I've no clear idea how what you are asking relates to what I said.

Mathematics is essential to the world. The computer I am using, the internet, and even the sound it projects. The algorithm running by binary, it is obvious that the world revolves around Mathematics. But, if the bayesian theorem is not flawed, then my argument should be entirely wrong.

I argued, that there is no epistemic justification behind 50/50 — which is used as a starting basis towards whether the universe was created, or not. Adding to that, I also argued that mathematics does not have the capacity to comprehend knowledge in epistemological, metaphysical, and theological territory. That mathematics needs to be accompanied with rational thinking.

1+1=2. In that statement, the '1's are the assumed terms. The result (2) cannot be changed unless the former terms, or assumptions are altered. If these assumed terms are taken from no where, then it does not make any sense. It can be empirical, when I say I hold 1 pencil on both my hands, thus I have 2 pencils, then there is empirical sense. It can be rational, when 1 does not have a value in the real world to start, thus requires adding value into 1; there has to be a basis why things began with 1.

So, is mathematics just as powerful to things that require rational reasoning? Please educate me.

Mathematics is essential to the world. — SethRy

Nuh. Mathematics is essential to our descriptions of the world, That's not the same.

What do you think mathmatics are describing?

One chooses a mathematics that suitably describes the world.

So a suitable mathematics describes the world.

What would be an example of unsuitable math?

I think it is not unsuitable mathematics, it's unsuitable situations for forms of mathematics (Just a guess out of the blur). You would devise a proper mathematical theorem or formula to solve a problem, not something that couldn't be logically capable to do so.

What would be an example of unsuitable math? — DingoJones

Some speculative parts of physics treat time as a complex number. It seems very much a scalar quantity so I suspect this will turn out to be one of those cases of unsuitable maths being used to describe part of the universe.

In general maths describes the universe. Actual infinity is not part of maths IMO so we have a finite universe (and a finite God, if he exists).

"Mathematics is essential to the world.
— SethRy

Nuh. Mathematics is essential to our descriptions of the world, That's not the same. — Banno

But nature and reality appear to use mathematics:

https://www.planetdolan.com/15-beautiful-examples-of-mathematics-in-nature/

We can say mathematics predates the universe. We can also say that mathematics is universal and transcends the universe (in the sense if there are other universes, maths will be exactly the same in those other universes as our maths).

God if he exists is a mathematician, but he did not invent maths, he just discovered it.

Any unsuitable theory. Mundane examples would be using Newtonian equations to calculate relativistic speeds and times; or using Maxwell's equations to calculate the motion of an electron.

See how the alternative leads @Devans99 to mystical expressions about mathematics:

We can say mathematics predates the universe. We can also say that mathematics is universal and transcends the universe — Devans99

As if it were astonishing that the word "peanut" can be about any peanut, anywhere: '"Peanut" is universal and transcends the universe'.

Mathematics is constructed, not found. Hence,

You would devise a proper mathematical theorem or formula to solve a problem, — SethRy

Ok, Think I get it. Not much of a math guy so its a bit greek to me.
So does math the construct describe something, is it mapped onto something that is not constructed by humans?

Ok. Thanks.

God if he exists is a mathematician, but he did not invent maths, he just discovered it. — Devans99

So, Mathematics is an intrinsic theory, therefore already essential to the world, not its descriptions?

Because if you argue that mathematics was not invented, it was infinite, then that unstoppable regress would live by the existence of the cosmos and the world — therefore essential to the universe, to the world.

As if it were astonishing that the word "peanut" can be about any peanut, anywhere: '"Peanut" is universal and transcends the universe'.

Mathematics is constructed, not found. — Banno

The concept 'Peanut' does not predate the universe.

1+1=2 in all universes. π is the same in all universes. So if maths is constructed; it is constructed the same in all universes. IE it is discovered.

The universe is discrete at macro and micro levels so I think we can at least conclude the concept of 'one' is built into the universe.

Because if you argue that mathematics was not invented, it was infinite, then that unstoppable regress would live by the existence of the cosmos and the world — therefore essential to the universe, to the world. — SethRy

Not sure what you mean; can you expand?

To begin, I guess we can agree that a god, is necessary and completely superior to beings that are contingent. The earthly possessions consist of contingency. That contingency, relies on it's creator, in this situation, we suppose it's a god.

When we say it is 'a god', we do not know of it, finite or infinite, perceivable or con-substantial, what we know of this god, is approximate. Unambiguously, god created the substance of the cosmos, this god fueled the constant, ongoing, system of time and space.

If mathematics predates the existence of a god, we can assume this god is finite, for there is something greater than his existence. If this god was absent, then the universe would conceivably be absent as well. No god = no universe.

