Scientific Proof of God, A New and Modern Bible, and Coexisting Relations of God and the Universe

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Building and Separating the Theory of God, Science, and Religion Properly

Today, the theory of God is not growing. The same can be said about all religions. Two reasons explain this awful situation. One reason is that many people rely on scriptures but do not trust science. This is a human error because God gave us the abilities to build knowledge. The second reason is that most people do not distinguish ‘theory’ from practice.’ The medical systems, for example, do distinguish them. So, a specific medical theory cannot be practiced by doctors on patients until this specific theory has been proven. The need to separate theory from practice is why the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) conducts trials on medical theories before it approves them.

So, one might ask, ‘Why do people practice a religion when the theory of God has not been proven?’ But, one might also ask, ‘Why do doctors practice cancer drugs when the theory of cancer has not been proven?’ The truth is that ‘proofs’ are really not final. Proofs improve and change. Some changes are slow whereas others change rapidly. The point is that we live in a changing world whereas God is always the same.

If the theory of God, religions, and science are to grow, people must separate the theory of God from religion but must unify scriptures and science. In the USA, the theory of God is not separated properly from religion. For instance, the USA has a society, as defined by the Declaration of Independence, and a government, as defined by the Constitution. The Constitution says that religion can be in society but cannot be in government. However, the Declaration of Independence says that the theory of God must be in society. But, the Constitution says that the theory of God must also be in government. Thus, two major errors have been made by the US Supreme Court. These errors must be corrected to be consistent with the founding documents.

The Preamble of the Constitution says that one purpose of government is to form a more perfect Union. The measurement of the term ‘more perfect’ requires a standard of perfection, just as length requires a length standard. The perfect standard can be determined but only with the theory of God, who is the only perfect thing. So, the US Supreme Court has made two big errors --- an error in measurement practices and an error in the theory of God.

The unification of scriptures and science are simple if scriptures are defined as ‘early science.’ Then, today’s sciences could be defined as ‘later science.’ Then, early science and later science would be connected by time and would have a common purpose --- to search for the truth. With these new definitions, it is not wrong to display in public areas the advances of past sciences by man. For instance, the Ten Commandments, a military tank or airplane, a DNA model, etc. can be displayed in public areas so that people can teach their children of the past and their futures.

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Moderating Comments

In learning how to ban all atheists from this website, this morning I received 7 comments from atheists and three comments from apparent friends. I rejected the ones from the atheists. Then, I published one comment from Michigan but somehow lost the two other comments. One was telling me something about the Declaraion of Independence and the other one was thanking me for defending myself against the atheists. I got that message and thank you dearly. But, the message on the Declaration of Independence must be sent again.

Does anyone know how to moderate comments without making errors?

Another Atheist Takes a Shot at Me and My Book

A freelance writer, Ed Brayton, gave me ‘‘his thought trophy’ on April 24, 2007. Click His thought trophy was based on the April 21, 2007 review of my book by Mark Chu-Carroll, a Jewish skeptic. Click As usual, Carroll’s followers bowed down to his nonscientific review. Instead of seeing through my mixed English/Pennsylvania Dutch style of writing and focusing on the scientific aspects of my book, the only purpose of his review was to assassinate my character again so he and his atheistic friends could laugh and dance at the steps of Darwin’s religious evolutionary theory.

Carroll seems to be lazy because a mathematician will not get through my book as fast as he did. Getting through Nicholas of Cusa alone takes time, lots of time. He scanned it and this is why his book review is useless.

However, a comment (by Kea) told Carroll a truth. The comment says, "You may be an OK mathematician, but you are a lousy book reviewer. ......your review did nothing to convince me of this. On the contrary, it sounds as though he raises some interesting ideas. ...... Moreover, the terms 'symbols' has been widely used, notably by the 19th century mathematical philosopher C. S. Peirce, ... but you do not appear to have addressed the underlying arguments." Charles Peirce (1839-1914) is one pragmatist who was smelling the big 1920 discovery of many independent linguists --- that sense data are primatily symbolic. This comment by Kea is sensitive to the sciences in my book. This comment is also sensitive to the subject of ‘symbols.’ Carroll is quiet on this subject. The philosophy of symbolism is a major subject of my book. Specific symbols, even some of those in scriptures, are carefully analyzed and discussed throughout my book because the meanings of symbols can affect the human mind negatively.

I discuss the problem of symbolic languages early in my book. I see two basic symbolic languages — scientific languages and talk languages. On talk languages, I say that the English language is poor compared to the German language. The English language is weakened by Aristotle logic and affects the human mind negatively. So, Carroll’s weak English, which forms his MINDSET, might be worse than my English/Pennsylvania Dutch language. Our different styles of writing might explain why Carroll did not review the scientific aspects of my book adequately. My book says that the developments of different languages by humans are not explained by evolutionary theory. Atheists might have a problem with writing styles because they do not know the linguistic problems of humans and the complex relations that exist between symbols and the human mind.

Carroll’s book review was too early for the announcement I made on a blog dated April 26, 2007. On this blog, I tell my website readers about a new book, The God Theory, by Bernard Haisch. He is an astrophysicist. In the announcement, I report that his book and my book will unify the modern creation theory I describe in my book. So, Ed Brayton, your trophy does not fit me. But, it might fit Carroll.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Announcement: Some Posts Can Be Deleted Immediately

As the blogger of this blog, I have concluded that some posts on this teaching website are inappropriate. I also concluded that these posts are unhealthy for our nation. So, some new posts must be deleted immediately. Posts that seek or give opinions are appropriate and will remain so that people can share their thoughts. The following posts will be deleted immediately: (1) any indicated attempt to assassinate the character of the blogger or anyone else and (2) any indicated attempt to degrade the Pennsylvania Dutch or any other language that is mixed with the English language.

The pic means 'scream at the sky, not me.' Waste your own time, not the time of other people.

A Book Consistent With My Book

Recently, I purchased and read the book ‘The God Theory’ by Bernard Haisch, an astrophysicist. I do not believe that any other book on the market can be made more consistent with my book, The First Scientific Proof of God. Thus, for the first time, I suggest that readers review my book with Haisch’s book as a single book. What I did not include in my book will be found in Haisch’s book. And, what Haisch did not include in his book will be found in my book.

Briefly, both of us say that there is more to reality than physics. We thus view the world as a spiritual/physical thing. Accordingly, both of us believe in God and say that (1) God cannot be limited and (2) the universe cannot be completed or reduced to an ultimate equation. Interestingly, we also distinguish our work clearly. My work proposes spiritual atoms for the universe. These atoms are immortal and establish the potentials for all created things. On the other hand, Haisch’s work proposes the way these potentials become actual things.

I had to stop my work because I am not getting younger. So, I had to record my research by writing my first book. Since I had to stop my research, I could not include details on the initial steps of God’s creation. To my surprise, these initial steps are included in Haisch’s book.

With our independent works, the end of atheism is now certain.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Knowing the Pennsylvania Dutch Language

The language used by different people of the United are not always identical or similar to the English language. Although the English language might be assumed to be the national language of the USA, it is not the legal language of the USA. Few people know that the English language is weak scientifically because it is filled with very poor word meanings. Many words and their meanings can be determined only with logical reasoning. These determinations weakened the English language considerably. This linguistic problem in the English language is a legacy of Aristotle and the world's logicians who have corrupted every national language. drastically.

