite set, e.g., of stones or angels, produce further angels? Of course He can do this, has to be answered here. If he {{Durandus de Sancto Porciano}} further derives from that: That means that the angels produced first have not been infinitely many, then this conclusion is utterly wrong because the supposed set of produced angels is a transfinitum capable of increase and decrease." [G. Cantor, letter to I. Jeiler (20 May 1888, Whitsun)]

"These angels cannot influence our fate; nevertheless, the more often we ask for their help, the more lucky is our lot." [Franz Ludescher: "Engel" (Oct 2010)] "Great cardinal numbers can be helpful even there where they are not really used." [Ralf Schindler: "Sind große Kardinalzahlen entbehrlich?" (23 Apr 2010) p. 24] "we can never exclude that there are two contradictory statements both of which can be proved correctly. (We believe firmly and unshakeably that two such statements are not existing)." [Manfred Burghardt: "Notes of a lesson by Peter Koepke", Bonn (1996) p. 3] And this is the victory that has overcome the world: our faith. [Anonymous: "The holy bible", 1 John 5:4]

Regards, WM

tisdag 9 november 2021 kl. 12:06:25 UTC+1 skrev WM:
> A being exists which reconciles all positive properties in itself. That has been proven by the legendary logician Kurt Gödel by means of a complicated formula. Two scientists have scrutinized this proof of God – and have approved it. "The existence of God can in future be assumed to be a proven logical theorem." [T. Hürter: "Mathematiker bestätigen Gottesbeweis", SPIEGEL ONLINE, Wissenschaft (9 Sep 2013)] "Gödel's ontological proof has been analysed for the first-time with an unprecedented degree of detail and formality with the help of higher-order theorem provers." [Christoph Benzmüller, Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo: "Formalization, mechanization and automation of Gödel's proof of God's existence", arXiv (2013)] This is a very lucid example of the advantage of the technique of formalizing and the safety, reliability, dependability, and trustworthiness gained by checking theorems by automated theorem provers.
>
> In this context it may be of interest to note Cantor's answer to the question: "Couldn't God, after having produced an infinite set, e.g., of stones or angels, produce further angels? Of course He can do this, has to be answered here. If he {{Durandus de Sancto Porciano}} further derives from that: That means that the angels produced first have not been infinitely many, then this conclusion is utterly wrong because the supposed set of produced angels is a transfinitum capable of increase and decrease." [G. Cantor, letter to I. Jeiler (20 May 1888, Whitsun)]
>
> "These angels cannot influence our fate; nevertheless, the more often we ask for their help, the more lucky is our lot." [Franz Ludescher: "Engel" (Oct 2010)] "Great cardinal numbers can be helpful even there where they are not really used." [Ralf Schindler: "Sind große Kardinalzahlen entbehrlich?" (23 Apr 2010) p. 24] "we can never exclude that there are two contradictory statements both of which can be proved correctly. (We believe firmly and unshakeably that two such statements are not existing)." [Manfred Burghardt: "Notes of a lesson by Peter Koepke", Bonn (1996) p. 3] And this is the victory that has overcome the world: our faith. [Anonymous: "The holy bible", 1 John 5:4]
>
> Regards, WM
a logical theorem cannot prove that something physically exists.