If this god discovered mathematics, he must have used it to create the universe. Therefore, the absence of mathematics would form a conclusion, that without it, there is arguably, no god? but surely, no universe. No Mathematics = No universe, but not necessarily, no god.

So, I personally believe, that God, not only a god, created mathematics and utilised it to construct the cosmos.

So, I personally believe, that God, not only a god, created mathematics and utilised it to construct the cosmos. — SethRy

I think it is probable that the universe was constructed using mathematics but I don't see how God could have constructed mathematics itself. For example, its not possible to construct a coherent maths where 1+1!=2, IE maths is invariant - whoever 'creates' it creates exactly the same thing each time... hence it seems 'discovered' is a more appropriate word.

For example, its not possible to construct a coherent maths where 1+1!=2, IE maths is invariant - whoever 'creates' it creates exactly the same thing each time... hence it seems 'discovered' is a more appropriate word. — Devans99

It is also probable that God, whom theoretically, designed the universe intellectually in a way that it is infinite. Supposedly, with God's omni-godly capabilities, he should be able to create things intellectually but still abide to the laws of logical possibility. He can't make square-circles or 2-2=7 because he permanently designed logic as well, in a way that is infinite yet understandable to human or more specifically, contingent perspectives. The concept and entirety of mathematics is intellectually designed which can (just can) be evidence for God's existence.

Unsuitable mathematics in particular situations happened due to distinction of logic. God designed the origins of logic purposely by concepts that are known to necessary beings, thus we do not have the capacity to rationalize completely how everything began. We only developed, as sentient and rational beings, to utilise mathematics into our humanly descriptions of the universe, and not it's phenomenal existence — not traceable to the roots and origins of logic, mathematics and the overall structure of the universe.

I would question whether even God can exist without logic (and maths is an extension of logic).

What is logic? It is information (statements with their truth value). True and false are 1 and 0. In a world without logic it's impossible to tell true from false so there is no information. I don't think anything could exist without information and information (being able to differentiate between things) implies logic.

He can't make square-circles or 2-2=7 because he permanently designed logic as well, in a way that is infinite yet understandable to human or more specifically, contingent perspectives — SethRy

I don't see how you could 'design' logic if logic did not exist. You would not be able to design anything without knowing the difference between right and wrong.

Nuh. Mathematics is essential to our descriptions of the world, That's not the same. — Banno

But mathematics is necessary for, and therefore essential to, many of the artificial things existing in the world. The world would be completely different without mathematics, so mathematics truly is essential to the world in which we live.

I don't see how you could 'design' logic if logic did not exist. You would not be able to design anything without knowing the difference between right and wrong. — Devans99

See it as the origins of the universe, no, time - no not even that, existence. Existence, if we suppose a god exists, was created by this god. From the very beginning, that even the concepts of nonexistence was void.

We know that existence and nonexistence were two opposites. But their disparity was meaningless as the correlation was absent, one can only live by the presence of the other. The beginning was undefinable. Hence, existence predates logic and mathematics.

(I would point out an oxymoron in this; If existence and nonexistence wasn't there, what was God?)

The beginning, as undefinable, was pure nothingness. Not perceivable, not tangible, not sensible - concepts far from our humanly understanding. Then a god, I personally would suppose, God; created time, logic, step by step to construct universal life - to construct existence and its subsets like logic and mathematics in order for it to stand. God is, of, substance to the entire universe - filled with purpose, design, and conceptual origins that only of him knows.

That whatever greatest, the most awesome thing that you believed to be the completely best, God is greater. God was greater than existence and nonexistence.

The beginning was undefinable — SethRy

I don't think there can be a temporal beginning for God as that requires time - he must exist permanently beyond time and be without cause.

The act of creation requires logic. It would require logic to create time. It would require logic to 'create/discover' logic. So logic can't be a creation; it must be a discovery.

God is also omni-temporal and omnipresent. Concepts of cause and effect and infinity are of different interpretation to him.

If logic was discovered, then is it essential to this god and the universe? That without logic, the universe and the world could not exist?

Damn this is complicated.

The act of creation requires logic. It would require logic to create time. It would require logic to 'create/discover' logic. So logic can't be a creation; it must be a discovery. — Devans99

Great point.

If logic was discovered, then is it essential to this god and the universe? That without logic, the universe and the world could not exist? — SethRy

I believe so. True and false is the most crude representation of information we have. If the universe could not support true and false (IE logic), then it would not seem to have any information in it, so no beings, matter or gods.