I write like a Pennsylvanian Dutchman because I was born and raised in a Pennsylvania Dutch town. Pennsylvania Dutch is not a perfect language. But, the English language is also not perfect. So, while I must struggle to understand some of your comments written using the troublesome English language, please take time and have patience to understand the responses I write using the troublesome Pennsylvania Dutch language. To know the Pennsylvania Dutch language, click.

Thanks, George

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Rejecting the Infinite qua Infinite Is Erasing the Great 19th Century Progress in Mathematics

‘What Is Mathematics?’ is a popular book written by the German mathematician, Richard Courant (with Herbert Robbins). In 1934, he brought the great 19th century progress in mathematics to th USA and worked in the New York University. On page 77 of this book, one learns that Courant also brought with him (1) the infinite qua infinite, which is a noun or determinate infinite, and (2) the infinite (without end) or indeterminate, which is an adjective. Since Courant was born in 1888 and thus after Georg Cantor found the transfinite numbers, it seems likely that he also brought Cantor’s genuine infinite (the infinite qua infinite) and non-genuine infinite (the infinite without end). One wonders why our mathematicians and scientists are not considering both infinities. Without both infinities, it seems that a half-world exists rather than a whole world.

If one investigates Courant’s book further, one learns that the complex numbers, like the negative numbers, were created in order to extend the number domain so that unsolvable equations could be solved. The extended domain of complex numbers was developed and was based on definitions, which are freely made. But, this development maintained the rules and properties of the lower domain. Cantor developed the transfinite numbers the same way.

Interestingly, such progressive extensions are usually opposed, by the same field of thought, the Aristotlean logicians. Cantor was attacked by the logicians of his time. He spent much time in hospitals due to the stress. Today, such logicians continue to oppose such progress by attacking my character and my scientific proof of God without ever reviewing it. This character assassination has continued by atheists ever since the book appeared on the market in June 2006. As an engineer, I know the importance of progress for the USA. But, I also know that this progress will be denied with atheism. Atheists do not know that progress of a nation is possible only when man's work is consistent with God's work.

Like extending the number systems, I used my personal freedom to extend the finite world into the infinite world of God. This extension shows that God originates all finite things. This extension is essentially my proof of God. Essentially, I connect the ‘infinite qua infinite’ to the ‘infinite without end.’ Thus, my extension is not much different from extending the real number systems to the complex numbers and transfinite numbers.

Since mathematicians cannot extend the number domain beyond the transfinite numbers and into some higher world of numbers, it seems time for them to accept the infinite qua infinite and start developing Cantor’s transfinite numbers. By developing the transfinite numbers, I expect science to uncover many hidden secrets such as new energy sources.

Monday, April 23, 2007

The Infinite qua Infinite

Two different infinities exist. One is an adjective and the other is a noun. As an adjective, it means ‘without end.’ An example is the set of natural numbers, which are 1,2,3,4,.... or the set of odd numbers 1,3, 5,... Another example is the set of apples, stones, suns, flowers, etc. The other infinite is a noun and is often expressed as the infinite qua infinite. As a noun, for instance, the infinite God is both absolute maximum and absolute minimum . The circle in the pic is thus a close image of God since it has a minimum (the center) and a maximum (circumference). And, in complex numbers, which are plotted on the flat S-plane with zeros and 'without end' infinities, God is the infinite that surrounds the plane and limits the plotted complex numbers.

As a noun, the infinite is an attribute of God. It was thus appropriate for the early Jews to name God ‘the infinite God. This noun can be generated in any national language by beginning with the symbol ‘finite.’ The infinite, as a noun, is generated by negating (or removing from the universe) all finite things.’When one negates all finite things, one generates the symbol, not-finite. Here is the path of thought that led me to a scientific proof of God.

Plato gave my mind an intellectual boost when he rejected Aristotle’s definition of the symbol ‘not.’ Aristotle’s negation can move a human mind from something positive to its contrary (or opposite). This is the origin of Aristotle’s logic. However, Plato wanted to correct the negative thoughts of Socrates. Plato’s negation can move our minds from a positive idea to a new positive idea. The new idea is merely a different idea. Plato makes this argument in his Sophist dialogue, 257. Aristotle’s negation leads to logical reasoning. But, this movement can hide the intellectual tool that God gave us.

When the symbol finite is negated and our mind follows Plato, our mind is contacting the symbol infinite, which is something new and different. But, the symbol finite does not vanish with this movement of our minds. Only if logical reasoning is used, will all finite things be destroyed. The movement of the mind from finite to infinite tells us that infinite and finite coexist. This movement of the mind is known as both/and reasoning. This form of reasoning is a level of thought higher than the level of either/or logic.

My scientific proof of God follows Plato’s path of thought. This path of thought tells us that every finite thing in the universe is connected directly to an infinite God. There is nothing in between, as the song writer said, ‘Accentuate the positive. Eliminate the negative. And, don’t mess with Mister in-between.’

Sunday, April 22, 2007

An Email to the ScienceBlogs Website

This morning I sent the below email to the website of ScienceBlogs. Click My hope is to open a dialogue.

Email Content
I am a retired electrical engineer and the author of "The First Scientific Proof of God.' Last summer, Mark Chu-Carroll, the blogger of the Good Math, Bad Math website, began to attack me and my book. He continued to attack the book this spring and continued to assassinate my character. He never evaluated this proof of God.

Our discussion ended when he banned me saying that he is protecting Google against me.
Since he banned me, I exposed Carroll's unusual behavior on my website. Since Carroll did not listen to my arguments that the field of mathematics has no access to God through numbers, I started to inform 'the people' on my website that our mathematicians are practicing atheism. Then, after I investigated the website, ScienceBlogs, I concluded that all sciences also practice atheism. So, my website is now informing 'the people' that mathematicians and scientists are practicing atheism.

I make statements about 'practicing atheism' after I discovered the scientific proof of God. I make these statements because both the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence say that the founders mandated that the USA be a nation under God. In the USA, the practice of atheism is thus illegal.

The practice of atheism in the fields of mathematics and science means that God is not considered by mathematicians and sciences in their research. Yet, I use God in my research with unbelievable results as my book. shows.

Today, both mathematicians and scientists are saying that the universe has an end. This statement is made without any proof. My research shows that this saying is false. The danger of making such statements in any nation is great. For instance, the Muslim's say that a suicide bomber will be rewarded by God. This saying is false and causes errors in human behavior in the Muslim nations. Saying that the universe has an end causes errors in human behavior in all nations.

The purpose of this email is to inform the mathematicians and scientists on your website of my action to apply God in all fields of thought and to apply God correctly.

George Shollenberger

Saturday, April 21, 2007

The Mathematicians and Scientists of Today's"Me Generation" Are Destroying Our Children and the USA

In the past, most mathematicians and scientists would tell you that they believe in God. These mathematicians and scientists, who respected God as well as their souls, developed many honors from ‘the people’ because of the military success during WWII, the landing on the moon, and the new technologies found in our homes. Today, these mathematicians and scientists are either retired or have passed on.

The new mathematicians and scientists have changed the past. Some of them believe in God. But, every Monday, when they return to their job, they toss God out of their minds and think no more about Him. Others will tell you openly that God does not exist, even though they cannot prove any nonexistences. The truth about the new mathematicians and scientists is that most of them are practicing atheists.

Yet, the practice of atheism is unconstitutional and also violates the Declaration of Independence. When will our politicians and government stop this practice? It must be stopped because the new generation has become the ‘me generation without God,’ which is slowly destroying the minds of our children. In the long term, this godless generation will divide and destroy the United States.

