text: Review of George D. Shollenberger's Book by Stephen P. Smith: The First Scientific Proof of God: Reveals God's Intelligent Design and a Modern Creation Theory
  Abstract: This is a philosophic proof, but is it a scientific proof? Science has drifted into philosophy, and it finds itself unable to stay as a pure activity as Popper demanded. And so Shollenberger`s proof can be seen as scientific in that all evidence must make sense within the unifying presence, and because science necessarily drifts into philosophy for big questions about what is beyond caricature (infinite). When science is limited to empiricism and existentialism, science can only test theories that permit predictions (that necessarily make a caricature of their subject). The caricature-giver is beyond Popper`s science. See: http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/26
  Review of Duane Elgin's Book by Stephen P. Smith: The Living Universe: Where Are We? Who Are We? Where Are We Going?
  Abstract: A close look at Elgin analysis shows that science has been unable to get beyond the three-fold archetype (receiving, sending, and middle-term), and it is this archetype that hints at Elgin`s conclusion. Elgin gives the false impression that most scientists will welcome his conclusion (or rediscovery). No, only some will have the level of maturity to find something significant in Elgin`s work. Many will accuse Elgin of being pseudo-scientific, but they are wrong. True, Elgin`s account is less about science as it is known traditionally, but his interpretation of the evidence is the correct one (in my view). Elgin presents a philosophical and spiritual treatment that recognizes the scientific evidence that is found beholding to the three-fold archetype. And this is not to say that all presented evidence is valid enough to give its support to Elgin`s thesis. For example, Elgin (page 103) mentions sting theory: "the particle nature of matter gives way to unimaginably small, vibrating loops of non-material strings." But string theory remains a wild speculation, and it adds little value to Elgin`s worthy insights. See: http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/27
  Review of Amit Goswami's Book by Stephen P. Smith: God Is Not Dead: What Quantum Physics Tells Us about Our Origins and How We Should Live
  Abstract: Goswami's book provides evidence for the reality of God, and he gives (page 34) an early outline: "In view of quantum physics, the vast data on life after death, and alternative subtle-body medicine, it is considerably more difficult to refute the ideas of downward causation and subtle bodies." Goswami is breaking new ground here. Nevertheless, the book could benefit with additional treatments of some classical philosophical arguments, and I mean to point to arguments that are beyond Thomas Aquinas. Hegel's "ontological proof of God" and Charles S. Peirce's "neglected argument for the reality of God" (as they are known) provide non-dual understandings that are agreeable to Goswami's monistic idealism, in my opinion. See: http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/28
  Review of Antony Flew & Roy A. Varghese's Book by Stephen P. Smith : There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind
  Abstract: Antony Flew's "There is a God" deserves a careful read by both believer and non-believer. Flew sews together an evidential tapestry, mostly by pointing to the work of others like Albert Einstein, Paul Davies, Gerald Schroeder, John Barrow, Richard Cameron, David Berlinski, and several others. Overall, I am impressed with Flew's thinking. See: http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/29
  Review of Bernard Haisch's Book by Stephen P. Smith: The God Theory: Universes, Zero-point Fields, and What's Behind It All
  Abstract: Bernard Haisch's "The God Theory" is required reading for anyone interested in the religion versus science debate. Haisch (page xi) notes the modern-day dilemma: "you cannot get away from the preexistence of something, and whether that is an ensemble of physical laws generating infinite random universes or an infinite conscious intelligence is something present-day science cannot resolve, and indeed one view is not more rational than the other." But Haisch's God is very real. We are God's expressions, and we labor to bring God's experience to an otherwise meaningless world. See: http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/30
  Log in to post comments
  Comments
  hspal
  Sun, 02/19/2012 - 11:56
  Permalink
  One more proof that there is a God
  In one of my earlier posting in 2012 Daily I have written that God is equally present at each and every point of this universe, and due to this the distance from any point of this universe to each and every other point of the same universe is zero. (A)
  Now it may be true that there is indeed a God, or it may not be true. If God is really there, then basic characteristic of space will be just like (A). But if God does not exist, as claimed by atheists and atheistic scientists, then there is no reason as to why space characteristic will have to be like (A). If, and only if, there is a God who is all-pervading, then it can be logically justified why space characteristic will be like (A). Now let us suppose that some scientific tests and experiments have been conducted through which it is revealed to us that space characteristic is just like (A). Then we can claim that the results of these scientific tests confirm that there is really a God.
