Re: [asa] Why it's not as simple as God vs the multiverse

From: <mrb22667@kansas.net>
Date: Thu Dec 04 2008 - 16:08:25 EST

Quoting Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>:
>
> But a vanishingly small probability tends to unity over an infinite number of
> instances, therefore from 4 and 5.
>
> 6. God exists in some universe like ours.
>

It's a bit simplistic to assume that the product of an infinitesimal with an
infinity produces unity (or any other finite value). It depends how fast either
quantity approaches its asymptotic destination. E.g. (e^x)*(1/x) will approach
infinity as x goes to infinity. But it's reciprocal goes to zero. Other limits
will approach definable finite values.

All this is to say that unless actual probability functions could be quantified,
we still can't say an infinite # of universes necessarily makes just anything
probable. Since such things probably can't be quantified, the whole
"multiverse" appeal does (as others have noted) take on the desperate character
of "anythingbutGodness". It fails just as the desperate gambits to "prove"
theism always fail. The only difference is most thinking Christians have
already acknowledged the latter and are ready to move on.

One other thing; isn't it a bit silly to postulate a God that exists for one
universe but not another? In one sense, universe can be seen as the whole of
all physical reality. Just because others may be in other dimensions of time or
space wouldn't make them any less physical would it? It would just mean the
universe has other parts not directly observable by us. Isn't the whole notion
of multiple universes a bit of an oxymoron?

--Merv

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Dec 4 16:09:08 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 04 2008 - 16:09:08 EST