Unfortunately, ‘the people of today’ is different than ‘the people of the past.’ This difference is troublesome because the people of today do not know that the new generation is actually failing. Thus, if ‘the people of today’ present more honors to the new mathematicians and scientists, I conclude that the USA will lose most of the earlier ‘blessings’ it had received from God.

Friday, April 20, 2007

A Message to Open-minded Mathematicians and Scientists

The S-curve, which originates in the field of statistics, is a powerful tool of thought. It explains the different human behavior that God has given the human species. For instance, this curve says that a small number of people buy a new product immediately, that most people buy it naturally (at a later time), and that a small number of people buy it last. The S-curve also explains the open-mindedness, natural, and closed-mindedness of all humans. But, many people do not realize that the curve has guided the development of man. This guidance was noticed only over the last thousands of years. Let me discuss how the S-curve guided the flow of knowledge in the Western world since the time of Abraham.

Man’s scientific mind was opened with Abraham’s monotheism. It was opened wider with the Old Testament, Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Jesus Christ. But, it was closed when Cicero installed Aristotle’s logic in the Roman courts. It was closed tighter when the Roman Church installed Aristotle’s logic in Christianity. This tightness created the non progressive Middle Ages. In the 13th century, the mind opened somewhat with the rejection of Aristotle’s logic. Then, mind was opened wider with the 14th century renaissance and the return of Plato’s writings. The mind was opened very wide by Nicholas of Cusa in the 15th century and led to the beginning of modern science through Galileo in the 16th century. However, the mind was closed tightly again in the 17th century with Newton’s Universe. It was closed even tighter in the 18th century when Kant failed to reconcile empiricism and rationalism. Mind began to open again with the 19th century mathematics. And, mind was opened widely, in the early decades of the 20th century with Einstein’s relativity and the linguistic discovery of symbols.

A monotheistic God creates and has no opposition. Since the S-curve is in God's Intelligent Design and in our world, the open-minded, natural, and closed-minded behavior are one in God. In our world, of created things, the S-curve must thus be in all created living things both necessarily and accidentally. Each person thus has a choice to behave with necessary manners or accidental manners. It should be obvious that necessary manners are expressed with open-mindedness and accidental behaviors are expressed naturally and with closed- mindedness. I thus conclude that (1) open-mindedness is a godly behavior,: (2) natural behavior is a behavior of growth, and (3) closed-minded behavior is like a piece of steel or stone and changes very little or not at all.

Today, the scientific mind of man is closed tightly because mathematicians and scientists have rejected God. This is a major mathematical and scientific error. Based on the way God creates, I suggest that mathematicians and scientists, who feel a godly behavior in their souls, consider a break away from the natural and closed-mindedness of their friends so that the scientific mind of man will remain open forever. See the prism in the pic as your mind and the two rays as two different ways a natural and open-minded can behave. What way are you behaving? It seems to me that some Internet websites have a tendency to close the minds of our mathematicians and scientists.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Mark Chu-Carroll and the Good Math, Bad Math Website

The Good Math,Bad Math website originates in the ScienceBlogs website. Click Currently, this website has 61 different blogs, more than 30 thousand posts, and more than 3 million comments. Although some of these blogs deal with the life sciences, most blogs are dominated by the physical sciences and mathematics. So, it is in this website and its blogs where most US atheists originate or are born. This kind of blogging operation can create a large number of members who have highly closed and narrow MINDSETS. The pic represents a very similar MINDSET of many people who develop and stick to the same ideas and do not like to consider new ideas.

One can see such a closed and narrow MINDSET in Mark Chu-Carroll, a mathematician at Google. He is the blogger of the Good Math,Bad Math website, which is one of the blogs listed on the ScienceBlogs website. click His MINDSET was observed by me after I suggested in my blog that the field of mathematics restudy itself and he began to attack my character and my book, 'The First Scientific Proof of God' on July 20, 2006. click He continued to attack my character and book again on March 06, 2007. click Today, he continues this attack. Today's mode of attack is found when one sees his writings about me on a Google Search using my name, George Shollenberger. click He is making these attacks without learning about my 53-year research career and without reading my scientific proof of God. Although Mark says that he is a Jewish skeptic, his behavior is that of a typical atheist whose MINDSET propagates negatives continually against the theory of God. Our lawyers, judges, political leaders, and parents must review this form of US atheism because the minds of our school children are slowly being closed.

The minds of our children are being closed because the scientists and mathematics in these blogs have the belief that God does not exist. But, they have never proved that God does not exist. Yet, the USA was founded under God. Their belief is thus undeclarational and unconstitutional. This means that atheism cannot be practiced under the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Yes, these mathematicians and scientists are practicing atheism illegally.

What is generating these errors of our scientists and mathematicians? These errors come from the scientific philosophy, which is known as 'reductionism. ' This philosophy unifies scientists and mathematicians to form a class of people known as 'mathematical physicists.'' Today, this class of people is the true atheists in the world and say that all things in the universe can be reduced to the mathematical equation, 1 = 1. All nonliving and living things are physical, nothing is spiritual, God does not exist, and the Big Bang theory governs everything. This class of people speaks of the 'theory of everything' when they want to speak against the 'theory of God. They also support Darwin's theory of evolution. Darwin's theory in inconsistent with my first scientific proof of God.

The people in this class are not reviewing any theories of God, including my own scientific proof of God. I told Mark that mathematics is not necessary to prove God. This means that the philosophy of reductionism applies only to nonliving things and does not apply to life and living things. The people of this class also state that the universe, science, and mathematics will come to an end. This is a false theory and would apply only if God does not exist. God is now proven scientifically after many open-minded people already concluded that God's exists for thousands of years.

This error in the mathematical and scientific fields must be corrected by our political leaders immediately because this class of people, if not corrected, can destroy the USA.

This Website No Longer Records or Responds to 'Anonymous,' etc. Comments

For good reasons, I accept only real names. Play games on your own websites.

What Is Atheism, a Theology, Philosophy, or Science?

Atheism is a strange ‘ism’ because it does not have a natural home in the minds of all people. But, it does find a home in the minds of about 15% of the people in the USA. Why does 15% of the US population choose to be atheists? Let me investigate this question.

As a theology, atheism is the contrary of the theory of God. As a theology, 15% of the US citizens thus reject God. As a philosophy, atheism can coexist with the theory of God. Sam Harris, a well-known writer in favor of atheism, believes that these two contraries can coexist. But, can the theory of God coexist with atheism? Finally, as a science, which is a truth seeking field of thought, atheism would become a proven truth and the theory of God must thus be rejected. Let me now look at new facts.

The theory of God was incorporated in the USA by the founders in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution. In the Declaration, the theory of God was incorporated "directly’ with words such as God and Creator and two laws, the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God. In the Constitution, the theory of God was incorporated "indirectly," in the Preamble’s statement ‘... in Order to form a more perfect Union, ...; This statement requires a ‘perfect thing’ to measure the words ‘more perfect Union.’ God is that perfect thing.

In the founding documents, we thus find that atheism can be practiced, but not in the USA. Nor can atheism be practiced in the USA until atheism is proven to be a science. Clearly, the USA was viewed as a nation under God by the founders. This kind of nation would exist until God is proven to be false.