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 3:45:28 AM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> tisdag 9 november 2021 kl. 12:06:25 UTC+1 skrev WM:
> > A being exists which reconciles all positive properties in itself. That has been proven by the legendary logician Kurt Gödel by means of a complicated formula. Two scientists have scrutinized this proof of God – and have approved it. "The existence of God can in future be assumed to be a proven logical theorem." [T. Hürter: "Mathematiker bestätigen Gottesbeweis", SPIEGEL ONLINE, Wissenschaft (9 Sep 2013)] "Gödel's ontological proof has been analysed for the first-time with an unprecedented degree of detail and formality with the help of higher-order theorem provers." [Christoph Benzmüller, Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo: "Formalization, mechanization and automation of Gödel's proof of God's existence", arXiv (2013)] This is a very lucid example of the advantage of the technique of formalizing and the safety, reliability, dependability, and trustworthiness gained by checking theorems by automated theorem provers.
> >
> > In this context it may be of interest to note Cantor's answer to the question: "Couldn't God, after having produced an infinite set, e.g., of stones or angels, produce further angels? Of course He can do this, has to be answered here. If he {{Durandus de Sancto Porciano}} further derives from that: That means that the angels produced first have not been infinitely many, then this conclusion is utterly wrong because the supposed set of produced angels is a transfinitum capable of increase and decrease." [G. Cantor, letter to I. Jeiler (20 May 1888, Whitsun)]
> >
> > "These angels cannot influence our fate; nevertheless, the more often we ask for their help, the more lucky is our lot." [Franz Ludescher: "Engel" (Oct 2010)] "Great cardinal numbers can be helpful even there where they are not really used." [Ralf Schindler: "Sind große Kardinalzahlen entbehrlich?" (23 Apr 2010) p. 24] "we can never exclude that there are two contradictory statements both of which can be proved correctly. (We believe firmly and unshakeably that two such statements are not existing)." [Manfred Burghardt: "Notes of a lesson by Peter Koepke", Bonn (1996) p. 3] And this is the victory that has overcome the world: our faith. [Anonymous: "The holy bible", 1 John 5:4]
> >
> > Regards, WM
> a logical theorem cannot prove that something physically exists.

Math is before man's mind.
This shows a mathematical God before man
all the way back to the initial conditions of
the universe...

tisdag 9 november 2021 kl. 20:24:38 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> On Tuesday, November 9, 2021 at 3:45:28 AM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > tisdag 9 november 2021 kl. 12:06:25 UTC+1 skrev WM:
> > > A being exists which reconciles all positive properties in itself. That has been proven by the legendary logician Kurt Gödel by means of a complicated formula. Two scientists have scrutinized this proof of God – and have approved it. "The existence of God can in future be assumed to be a proven logical theorem." [T. Hürter: "Mathematiker bestätigen Gottesbeweis", SPIEGEL ONLINE, Wissenschaft (9 Sep 2013)] "Gödel's ontological proof has been analysed for the first-time with an unprecedented degree of detail and formality with the help of higher-order theorem provers." [Christoph Benzmüller, Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo: "Formalization, mechanization and automation of Gödel's proof of God's existence", arXiv (2013)] This is a very lucid example of the advantage of the technique of formalizing and the safety, reliability, dependability, and trustworthiness gained by checking theorems by automated theorem provers.
> > >
> > > In this context it may be of interest to note Cantor's answer to the question: "Couldn't God, after having produced an infinite set, e.g., of stones or angels, produce further angels? Of course He can do this, has to be answered here. If he {{Durandus de Sancto Porciano}} further derives from that: That means that the angels produced first have not been infinitely many, then this conclusion is utterly wrong because the supposed set of produced angels is a transfinitum capable of increase and decrease." [G. Cantor, letter to I. Jeiler (20 May 1888, Whitsun)]
> > >
> > > "These angels cannot influence our fate; nevertheless, the more often we ask for their help, the more lucky is our lot." [Franz Ludescher: "Engel" (Oct 2010)] "Great cardinal numbers can be helpful even there where they are not really used." [Ralf Schindler: "Sind große Kardinalzahlen entbehrlich?" (23 Apr 2010) p. 24] "we can never exclude that there are two contradictory statements both of which can be proved correctly. (We believe firmly and unshakeably that two such statements are not existing)." [Manfred Burghardt: "Notes of a lesson by Peter Koepke", Bonn (1996) p. 3] And this is the victory that has overcome the world: our faith. [Anonymous: "The holy bible", 1 John 5:4]
> > >
> > > Regards, WM
> > a logical theorem cannot prove that something physically exists.
> Math is before man's mind.
> This shows a mathematical God before man
> all the way back to the initial conditions of
> the universe...
Nope