Joseph-(UK) | Math Proves God | The Atheist Experience 26.19

We have Joseph in the UK pronouncer, he says there is

math

ematical evidence of a creator, so okay, what's going on Joe? Oh, hello, Mountain High Force. Sorry, I don't have much time to go over this, but very, very quickly and First of all, from a Christian perspective, I was at a stage and that's not the case anymore, but that doesn't start with believing that there is a god, if not the god of the Bible, there are many reasons why I won't get to I know where I just believe in that god, but essentially I'm with the

atheist

on that, it's just not in my opinion, it just makes some sense, uh, God sending someone to an infinite hell and torture for finite sins, that's very logical to me. and I wouldn't accept it so it's just not viable for me, I would say from the beginning that I don't know what your justification is for stating that because a god doesn't seem logical to you, he doesn't exist I mean it's a huge fallacy from the beginning, so if you're going to say there is

math

ematical evidence for a creator we would need you to define that creator and then show what the mathematical evidence is whether or not you find various concepts of God for preposters to believe is irrelevant well I just want to say that teachers in terms of the Bible is a biblical narrative, that's what I mean by prostitutes, okay, but maybe it is.

Not being clear, Jose, your position is that there is mathematical evidence for the creator and I say define the creator, show us the mathematical evidence, don't sit here and start listing all the gods you don't believe in and why, because That could take forever. No, I don't usually do that at all. Well, I'll get right to it. First of all, this mafic mathematical aspect. I know it's been reviewed many times. I'm sure they will go down. to flames at certain points, but essentially if you look at the chance of something, it can be zero with no chance up to one, yes absolutely and you're talking about how many cards you can draw, for example, if you have ten cards. you draw them in sequence one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight and ten, it is approximately one million and three and a half million, on the other hand, if you have one hundred cards, then the possibility of drawing them in sequence is a with 158 zeros. then, in other words, it is one times 10 to the power of 158, which is an absolute infinite number, infinitely small.

Now, the reason I mentioned those two is to show how the probability of them happening changes geometrically, virtually, uh, rather than just sequentially because it is multiplied within that entire extent of probability, for that reason, when you apply probability to things like, for example, the universe and you say well what created or it just happens randomly, um, I guess it seems to me that the possibilities of these really amazing things happen if some of them actually have numbers here, but they're infinitely small and That doesn't make me jump, I'm just saying, okay, he must be a creator.

I'm just saying that that aspect worries me and then the second part is entropy, which essentially says that things tend to decline and deteriorate from any position in the universe, so over a period of time we eventually get more and more randomness and less and less structure and I guess that's the universe of the process of doing that the big bang starts and now it's degenerating to actually functioning as an empty universe, an empty space, so those are the two things that I rely on to put those together. two, yeah, no, so I'll start with the first one, if that's cool, you said the probability of something happening if the universe formed in the first place, the probability of all of this, I guess the events you were talking about are like the formation of galaxies and planets in life and blah, blah, blah, um, the thing is that when you talk about your correction or something, things that we know are not close to everyday life, even those, the probability that happen by chance and it's not infinitely small, so the question is when you talked at the beginning, you were right when you said that you know that you can measure things on a scale from zero to one and you know that if you have ten cards you have to draw them in each sequence, for what there is one out of ten. chance and there's a one in nine chance and one, blah, blah, this is all made up of simplifying all of this, just use a different example, roll a die, there's a one in six chance of getting any number.

I can say this with confidence because I can see all six. There are also possible sides of the die, you could say there is a possibility that it will land right on the edge and balance perfectly and who knows how, but we simplify this correctly, we just say that there are six sides. I'm looking for a number, so there's a probability of one and six for you to say there's such a small chance of something random happening in the universe that you'd have to say well, here are all the possibilities and against them, I'm weighing this one, then, how many not different? universes have formed that you have measured how many times life that you have measured did not begin how how are you sure in saying that the possibility of this cell happening is infinitely small unless you have seen any of these things?

This will not happen unless you have analyzed the possibilities that exist, in my opinion it is not just a matter of mathematical probability. I understand that within the time that the universe has existed, approximately 30 years, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, that's not what I asked, so Joseph, you came with a question of probability. Forrest responded with questions about probability and then you said, "Well, it's not just about probability, it's about how long the universe lasts." you are presenting and it is your probability that forced which force already addressed and asked a question and by the way my notes were exactly the same, you are conflating the possibility of a universe occurring without an intelligent creator with a probability of not I have no idea how or someone else calculated it because you don't have other universes to compare it to, but that's what we have to do, we have to compare what the odds are of a universe happening without an intelligent creator and compare that to the odds. of it happening by any other method and I don't know how any of them are calculated, but your or anyone's personal feeling or even the entirety of everyone's personal feelings about how improbable a universe is is completely irrelevant and is not enough to demonstrate that a god combining probability with this entropy problem I am also saying that those two together no, no, sir, no sir, one is about the formation of the origin of a universe, entropy is what happens in a system closed after that system exists, so you can't combine the two. and I need you to answer how the heck did you calculate the probabilities of a universe happening with and without an intelligent creator what is the methodology that led you to a probability calculation of a universe happening without an intelligent creator okay well I would look into the probability From the individuals we

experience

in our lives, we know, for example, that some possibility of a molecule forming or not forming because it doesn't have to be fundamental, starts from the beginning, so look at those individuals and then multiply them. those and you do it because you add all of them the more you add individual examples of problems that you are doing a class I have a question for you what is the probability that a molecule or an atom forms you said that you started with those and of them together what is the probability of a molecule or an atom forming um well, it is what it is, it's huge, it's one in, you know, one and ten times 500, maybe even more, okay, so how many atoms have you observed? ? it is not formed or where did you get these numbers how will I ask you this instead of doing that how atoms are formed could you tell me how the atlas is formed?