There are new facts that support the founders. These facts are: (1) a scientific proof of God has emerged in the USA by me and (2) a scientific proof of God has also been found by the Muslims. These facts indicate that atheism is not merely a strange ‘ism.’ It is also false. Hopefully, the theists and atheists can decide to unify and shake hands as the pic suggests.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Building a Nation Today With a Melting Pot of People Is Not Possible

When a person says that it is great and safe to build a nation with a melting pot of people, that person does not know anything about the nature of the human mind. The person who killed 32 people at Virginia Tech yesterday was known for his violent writings and was a 23-year old Korean citizen, whose name was Cho SeungpHui. See pic. He thus had a Korean MINDSET, not an American MINDSET. I argue that this difference was the primary cause of Virginia Tech’s deaths. More specifically, the Korean God is very different from the American God. This difference is one reason why the Korean MINDSET is different from the American MINDSET. And, in general, the Korean culture is different from the American culture. The differences of these two cultures hold explosive potentials.

So, police departments and criminologists, please do not look any further for the cause of this Virginia event. Instead, work for the USA to develop the true American MINDSET so it will have no criminal potentials. Do this work in the memory of Virginia Tech’s lost children. This work would make the American MINDSET even more moral compared to what it is today. This means that US atheists must be asked to convert and foreigners must be asked to build their own nation.

A melting pot of people will never be a happy group of people.

Monday, April 16, 2007

The Killings At Virginia Tech

The killings of crime at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007 was predictable. But, TV announcers can only ask, "How did this happen?" Crime isl not predictable today because people refuse to become intelligent about science and root causes.

When I worked in the US Department of Justice, my research was telling me that crime comes from linguistic flaws in the human mind. I reported this research. I also discussed my research with Dr. Robert Health, School of Communications, at the University of Houston. The University agreed with me and submitted a grant application for research. A peer review group reviewed the application. It did not understand the application. At my retirement from the Justice Department, I told the Attorney General, Janet Reno, that crime can be eliminated. A justice person did contact me after I retired but could not understand me. Then, after I retired and was studying Jesus Christ, I found that Jesus said (Mark, Ch. 7) that evils comes from within us. The within thing defiles us. It is the human mind and its flawed symbolic languages. Finally, I discussed this cause of crime in my recent book, The First Scientific Proof of God. What else can I do?

How long will Americans continue to do nothing about the crime problem?

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Mark Chu-Carroll and Innumeracy

On April 2, 2007, Mark chu-Carroll, the blogger of the Good Math, Bad Math website, said 'George Shollenberger Returns to Prove His Innumeracy.' click and scroll down Innumeracy means that statements can be proven without numbers. In my book,The First Scientific Proof of God' one will find the first scientific proof of God in Part I, Chapter 1. This proof contains no numbers. As a mathematician and a Jewish cabalist, Mark is saying that the existence of God, or the existence of anything else, cannot be proven without numbers.

Many Jewish cabalists work with the number 10 and say that nine worlds exist below the highest world, which is God. I am a modern Christian and say that no worlds exist in between God and all of the things that God creates. Did Mark ban me from his website because of our differences about the 'number' of worlds below God?

To prove something in science, the scientific method requires phenomena and a theory to explain the phenomena. To prove something in science, one must thus collect phenomena by measuring them with some kind of instrument that has 'numbers.' As seen, Mark is challenging my first scientific proof of God by saying that my proof violates the scientific method, in that, God is not being measured with a 'numbered' instrument.'

In Part IIa of my book, I discuss the great work of Nicholas of Cusa. Nicholas says that mind is the first created thing. It is first because mind is the knowing tool for all humans. With this tool, humans can measure all created things and their phenomena. So, Mark is correct to say that man must make 'numbered instruments.' However, Mark, because he is an atheist and believer in evolutionary theory, is incorrect to say that 'natural selection' caused the production of the human mind so it can build 'numbers' and 'numbered instruments.' Mark, do you really believe that a single cell and its numbers can produce the human mind? I suggest that you open the many books of Nichols of Cusa and study them? They took me many years of study to master his big messages.

Using the symbols, finite and infinite, in my scientific proof of God, I say 'all finite things are originated by an infinite thing.' All finite things means 'all phenomena'. And, my theory says that 'all phenomena originates in an infinite thing.' God is thus proven if God is that infinite thing. Since finite things cannot originate themselves something positive beyond all finite things thing must originate them. To find this positive thing, one must negate all finite things. As Plato says at 257 of his Sophist dialogue, the symbol 'not' does mean something contrary to what exists. Thus, when our minds use the negation process or the the symbol, not-finite, we mean infinite so that our mind seeks a positive thing that is beyond all finite and all infinite things. (Perhaps, mathematicians are not viewing 'not-finite as something positive.) So, something is a reality beyond all finite and infinite things. If infinite and finite are viewed as attributes of this positive thing, the positive thing can be only the thing all people call God. As seen, numbers are not used in my proof of God. But, this proof is a scientific proof because it generalizes the scientific method of proof. My scientofic proof of God shows that the field of mathematics is extending itself too far into the theory of God with numbers. This field might also be extending itself too far into the theory of evolution with numbers by trying to disprove that this theory is a tautology.

So, open you heart, Mark, and remove my ban. I am not out to destroy Google. I only try to teach others what I believe or have proven.


The Editor's Journal and the Biblical Recorder Opinion

It seems that some people are reading my book. Click This opinion was posted on Nov. 30, 2006 and deals with important subjects in my book. One comment, by Cyrus B. Fletcher, says that my scientific proof of God is '...basically an exercise of logic.' Fletcher's comment is false. Logic is limited to either/or concepts found in the universe. The infinite qua infinite (a noun) is not a finite thing. The infinite qua infinite is an infinite thing that 'coexists' with the finite things it creates.

The coexistence of God and His creation explains why polytheism failed and why deism will also fail. To reach God, people must keep Aristotle in his coffin. Instead, people must grasp Plato so they can think beyond the either/or logic of Aristotle and the the finite things found in the universe. With Plato, one will rise into a world of intelligence built on both/and concepts rather than either/or concepts. Once in the world of intelligence, one will see God's world of wisdom.

The world of intelligence will reveal many, many new ideas, as I show in my book. For instance, I say that God also appears in our finite world without destroying Himself. Here is a real miracle. Further, the Intelligent Design of God, which we are just beginning to understand, is very complex. And, the modern creation that I started to build in my book will be unbelievably beautiful. The life of a nonbeliever must be very boring.

Friday, April 13, 2007

Who Is George Shollenberger?

I was born in 1929 at Pine Grove, a small Christian town in Pennsylvania. As kids, we played in mountains, creeks, and a lake, attended church every Sunday, and played sports until 6th grade. Then, I fell in love with basketball and mathematics. In basketball, I won honors in the State of Pennsylvania in the 12th grade. I graduated from high school in 1947 and decided to enlist in the military for three years. I went into Army Security Agency. It tested me and wanted me to become a code-breaker in a California school of cryptography. I refused because I wanted to become technical and attend the radio school at Ft. Monmouth, NJ. There I became a radio technician and was shipped to Germany in 1948 where the US Army was intercepting Soviet Union radio communications.

I was discharged in May 1950, just before President Truman added one year to all military enlistments. Having about one year of GI Bill Rights schooling, I attended Gettysburg College for one year. With no more money for college, I moved to Philadelphia, lived at the YMCA, and started night school at Drexel Institute of Technology. In 1954, I was married, moved to Baltimore. There, I worked for Lockheed-Martin, and started night school at Johns Hopkins University in electrical engineering.