  Now is there any scientific test that has been conducted on earth by any scientist so far that has revealed that basic characteristic of space is just like (A), that any point of space in this universe is connected to each and every other point of space, and that distance between any two points of space is zero? Yes, indeed there is such a test that has already been conducted by some scientists. Let us suppose that two particles have interacted and then they are separared by a long distance. One particle remains on earth whereas the other particle goes to the outside space. In spite of that the two particles will remain entangled even if distance between them is billions of light years. Measurement of any property of the particle on earth will instanteneously determine what will be the property of the other particle at the distant end. If one particle here on earth is found to be in a state of spin up after measurement, then the other particle will instanteneously take a state of spin down. Now we know very well that nothing can move faster than light. IF this is indeed the case, then how does the information that the particle on earth has been in a state of spin up after measuremet travel to the other particle instanteneously causing it to go to a state of spin down immediately? Now this is a well-known fact that such things really happen in nature, that two systems remain somehow connected with each other even if they are separated after their interaction. In scientific term this fact is called quantum entanglement.
  Now scientists have merely stated the fact, but they have not given any explanation as to how the two interacted particles remain entangled after they are separated. The point to be noted here is that the above-mentioned test can be conducted anywhere on earth, and that the other particle that goes to the outer space can arrive at any point in the vast universe. It can even go to the edge of the universe. Even in that case also scientists claim that the twp particles will remain entangled. So from this we can conclude that any point on the surface of earth is potentially entangled with each and every point in the outer space. But the question is: how?
  If we accept the fact that there is a God who is equally present at each and every point of this universe, then it is due to His presence that distance from any point of space to every other point of space in this universe will always be zero. So here we find the reason as to how and why the two interacted particles remain entangled with each other even after they are separated by a long, long distance. This is because God is not only the creator of the universe, but He is also its sustainer. By being present at each and every point of the universe He keeps all these points always interconnected, the distance between any point of space to every other point being always zero.
  Now the question is: If space has really the characteristic as described in (A), why was it not revealed to any man on earth beforehand? Why was not a single man aware of this truth about space? But this is definitely not true. Mystics were well aware of this fact, as we will see from the following quote from Bertrand Russell, an atheist philosopher:
  "The doctrine of interpenetration, according to which different things are not really separate, but are merely so conceived by the analytic intellect, is to be found in every mystic, eastern or western, from Parmenides to Mr. Bradley".
  (Book:Skeptical Essays, 1928 Edition, Chapter: Philosophy in twentieth century, Page 69)
  Log in to post comments
  hspal
  Tue, 02/21/2012 - 03:55
  Permalink
  Our belief and non-belief
  If God does really exist, then all the non-beliefs of all the atheists on earth will not be able to make Him non-existent and unreal even for a single fraction of a second. God will still exist defying all the non-beliefs of the atheists on earth. Similarly we can say that If God does not really exist, then all the beliefs of all the theists on earth will not be able to make Him existent and real. Our beliefs and non-beliefs do not have any such power. Now let us suppose that God does really exist. In that case our universe will be spaceless and timeless at its deepest level, because God is spaceless and timeless, and because God is all-pervading. In other words we can say that if there is a God, then ultimate reality of our universe is spaceless and timeless. And it will remain spaceless and timeless whether we believe it or not. Now if there is any science that can go to the deepest level of this universe so that it can touch that ultimate reality, and if after reaching there it finds that the basic features of that reality are indeed spaceless and timeless, then that will confirm that there is really a God.
  Now is there any branch of science that can go to the deepest level of our universe where no other branch of science can go? Yes, there is. And that branch of science is called quantum physics. When classical physics fails to tackle the reality, quantum physics takes its place. Quantum physics is called the physics of the smallest things in nature. In that sense we can say that it has gone to the deepest level of our universe, and it has shown that at its deepest level this universe is spaceless. Yes, one particular phenomenon of quantum physics, that is known as quantum entanglement in scientific world, clearly shows that space must have to be non-existent and unreal at the deepest core of our universe, as otherwise we cannot explain as to how two particles that have interacted with each other can still remain entangled with each other even if they are separated after their interaction by a distance of billions and billions of light years.