Yes, what are atoms made of? Well, atoms are made of compressed energy as much as possible. I'm not concerned in scientific terms what the actual definition of the individual is as nuclides, like what atoms are made of, what are the parts of the proton, this the simplest one is a proton and a neutron, I think it's hydrogen and as You go down the periodic table, they get bigger and bigger as they add more and more neutrons, so you have a proton and a neutron, there's a third of an atom, you know what an electron is, okay, like this So now let's go back to protons and neutrons.

What are they made of? I believe they were formed in the Big Bang through the release of energy and then made of quarks. Protons and neutrons are made of quarks. Finally, they are compressed into energy, making protons and neutrons. they're made of quarks and then we also have to take into account the strong nuclear force, which is, you know, you could use gluons as the boson that holds all these things together. You have the weak nuclear force that drives radiometric decay every time these atoms break apart. electrons are leptons so you know fundamental particles don't sell what I'm saying is you're saying you have this probability of an atom forming and you haven't shown that you know what atoms are made of or how they form, but That's right, but I just told you that in the big bang there is a compression and then a release, that's how the university is expanding, so we go back to the big bang, since it was the source of this is the primary energy. within that, that actually became matter as it expanded as the universe expanded, it cooled and the energy was allowed to condense into quarks and then into protons and neutrons like in the gates, yeah, sure. , what is the probability of any of that?

How do you know what I am like? I'm trying to figure it out because the thing is all of those things are the natural product of what happened, it makes sense that as the universe expands it cools because we understand the gas laws pv equals nrt so a As the universe expands it will cool. We understand that these systems are more stable since they are coagulated this way, so it makes sense for them to do that. It makes sense that hydrogen and probably some helium 2 would be the first elements because they are the simplest elements you make.

I have a feeling that when hydrogen gets together in a massive enough air system, it gets together and will start a fusion reaction so that the proton chain forms heavier elements and that's what we call a star and that's where it's from. where we get new elements, all these things. obey the most basic laws of physics, so how are you going to say that it is impossible for any of them to happen? How are you going to say it's super unlikely? When it's the most basic laws of physics, these things happen just because they do. how they always work all the time, okay, whether you're talking about what you've done correctly, but the physics of what happens and going back in time, etc., how the universe was formed, etc. and also just mathematical probability, both need a time frame. being active to produce these things from the beginning is a period of time from that moment okay before the big bang this is what this is what I interpret it before the big bang there is only primary energy there were none of these none of these things that you have listed they existed except what it means before the big bang because the big bang was the beginning of time so what happened before time began and why does the concept of before make sense before time happens?

Okay, so my definition of Time is a description of a balance between energy and mass, so at the beginning of the Big Bang only energetic mass was created through the Big Bang as it expanded, before that there was the balance between mass and energy before. makes any sense so that was your definition of time which is not the definition of your personal definition of time is not a definition of time and it seems like you are also making a very common mathematical mistake that people try to make when they are when we are calculating the probability of a particular event occurring, so you could say that the probabilities of my existence are based on the probabilities that my parents met and procreated at the time they decided to do so, which is based on the probabilities . of their parents getting together and doing that on both sides and all this and you can keep multiplying and you can make it look like the odds of me coming into existence, you can make it look like the probability is just astronomically small when the probability of my existence is one and the probability that a universe exists is one and although you could say how many what are the probabilities of rolling a die or a die, a single die, three times in a row and getting six all three times and that is one in 216 but that's not the same as saying hey we know how to calculate the probability that a universe must have an intelligent creator for it to begin you don't have the ability to investigate this is a question and that's okay well if you understand you don't have the ability to investigate it, so how the hell did you come up with probabilities that you can't investigate and then determine that they are so improbable that he must have been a god?

That is patently absurd and at the same time you recognize that you have no way of investigating it and then claiming that you have arrived ata conclusion because what you said at the beginning of the call is that there is mathematical evidence of a creator and that is not true, it is actually that my argument was never presented that I could mathematically determine that therefore god existsI'm saying well, then we continue Go ahead, Joseph, between no, no, we're moving on, that's what it said on the call screen, right? Yeah, and that's what you said at the beginning of this call, but you know if you're saying that if all Joseph says is that I look at the math and I find it unlikely that this could have happened without a god, well, congratulations, that's it. your argument of personal disbelief, but you have done nothing to show that there is a good reason to believe in a god even if you suspect that a god exists, but congratulations on your suspicions