By 1957 and after the Soviet Union launched its Sputnik, I was beginning to move upwardly as an engineer. By 1960 and without a degree, I had became a national leader in the field of telemetry, had studied a very new mathematical procedure for electrical engineers at Johns Hopkins, and was managing a group of telemetry engineers consisting of PhDs,, Masters, and BS engineers at Lockheed-Martin. I was thus at the right place and at the right time when John Hopkins offered this very advanced mathematical procedure. My telemetry effort at Lockheed-martin caused the US electronic industry to shift from analog to digital. This shift was the first major step to the home computer and explains the success of Bill Gates and Microsoft. By 1964, I received my degree in engineering and was being lured by private electronic companies. I left Lockheed-Martin for business opportunities after John Glenn orbited the earth on the Gemini spacecraft. This spacecraft had the telemetry system that I designed and managed.

By 1970, a medical problem (diabetes) was disturbing my career. So, I took a position in a new agency of the US Department of Justice. This new agency would deal with the nation’s crime and justice problem and was authorized by Congress in 1968. This research position was the manager of the Advanced Technology Division of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) . Over the next two years, I managed a $9 million budget. This research money was disbursed into the private sector to private companies, colleges, and universities. I also represented the Justice Department on President Nixon’s science and technology domestic initiatives. What a great domestic program Nixon had for the citizens of the USA. Unfortunately, Nixon’s political error forced him to resign. Soon, Nixon’s domestic initiatives ended up in the circle file. What a loss this was to ‘the people’ of the USA. With this loss, the field of US politics lost me as a follower forever. For years, I have been an independent voter. Nixon’s resignation affected the science and technology program at Justice considerably.

By 1977, the head of the NIJ asked me to think about measuring the performance of the NIJ staff. A year later, I completed the report. I found that the performance of any government employee is relative and cannot be measured absolutely. Today, many US government agencies are using ‘benchmarks.’ I believe that these benchmarks are measuring agency goals from year to year. This measurement technique is equivalent to the ‘relative’ measure as I discussed in my report to NIJ.

The report on performance measurement changed my career radically. As a result of this report, my thoughts at Justice shifted from the physical sciences to the life sciences. And, there, my thoughts began to be focused on theology, that is, the theory of God. This shift led me to focus my thoughts on basic causes such as the cause of cancer, the cause of crime, and the cause of my mind. At that time, language became a new tool of thought for me. By the late 1980s, I was asserting that criminals are caused by language flaws. This assertion then caused me to clearly distinguish the linguistic concepts, ‘sign’ and ‘symbols.’

However, by 1993 I experienced brain damage from a carotid artery blockage. The damage was in the language function of my brain. Using my own mind-body theories, I created a computer program that would require my mind to exercise my brain. The more my mind exercised my brain, the shorter my written sentences became. In two years, my average sentence lengths were approaching those of professional writers. This medical experience convinced me that the relations between our mind and brain are not understood correctly by medical researchers.

With my personal mind over body experience on my brain damage and my retirement in 1994, my attention shifted permanently to the theory of God and the sayings of Jesus Christ. In 1999, I lost my wife to brain cancer. Then, in 2001, I decided to get married again and continued my research on the theory of God. In 2005, I found the first scientific proof of God. Since I was an unknown writer, publishers showed no interest. Then, I decided to self-publish a book titled, The First Scientific Proof of God. My 53 years of research, beginning in 1954, becomes very clear in this book on God and His creation.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Mark Chu-Carroll and the Law of Evolution

Mark wants to change the theory of evolution to the law of evolution. click His change means that he wants Congress to make a law saying that the theory of evolution is true. He wants this law so that the Discovery Institute can be arrested and put into jail. Since Mark is an employee of the Google Corporation does this mean that Google also wants this congressional law? Who has this answer?

Why would Mark want Congress to make a law of evolution when the theory of evolution has never been proven scientifically? Further, all scientists agree that the theory of evolution must be rejected if God's existence is proven scientifically. Mark, God has been proven scientifically by me. Are you afraid to challenge my proof? The more research I do on your writings, the thinner the ice is getting on which your writings stand. On the theory of evolution and the existence of God, you are beginning to show irrational thoughts that any person cannot answer with numbers. You might be reaching thoughts well beyond your mathematical abilities. I conclude that your writings certainly do not deserve the atheistic followers you seem to get.

For instance, the founders of the USA mandated in the Declaration of Independence that 'the people' will build a nation under God. They also mandated the Laws of Nature and Nature's God. Don't you read the founding documents, Mark? Even the Constitution mandates a nation under God. This mandate will be effective until God's nonexistence is proven. No one has ever proven God's nonexistence.

When you call for a law of evolution without changing the founding US documents, you are moving the minds of many people and can be stimulating the second US civil war. Your call for this change is a very dangerous act. Mark's research is very weak. Perhaps, Mark should stick closer to his mathematics. Wrong political idea can be explosive. Hitler developed wrong political ideas too. The late Kenneth Burke predicted Hitler's Holocaust or did you not know that?

Mark Chu-Carroll Is Like Horse Feathers, Everywhere

A friend sent me a Yahoo list of a search on my name. Mark's rather ignorant writings about my book are everywhere. Does he hate God that much? I am now convinced that he is including the names of people on his blogs has a real purpose -- to assassinate the character of people. I do not believe the Internet was made for any criminal activities or pornography. When are Americans going to learn that free speech is not a reality?

Can anyone confirm whether this kind of Internet activity, although speculative by me, is criminal activity? FBI, etc. There is considerable data on his blogs.

I still cannot understand his blog "George Shollenberger Returns to Prove His Innumeracy." He doesn't seem to understand that God is innumerable Mathematics has nothing to do about God. God treats all people equally. God does not make it difficult for a hard worker to seek Him and make it easy for a lettered philosopher to seek him. One must thus seek God alone with your own special mental tools and feelings, as many people already do. My scientific proof helps all scientists to search for God so they can help others search for God. Does Mark feel hurt because he is being left out of a scientific proof of God? The creation by God is a contraction process. This is a very complex process that no one understands. Sometimes, I describe this process as a 'symbolic mirror.' So, numerables, such as the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., are not to be found in God.

My experience tells me that a scientist must study the complete works of Plato, Nicholas of Cusa, Gottfried Leibniz, and Georg Cantor before he or she can compete with my research results. The alternative of assassinating the character of people in science and mathematics is the first event for me. It is so unusual that it is still hard for me to believe that it did happen.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Yet Another Posting by Me on Mark Chu-Carroll

I received an interesting data from a friend about Mark. It seems that Mark, now that he is an employee of Goggle, is using his position with Google unfairly. If one searches Goggle using the term, George Shollenberger, many of Marks communications with me from his own his private website are on the search list, And, they are AT THE TOP OF THE LIST. Click Carroll seems tom to take control of this list by including the name of the person in the title of the blog. This will always place the blogs of his oppositions at the of the list. Hmmmm! Very clever, if one wants to assassinate the character of a person effectively. Even rev BigDumbChimp, a Darwinist who is making false statements about me on his website, is also on the Google search. The positive statements about me are forced down the list where people are less apt to look. Interestingly, my emails are saying that the use of dirty words on the Internet must be eliminated, just like the racist words of Don Imus was eliminated

Mark and BigDumbChimp are Darwinists. Many people do not know that Darwinism and a nation under God cannot coexist. Together, they will always be warring. It is becoming clearer and clearer to me that US Darwinists are trying to destroy the USA and its founding documents.

The work of Mark seems to be unfair to American Internet users. So, let me ask the Google Corporation, 'Is the use of the private website of Mark, which seems to control Google searches and which favors Darwinism and disfavors the writings of believers of God, approved by Google?'

At the same time, I wonder whether Carroll's banning of me on his website violated my constitutional rights of free spech. He says that I have been banned so that he can protect the Google Corporation against me. But, what is the higher authority, the Constitution or Google? Perhaps, this is a good question that the ACLU can answer?