Some believe God has a personality and also can plan ahead. Had OpinionsMatter's dog died the dog probably might have been better off dead depending on how it was treated when it was alive. I've prayed for death about 200 times in the past 10 years and have even been held up at gun point and i chased the robbers away. After being in that situation i stayed where i was and called the police and shortly after that i prayed that the robbers wouldn't get caught because i knew how bad it is to get into the criminal system. The point i'm trying to make is there are worse things than death. I feel as many people do in that sometimes the only way to die is to do it yourself. I would not wish suicide on Hitler. If i thought Hitler was alive in Argentina i would do it my self. I'm pretty sure Hitler died a long time ago.

The point is death can be a release or at the very least an act of mercy.

Okay. Suppose again, the beginning was absolute nothingness - not even nonexistence, not even nothingness. I just used the word nothingness, only to start a concept. Nothing at all, that even nothingness was void.

That includes the existence of logic, logic was not existent nor nonexistent, it was void. Presumably, we agreed that logic is essential to the universe. Analyzing the principles of creation, it is known that if logic was essential to the universe, then it should coexist by it. Likewise, if the universe ceased or did not exist, then logic would not.

So by the universe's creation, logic was planned to be created as well - they happened at the same time, process and product.

In fact, logic cannot be argued by basis of theism because God, as I said, is and was, omnitemporal and omnipresent. Time and space by his creation is tangible to infinity. Perhaps, God designed the universe with a beginning yet still be infinite; constantly expanding yet constantly reducing.

Okay. Suppose again, the beginning was absolute nothingness - not even nonexistence, not even nothingness. I just used the word nothingness, only to start a concept. Nothing at all, that even nothingness was void. — SethRy

I'm have the opinion that you can't get something from nothing so something must have always existed. That something is the timeless first cause. It has always existed. But it could not exist without logic. Logic in its most basic form seems to me to be differentiating between different things. No logic means everything is the same, so nothing can exist.

So on the one hand you could say God exists permanently and logic exist permanently. But on the other hand, God could not exist without Logic, but Logic could exist without God.

What would be an example of unsuitable math? — DingoJones

Maybe ...

British computer scientist's new "nullity" idea provokes reaction from mathematicians, Wikinews, Dec 2006
Addressing mathematical inconsistency: Cantor and Godel refuted, J A Perez, Feb 2010
Bible Codes, K Sean Proudler, Jun 2014

Cantor was a bible bashing madman:

'Cantor linked the Absolute Infinite with God, and believed that it had various mathematical properties, including the reflection principle: every property of the Absolute Infinite is also held by some smaller object'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_Infinite

Criticising Cantor is far game IMO.

'Despite his willingness to question the Church, it was very important to Cantor to show that his theory of actually infinite sets could be rectified with Catholic teaching which traditionally held that the only completed in- finite was the infinite of God. This may have been partly a result of Cantor’s apparent belief that set theory was given to him directly by God. This belief is evidenced by letters to G ̈osta Mittag-Leffler from the winter of 1883–4 in which Cantor claimed explicitly to have been given the content of his arti- cles by God, having only provided the organisation and style himself (see Dauben, 1990, p. 146).'

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=25&ved=2ahUKEwigmZuv0LPhAhUxXRUIHZw3DXwQFjAYegQIAxAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Flogika.uwb.edu.pl%2Fstudies%2Fdownload.php%3Fvolid%3D57%26artid%3D57-08%26format%3DPDF&usg=AOvVaw0DlXIF5pxIwocATv-3HJJd

Talking to God... you can get locked up for that nowadays... what a looney...

From the same source:

'I have never assumed a ‘Genus Supremum’ of the actual infinite. Quite on the contrary I have rigorously proved that there can be no such ‘Genus Supre- mum’ of the actual infinite. What lies beyond all that is finite and transfinite is not a ‘Genus’; it is the unique, completely individual unity, in which every- thing is, which contains everything, the ‘Absolute’, unfathomable for human intelligence, thus not subject to mathematics, unmeasurable, the ‘ens simplicis- simum,’ the ‘Actus purissimus,’ which is by many called ‘God.’ (Meschkowski & Nilson, 1991, p. 454)17'

Cantor states in the passage above that absolute infinity is not part of maths. If only he had realised that actual infinity is not part of maths either; that would have saved us a lot of pain.

Poor Cantor, depressed, bipolar, suicidal, ... :confused:

, Perez' paper isn't about Cantor's "Absolute Infinite" (which is nonsense), but alleges to disprove Cantor, Church, Gödel, Turing and others, where their writings provided eminent insights.
Don't go all ad hominem when you'd have to address/justify Perez' paper (which is nonsense).
Anyway, @DingoJones asked for bad math, and coming up with some examples isn't all that hard.

Pseudomathematics (RationalWiki)