Can Science Prove God is Real?

Science can't prove anything.

>>8947158
Can God prove science is real?

Checkmate reptilians

>>8947167
Yeah. You keep repeating your "cant know nuffin" mantra. We'll go ahead and achieve biological immortality and colonize the universe without you.

>>8947158
>>8947167
GÖEDEL

>>8947158
It already has

God is the integral of the wavefunction of the universe.

>>8947174
No actually though science can't prove anything. Proof is a word only used correctly in the context of mathematical deduction. When I assisted general physics, I was required to dock a lot of fucking credit the moment a student used the word "prove" or "proof" in a lab report. Scientists don't use the word and every time someone does it triggers me

>>8947174
Science produces models which increasingly explain nature in its whole to greater precision. It doesn't mean we know what's going on, rather that we are really good at explaining what's going on.

>>8947158
If you can create a God in a variety of ways, all that's left is clarifying which God you're referring to. Are you refering to a computer/AI ascending to godhood? Or perhaps, the ultimate bioengineered human? Or perhaps, a human of sorts entering into a pocket dimension with all of the supplies neccesary to recreate the universe? Or could it be that in a future where time travel is possible, a human could travel back to a simulation of the beginning and create the big bang? Depending on how you look at it, there are a multitude of theories or ideas that would validate the existence of God.

If your referring to the God of the bible, then it's too vague to know whether you're on the money or not.

>>8947158
Science and religion both answer the following:
>Why?
However, it should be noted that "why?" means different things to a scientist and a theologian.

To a scientist, "Why?" means
>What is the mechanism behind
You can ask a scientist why the sky is blue at noon and red at dusk and he'll explain the function of electromagnetic wavelengths and how at a certain angle of attack a certain color/frequency is more abundant in our atmosphere.

To a theologian, "why?" means
>For what purpose?
So you can ask a theologian the same question and... Well, I've never asked one. I'm sure you'd get a different answer.

But ultimately these:
>>8947190
>>8947188
>>8947167

Science elaborates observation and can speculate from previously acquired data. It cannot "prove" in the sense that you're asking about, because "God" is too vague a description for a power.

For example, my very religious friend believes God is why humans have appreciations for art and music, neither of which had any purpose in evolution and reasonably should not have been selected.

One could argue that convergent evolution of intelligence guides any sufficiently advanced species toward an appreciation of abstract communication of subjective experiences as an increased form of empathy.

BUT I've only answered one "why?" and did not refute or debunk the other.
For him, God is the answer to:
>For what purpose do humans seek art and music
And for me, mysterious evolution shit is the answer to:
>What is the mechanism for humans seeking art and music?

I do not posit or pretend to know whether or not there is a PURPOSE. That is why hard materialists lean nihilistic. Science does not speak as to the purpose of anything, only its mechanisms. They're part of the same big picture. Studying a car scientifically gives you everything you need to know about how it moves, it doesn't tell you why I'm driving it.

>>8947167
This.

>>8947178
[eqn]\aleph \,=\, \iiint_{\mathbf R^3} \psi\, \mathrm d\ell \,\vdash\, \textrm{blown}\left( \textrm{mind} \right)[/eqn]

>>8947176
But that's not what Goedel said at all. He was only talking about mathematics as a model to represent "truths", and especially the limits of this model.
What does this have to do with God ?

>>8947875
Normally people say that science asks "How" not "Why" when making that point.

I suppose it depends on what your definition of a god is.

>>8947875
Reading this has uplifted my mood.

Are there any scientific essays you guys might want to recommend?

>>8947158

science can prove that most religions (including abrahamic religions) are full of shit. inb4 muh its a metaphor.