Recently, I learned that Mark is saying that he found that the 'natural selection' of Darwinism is not a tautology. Amazing, he must have found a second God? Doesn't he know that the first God, which is my God, is without oppositions!! What kind of mathematics is Mark really doing?

The Linguistic Behaviors of Don Imus, the Rappers, and Mark Chu-Carroll

Is there any real difference between the character assassinations of people by Mark Chu-Carroll and the character assassination of the Rutger's women's basketball team by Don Imus? I say 'no.' Yet, Imus received only a two-week suspension imposed by CBS Radio and MSNBC. Most people are saying that Imus should be removed from the airwaves forever. Other people are saying that the Rappers should also be removed from the airwaves. Perhaps, the Google Corporation should also examine Mark's questionable linguistic behaviors on the Internet.

Those people who do not agree with the language used by Imus, the Rappers, and Carroll, should know that unlimited free speech can be limited by US law without violating the Constitution. Click if you want to conduct research on Carroll. He is a Darwinist and thus does not know anything scientifically about God.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Yet More on Mark Chu-Carroll

Looking more at Carroll’s website, it seems that Mark has established a kind of monarchy with the symbolic language he used to assassinate my character and the character of other. To begin to assassinate the character of a person, he seems to begin by calling a person ‘an idiot.’Perhaps, his staff fears him. Perhaps, he is developing the behavior of a ‘power seeker.’

So, I am investigating Mark’s past writings to search for his flawed mental behaviors. These imperfections are found in all humans because no perfect human will ever be found in our world. In the ancient world, many monarchs have gained their power from ‘telling lies.’ The Sophists at Plato’s time are an example of some past power seekers. The Sophists formed the group who set-up Socrates’ criminal charge and had him executed. Many modern people have the characteristics of ancient monarchs. You can observe this group of people in most businesses, industries, and governments. They are usually ignorant of their immoral behaviors. Ignorance is what you must seek to find errors in the minds of crime-potential people.

Mark’s disinterest in my scientific proof of God exposed me to one of his ignorance. This disinterest appears to any observer because his closed MINDSET (or his cults) is forcing him to live only in a world of numbers. In other words, he is a pure mathematician and cannot conceive other worlds such as the spiritual world or the world of life. He might recognize the oneness of God. But, I doubt that he will recognize the twoness of God and the threeness of God.

I tried to teach him. But, at this phase of his life he is not teachable. Will he ever open his mind? I doubt that he will open his mind unless he lowers the number of cults that are controlling him. A person’s cults must be lowered in order to free that person’s soul. I pity people who cannot jump out of a smoking habit, a drug habit, gambling habit, a character assassination habit, a racist habit, or any other cult.

Monday, April 09, 2007

More on Mark Chu-Carroll

Today, Mark banned me from his Google blog. See his rationale by scrolling to his words "Update on Moderation and Banning. To me, this banning seems to mean that Mark decided to close his mind to my scientific proof of God. Who cares? The latest message on Mark's website, by Mel, is that I have dementia. Now, Mel is becoming a medical doctor. But, my character assassination continues on Mark's website. Hmmm?

Mark's website has many dirty words that I even found hard to accept. So, parents, take a look at the dirt on his website before you authorize your children to go there. Many people, including Mark, do not realize that, in a nation under God, the word 'free" (as in free speech) changes and is limited. Thus, even the US press is not as free as it believes.

Saturday, April 07, 2007

Bad News From the US Fields of Mathematics and Science

I am concerned about the lack of development of mathematics and science in the United States. This was bad news to me after I discovered a scientific proof of God, discovered that our colleges and universities do not distinguish theology from religion, and noticed that many research projects in the fields of mathematics and science support atheism and evolutionary theory. I found no research in these fields to develop knowledge about God. Yet, these two fields are funded primarily by the hard work of taxpaying believers. Since I know that knowledge of God can be produced by us, I posted messages on the Internet about this abnormalty. Some mathematicians responded to my message to the field of mathematics. The response from mathematicians is in the next paragraph. But, I am not waiting for responses from scientists because I talk about the field in detail in my book on the proof of God. But, I also believe that this report should be propagated to the public now.

Now, to the field of mathematics. On my July 5, 2006 blog, I posted my message to the field of mathematics. I suggested ‘Restudying the Field of Mathematics.’ Apparently, these mathematicians did not like this suggestion. Then, on July 20, 2006, Mark Chu-Carroll, a Google employee, posted a blog against my scientific proof of God. Carroll's first post was only 22 days after my book on a scientific proof of God appeared on Click Surprisingly, in his first post Carroll wrote negatively about my proof of God, without even reviewing the proof. On August 6, 2006, a person named Rev. BigDumbChimp also made a post. He warned mathematicians about my scientific proof of God. He made his post also without reviewing my proof. click Caroll made another post on August 18, 2006, click another post on March 6, 2007, click and a second post on March 6, 2007. click Carroll's first posting destroyed any friendly discussion on the proof of God because all of his postings have a single motive --- to assassinate my character.

In time, I learned that this group of mathematicians are essentially atheists because they speak negatively about creationism, intelligent design, and the Discovery Institute at Seattle. I conclude that character assassinations of believers could be a standard response procedure in this group of mathematicians. Then, on April 9, 2007, Carroll banned me from his Google website. This was unnecessary because I already collected a good data base about some of our mathematicians. I believe that this group of mathematicians might be an abnormality in the field of mathematics. To me, using mathematics to make computer games seems not to be very important compared to developing knowledge about God, the universe, and life.

Unfortunately, the mathematicians in this group do not know how to develop knowledge of God. Nor do they believe that an electrical engineer with a BS degree can discover a scientific proof of God. This is why a dialogue between us never developed. I conclude that our colleges and universities are limiting their minds because the theory of one God is not distinguished from the many practicing religions. The theory of God must become a subject in our colleges and universities. These mathematicians can understand finite infinities. But, an infinite qua infinite is unknown to them. One of their problems is their lack knowledge of the philosophy of symbolism. Without this philosophy, they can recognize only half of the whole world. With this philosophy, they would learn that the concept ' finite' (an attribute of our world) has a real opposing concept (an attribute of God). They would be willing to say, for instance, that concept of 'beginning'' has an 'end.' But, they will not be willing to say that finite has an infinite. They are thus almost completely ignorant of God and depend on faith alone. God wants us to know Him better and better as each generation passes on.

On related histories, many of our young Americans today do not know that the US colonists fought the Revolutionary War to build a Union under God. The purpose of this War is clearly expressed in the Declaration of Independence. In my book, I argue that the Declaration is the highest law in the US body of laws. The colonists also knew that a nation can be built two ways, with and without God. But, a nation cannot function properly if it stands on a fence in between God and atheism. Some US politicians and all atheists are trying to sell this fence as a reality. I argue that this fence is an illusion and causes many, if not all, of our social and moral problems. The colonists recognized this illusion and mandated a nation under God. The founder concluded that science would never prove that God does not exist. Today, modern science tells us that the nonexistence of anything cannot be proven scientifically because scientific proofs require empirical data. Eventually, I found a scientific proof of God and self-published it in June 2006. click This book covers God, the universe and life. Unfortunately, most mathematicians, physical scientists, and life scientists do not consider God in their research projects. In fact, most mathematicians and scientists assume that our world has an end. If one considers the God in my book, one will learn that our world has no end. Thus, I conclude that our mathematicians and scientists are working with the false assumption, that the universe has an end. I argue that this bad assumption will cause humanity to enter into an era of wars upon wars in the future.

