Am I so stupid at math or did I just prove God?

Author: TheGreatSunGod

Posts

Total: 208
Topic's author
#181
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
is that the chances of God existing go increase the more "Gods" (or religions) we worship
The more Gods are possible, the chances of one God existing increases. This is just math, and there is no way to deny it.
#182
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
But then does that mean that at the start of the universe the chances of God existing were zero because there didn't yet exist intelligent life to worship any Gods?
Topic's author
#183
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
The possible Gods exist irrelevant of person's own presence. Just like laws of math existed before humans. And possible Gods end up affecting probability then. Even mutually exclusive Gods actually increase probability there. The only way argument can be disproved is if chances of each God were around 0% there.
#184
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,764
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
The more Gods are possible, the chances of one God existing increases. This is just math, and there is no way to deny it.
Math is a function of logic.
Topic's author
#185
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
Math is a function of logic
So logic proves God too then.

1. Christian God is real and not Allah
2. Allah is real and not Christian God
3. No God is real

It seems that even mutually exclusive Gods increase probability too.
#186
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Ah, so it is irrespective of human perception. So how many 'Gods' possibly exist then? Potentially an infinite amount? But also in that case what are the chances for each of them existing? 1/2? 1/10? 1/1 quadrillion? And if so what is the basis for that? And what is the basis for denying other proposed probabilities such as 1/infinity?

For example, theologically speaking there is a much stronger case for the Abrahamic God than there is for Zeus or Thor, but is the dice rolled for each of them equal? Is the information at our disposal irrelevant? Does the flying spaghetti monster have a chance at existing? A chance that is more than just grasping at straws?

Like, are we really from a logical point of view just rolling some kind of dice an infinite amount of times? That's seriously the argument?
Topic's author
#187
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
And what is the basis for denying other proposed probabilities such as 1/infinity?
The average probability is 50% for each by default.

For example, theologically speaking there is a much stronger case for the Abrahamic God than there is for Zeus or Thor, but is the dice rolled for each of them equal?
Different probabilities of individual Gods result in same conclusion there.
#188
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
The average probability is 50% for each by default.
What is the premise of this default? Or is it just a logical axiom you decided on?
Topic's author
#189
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
What is the premise of this default?
The average of all percentage is 50% for one God there. There is no way to place any other percentage but average there. In case you provide evidence that some specific God exists instead there, then that doesnt change conclusion that there is a high chance that at least one God exists.
#190
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
The average of all percentage is 50% for one God there. There is no way to place any other percentage but average there.
What is the premise of this logic?
Topic's author
#191
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
What is the premise of this logic?
If you dont know what average is, I cant help you then.
#192
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,596
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
What is the premise of this logic?
If you dont know what average is, I cant help you then.
Yes, averages are generally acceptable and useful, but it's crucial to understand their limitations.
 
Averages can be a good way to summarize data, but they don't always tell the whole story, and relying solely on averages can obscure important information about the data's distribution.
 




#193
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
I know what average is, I am asking what is the premise for using it as the default. For it being the case that "There is no way to place any other percentage but average there."
#194
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,596
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Hero1000
I know what average is, I am asking what is the premise for using it as the default. For it being the case that "There is no way to place any other percentage but average there."
Actual numbers would be more useful than averages.
Topic's author
#195
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
I know what average is, I am asking what is the premise for using it as the default
Its the average of all possible chances, as no chance holds greater value over other.
#196
Hero1000
Hero1000's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 78
0
1
5
Hero1000's avatar
Hero1000
0
1
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
That's simply a re-explanation of what averages are. I am asking what is the premise for concluding that, by default, neither outcome has a greater chance of being the case of the other.

Let me ask an example question. If the chances of Zeus existing are to be 50%, and the chances of him not existing also 50%, why is that the case?
Topic's author
#197
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Hero1000
That's simply a re-explanation of what averages are
No. The chances of 0 to 100, none hold greater evidence value over the other.

#198
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,596
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Hero1000
Let me ask an example question. If the chances of Zeus existing are to be 50%, and the chances of him not existing also 50%, why is that the case?
The averages cancel out each other. The answer here is 0.
#199
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,764
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
So logic proves God too then.
Logic proves God, and God proves logic. I wonder if there's a name for this type of reasoning

It seems that even mutually exclusive Gods increase probability too.
Not how math works, but whatever makes you feel good...
Topic's author
#200
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
Logic proves God, and God proves logic. I wonder if there's a name for this type of reasoning
🤔

Not how math works, but whatever makes you feel good
So you give up?
Topic's author
#201
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
I asked AI again.


"If there are two mutually exclusive gods (meaning only one can exist or neither), and each has a 50% chance of existing independently, we can calculate the probability that at least one of them exists as follows:

Mutual Exclusivity: Since they are mutually exclusive, they cannot both exist at the same time. Therefore, the possible outcomes are:

God A exists (50%)
God B exists (50%)
Neither exists (the complementary probability)

Calculating the Chance That at Least One Exists:

The probability that neither exists is the product of both not existing:

P(\text{Neither}) = (1 - 0.5) \times (1 - 0.5) = 0.5 \times 0.5 = 0.25 

P(\text{At least one}) = 1 - P(\text{Neither}) = 1 - 0.25 = 0.75 

Thus, the chance that at least one of the mutually exclusive gods exists is 75%."


Maybe AI is broken.


#202
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,764
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Maybe AI is broken.
More like the person asking the question is broken.

AI is just running the scenario with the premises you fed into it. You told AI that each mutually exclusive god had a 50% chance of existing, so that's what it's using as it's baseline. Yet that's the error I've been telling you about for weeks now and you just leaped over it and started with it as your premise.

You cannot apply probability to an unknown. Already went through this with you.

AI is also treating the scenario as each result being an outcome, which is the other thing I explained to you is not applicable here. Either a god exists or no god exists. Whichever option is correct, it is already the case, has always been the case, and will always be the case. AI is treating this is an event outcome, like flipping a coin. Those are categorically different things. A coin flip can be repeated with different results each time. It is the fact that the results will be different each time that gives meaning to the concept of probability, yet you just ignore that and pretend it applies here anyway. It doesn't.
Topic's author
#203
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
You cannot apply probability to an unknown
It is not compleley unknown probability, and any probability except around 0 gives same result there. But we say its 50% because thats the average of equally proven probabilities.
#204
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,764
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
But we say its 50% because thats the average of equally proven probabilities.
It's not equally "proven" if there is no information available to begin with. We've been over this already.

Perform the following experiment: divide any number by 0, see what answer your device spits back out at you.
Topic's author
#205
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
It's not equally "proven" if there is no information available to begin with. We've been over this already
So information available is equal there. That is information now.

#206
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,764
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
So information available is equal there
Information available is non-existent, therefore nothing can be derived from it.
Topic's author
#207
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,013
3
4
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
5
-->
@Double_R
Information available
Equal information available there.

#208
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,596
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Maybe AI is broken.
AI is limited by the users IQ.