If our mathematicians and scientists change their attitudes about God, I believe that this unwanted era of wars can be avoided. To avoid this era, I conclude that the field of mathematics must develop the transfinite numbers of Georg Cantor. At the same time, I conclude that the sciences must develop the system of spiritual atoms discussed in my book. God's Intelligent Design cause the existence of these spiritual atoms. This Design also causes these atoms to combine and form distinct wholes. All of these wholes form a single universe consisting of 'one-many' bodies. The one-many bodies could clarify the concept of 'mass.' ' I also argue that there are sound reasons to explain why medical researchers are not finding cures for cancer, diabetes, etc. I conclude that the growth of atheism explains all failures in our sciences.

In my battle with this mathematical group, I learned that the field of mathematics is not very interested in knowing more about God. But, my research tells me that this disinterest is causing missed potentials. These mathematicians think that God does not exist because they are not grasping the symbolic nature of Georg Cantor's determinate infinite. They seem to limit their thoughts to either/or concepts and do not use both/and logic. Yet, many of these mathematicians are believers in God. However, when they say that they believe in God, they assume that God can be known with 'faith alone.' Faith alone will not produce any science or knowledge of God. My scientific proof of God is like any other new scientific discovery. While knowledge of God cannot be completed, all new knowledge about God will always reveal newer knowledge of God, the universe, and life. Thus, a 'faith alone mathematician' has created an unsolvable problem. For instance, if a mathematician wants to live on faith alone, how can this mathematician find a mathematical job in a nation that is continuously seeking new truths about God so that our knowledge about the universe and life grows?

Mathematicians and scientists can choose to do nothing about my concern. However, the Muslims recently discussed their new scientific proof of God. click This Muslim proof is highly specific compared to my general proof of God. With respect to the future, it seems clear to me that the Muslim scientific proof of God will be used to bring third-world nations under Islam. Accordingly, the US government must reform the USA by returning the USA to the Union mandated by our founders. My research shows that the USA began as a Union but was changed into a laissez-faire nation after Abe Lincoln was assassinated. The pic above is a sign of the mandated US Union.

Since one must expect the Muslims to spread their proof of God around the world, this is not the time to stand on a political fence between God and 'no god.' Such a fence is real only in the minds of our atheists. This fence will not be found in God's Intelligent Design of the universe . Neither can concepts such as 'political right' and 'political wrong' be found in God's Intelligent Design. My general scientific proof of God reveals new ideas in many fields of thought. For instance, the Iraq War can be terminated today gracefully. Creating free nations throughout the world can now be achieved only with words and ideas that originate in God.

Friday, April 06, 2007

More On Mark Chu-Carroll

Below is another message I sent to Mark Cha-Carroll, a Mathematician. I am concerned about the nature of his daily work. It seems that his work is for Google. If this is true, Google is using part of the productivity of the US economy to destroy God and destroy the founding documents of the USA. This could make interesting news. But, I am concerned about the method that mathematicians are using to destroy God and the US founding documents. Since mathematics have nothing to do with God and the spiritual world, Dr. Chu-Carroll and his mathematicial friends are using different methods to assassinate the character of those people who are doing research on the theory of God. I believe that this method of assassination is unnatural to human life and is a form of crime. So, the people of the US must inform their representatives in Washington of this form of evilness.

Now Mark is telling us that Einstein's equation, E= mc2, is no longer true. What then is it? It might be something like E = ? c2, where the mathematicians only know what ? is. Maybe they found Einstein's general relativity. If so, why don't they sell this unknown breatthrough to the string theorists and Big Bang theorists who need help to develop these pseudosciences.

Good Morning Mark,

I am responding to this blog with new blogs of my own. The first one is dated Apreil 5, 2007. Based on your most recent comments on my work on science and theology, I conclude that you and all other mathematician have no useful skills that can be used on the theory of God. The field of mathematics can deal only with the universe and its finite things. It will never be able to deal with the theory of God. So, all of your past reviews on godly subjects are nothing but junk.

Thus, I am concerned not only with your comments of my work. I am concerned with your comments on the work of other people who are also dealing with the theory of God. I think that your comments are misleading the people of our nation. Now, I can't believe that you are working for a national corporation such as Google. When national corporations are trying to sell atheism in the USA, something is wrong.

Based on what I see in your work, you are an atheist and are attacking the work of many believers in God. Those of us who are believers, do not believe in in evolutionary theory . Nor do we agree with the Pope that evolutionary theory is true. The Pope has much to learn also.
Since your web uses an the icon for evolutionary theory and you advertise for the American Museum of Natural History, I assume that you are serving atheists and have no interest in God other than destroying Him.

My Daddy often told me that 'people make their own bed.' You have made yours and I have made mine. So, as of today, you can expect to see your name on my blog often. I want to display your mathematical trash to as many Americans as I can. It is too bad that you can recognize other people's errors before you can recognize your own errors

George Shollenberger

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Another Blog By Mark Chu-Carroll, a Mathematician

After I told Dr. Chu-Carroll about the Muslim video, he opened a new blog so that he could accuse me again of using BAD-Math. The blog's title is 'George Shollenberger Returns to Prove His Innumeracy.' (Scroll Down and Click)

I did not have much time to look at this blog but now conclude that Dr. Chu-Carroll is a highly confused person. He must believe that I and other people apply numbers to God. I know that Jewish cabalists use numbers on God and that Dr. Chu-Corroll is a Jew and plays with cabala. How can such mathematicians have useful thoughts for any nation under God? Yet, these are the kind of mathematicians who teach our childen about the world and also that God does not exist.

Other blog responses seem to indicate that mathematicians do not give different meanings to the symbols, finite and infinite. They seem to view infinite as an attribute of something finite. On the other hand, I recognize finite light in a finite thing. But, I also recognize infinite light in an infinite thing. The finite light I recognize has no existence unless God creates. So, there is a big gap between my open mind and their closed minds. I believe that either/or logic is closing their minds, but that both/and logic is opening my mind. They seem to be giving Aristotle's ignorance a new life.

The Good Math, Bad Math Blog

Below is a copy of a note from me to Mark Chu-Carroll, who is the blogger of the Good Math, Bad Math blog. (Click) He is a skeptic Jew, an employee (I believe) of Google, and is using mathematics to help the atheists tear apart the United States from its founding ideas. For instance, he is fighting against creation, my scientific proof of God, and is fighting for evolutionary theory. His other interests are broad. (Click)

Hello Mark,
For the first time, I took a deeper look at the content of your blog. Unfortunately, I made a mistake and should have looked earlier. So, you have a PhD. That achievement is no longer great because US colleges and universities are lost and are not as great as you continue to sell your you PhD. Today, these higher schools of education are no longer 'higher'. They can't even tell the difference between the concept of 'religion' and a theory God. And, all sciences are on a terrible path of misery. Even the famous medical handbooks at Harvard are being challenged. Alternative medicine is coming whether you like it or not.

Today, most people are trapped in some kind of cult. You, like the Pope, also belong to the cult of mathematics. In your cult, you are seeing the beauty of mathematics, not the beauty of God and His creation. When the great literary critic, Kenneth Burke, took up his pen to spank the poets for their self_serving poetry, he became a close friend of most poets, dramatist, and engineers.

I looked at some of the subjects that you have examined and judged. Your mathematical skills and the field mathematics in general, will not reach into these subjects and the new fields of thoughts that man is developing. You must allow man to think thoroughly before you judge man. Man has thought about God and religion for a long time. Now, God and religion are becoming a science. Only later did Georg Cantor enter these ancient and modern thoughts to offer some mathematical ideas.

You are misleading man with concepts that you believe are correct, when in fact they are false. In other words, your judgements, if institutionalized, will only enslave people to more political bandits.

As a skeptic, you are misusing the skill you earned. My scientific proof of God and the Muslim proof of God are as good as anything that will come out of the field of mathematics for years.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Do Conspiracies Exist in the United States?

If you ask reporters today, most of them will say that there are no conspiracies among political lobbyists, bankers, industrialists, etc. in Washington, DC. This answer appears to be true because intelligent people do not take chances of being caught in a talking conspiracy among two or more people. But, are talking conspiracies the only way a conspiracy can be formed? I conclude that a conspiracy can be formed indirectly and without talk, by a single person.

I conclude that conspiracies are being formed this way by atheists who cannot prove their theories. A single atheist can form this kind of conspiracy unknowingly by expressing unproven facts against a believer, who is expressing his or her beliefs. Once the unproven fact is expressed, another atheist can repeat the unproven fact. When this independent action is taken by other atheists, the character of this believer is slowly assassinated. I believe that this kind of conspiracy occurs mostly in fields of thought that are unable to develop proven truths. Atheism and evolutionary theory are examples.

Atheists have expressed unproven facts about me after my book on the first scientific proof of God appeared in the Internet book stores. See (1) click , (2) click , (3) click , and (4) click. Of interest in this Good Math, Bad math website is that some of these mthematicians are believers in God. For instance Mark says that he is a Jew, and Mel says that he is a catholic. If they believe in God, why are they not interested in learning about scientific proofs of God. Conflicting words seem to surround them. I have read other character assassinations of those believers who are trying to explain to people the truths about ‘intelligent design.’ And, I have read of other character assassinations of believers who work in the Discovery Institute and who are trying to explain to people the falsities about ‘evolutionary theory.’ I have also read the writings of the atheist, Sam Harris, and his scientific debates with believers. Harris is a real scientist and does not assassinate the characters of his oppositions. He is the model that all atheists should follow.

Some atheists assassinate the character of a person who posts a review of a book written by an atheist. This is happening to me on (click) This assassin either simply votes against the reviewer or goes further to add negative characteristics about the reviewer in the comments. Tonight, ABC Nightly News reportes that school bullies are assassinating the character of autistic children. These assassinations cause psychological problems for the autistic child. One thus wonders wherther today's atheistic character assassins are only high school bullise in more expensive clothes. It seems as though the character assassinations used by many of our politicians are spreading into the citizenship.

When atheists choose ‘character assassinations’ over ‘sound scientific discussions,’ I believe that they are choosing the path of crime. I say this because the freedom in the phrase ‘free speech’ is not absolute. Using this phrase only reflects one’s ignorance. If atheists do not want to become real scientists, it might be time to make new laws that limit man’s Internet activities. Pornography could also be eliminated on the Internet. Only God’s freedom is absolute. So, wake up U Americans.

Monday, April 02, 2007

Christianity and Judaism v. Islam

With the Muslim discovery of the origin of the light that comes to us from the sun, the religion of Islam has found a path to the truths of the attributes of God. This discovery places Islam scientifically ahead of all religions including Judaism and Christianity. Now, if Islam accepts the Christian Trinity that I also prove scientifically in my book, The First Scientific Proof of God, Islam will become a follower of Jesus Christ and will become the scientific/religious leader in the Western world of all Protestant and Catholic churches and all Jewish synagogues. So, the future success of the Western religions will depend on how Judaism. Christianity, and Islam act and response to scientific issues about God and Jesus Christ.

More on the Photons Discussed by Islam

In my blog dated April 1, 2007, the work of Islam on the photon shows us that a photon exists initially in God as a spirit and is thus without mass (m). This means that a photon can exist in God without a body This form of existence agrees with my book, The First Scientific Proof of God, where I say that all finite things in our world originate from spirits. In my book, I refer to spirits as ‘spiritual atoms.’ There, I also say that an infinite number of spiritual atoms are needed to form all of the things that God want us to sense.

Now, let me discuss how God creates a photon so that we can sense it. A photon originates in God. There, it is a spirit and cannot be seen by us. But, since God wants us to sense photons, God must create them so they have existence in our world. However, since time does not exist in God’s spiritual world, God must create all things that He wants us to sense ‘all at once.’ So, the instant God creates, an infinite number of different spiritual atoms come into existence in our world. But, none of these different spiritual atoms can be sensed by us yet because they are infinitesimal or indivisible.

To create photons that can be sensed by us, God must give a body to each spiritual photon. The purpose of this body is to give each spiritual photon a quantity of mass. We can sense things that have mass because Einstein’s famous equation, E = m c2, says that mass is energetic and can be sensed. How does God give a spiritual atom a body? God makes bodies by ‘connecting’ many different spiritual atoms together to form a whole thing. This whole thing is known as a functional thing, which has a purpose that only God knows. So, when a spiritual photon is given a body, a functional photon is made by God. This functional photon is a physical photon. It is distinguished from the spiritual photon which remains in God eternally. The spiritual photon is thus an immortal idea of God. On the other hand, functional photons are not immortal because their bodies age and die. But, a spiritual photon is never without a functional photon. So, spiritual photons are always being refreshed with new bodies. This refreshing process of photons is more popular known as reincarnation. This refreshing process (or reincarnation) is necessary because God’s long term purpose for us is unknown. Nor will we ever know God’s eternal purpose.

In my book, I say that God makes all things in our world the same way.

I want to thank Islam for discussing publicly their ideas on the photon because this discussion gave me a good example to explain my general scientific proof of God.

Sunday, April 01, 2007

The Muslim Scientific Proof of God

Last evening, I listened to a video presented by Professor Muhammad al Mahdi on the first Muslim scientific proof of God. Click Although the audio was bad, I could understand enough of the words used by al Mahdi. In general, this Muslim proof of God is based on Einstein’s relativity theory. For instance, if you are on a moving train and are walking in the same direction as the train, a person standing still outside of the train will say that you are moving faster than the train. But, if you are walking in the opposing direction , the person standing outside will say that you are moving slower than the train.

The Muslim proof deals with the motion of a particle of light (a photon) and its motion to our planet from the sun. If the photon has mass and moves from the sun to our planet at the speed of light, the mass of the photon would increase to infinity and destroy planet earth. Only if a photon has no mass, can light appear in our world. The truth is that each photon travels to planet earth in a fraction of a second.

Physicists identify a photon as a packet of light energy. But, if a photon has energy, Einstein’s famous equation, E = m c2, applies. If a photo has energy, at the speed of light the mass of the photon is approaching infinity and a photo would destroy our planet. Obviously, today’s physicists have made an error on defining a photon. The Muslim scientists correct this error by removing akk mass from the photon. When all mass is removed, the massless photon becomes an attribute of God where it is pure energy rather than physical light energy. So, biblical statements such as ‘let there be light’ have been correct.

My general scientific proof of God distinguishes God’s spiritual world from our physical world. I use a system of spiritual atoms to distinguish these two worlds. In this system of spiritual atoms, the massless photons proposed by the Muslims will fit in my general scientific proof of God and would form an ‘infinite set of massless photons.’ However, an infinite number of other infinite sets are needed by an infinite God to create a finite world in which we live. For this reason, the photon and its potential light energy is a specific, rather than general, proof of God

So, a new future is coming for the godly people of the world whereas only confusion will come to the world’s atheists. The pic above shows how man seeks knowledge of small things. This kind of knowledge eventually leads to knowledge of God.