Bitcoin Forum

I was speculating how god isnt a person and really is a consistant force that we humans like to call math. I happed to stumble upon this page http://www.superiching.com/moreongod.htm and the more it got me thinking about bitcoins formula.

Thoughts? Ideas? Crazy comments?

I agree with you, however, IMHO, At this early stage of the development of bitcoin, this kind of theological PR strategy will make bitcoin weird.

In Code We Trust? :-))

Rene Descartes is the mathematical philosopher who in addition to giving us Cartesian coordinates also wrote:

"I think therefore I am".

Interestingly his view on the validity of the input of his senses actually appealed to the existence of god: (Wikipedia)

"Descartes also wrote a response to skepticism about the existence of the external world. He argues that sensory perceptions come to him involuntarily, and are not willed by him. They are external to his senses, and according to Descartes, this is evidence of the existence of something outside of his mind, and thus, an external world. Descartes goes on to show that the things in the external world are material by arguing that god would not deceive him as to the ideas that are being transmitted, and that God has given him the "propensity" to believe that such ideas are caused by material things."

He basically used god's existence as an axiom and the validity of his senses is inferred as a corollary.

He did live in the early 17th Century, so this might have been to appease the very powerful Roman Catholic church. You can imagine he was quite a radical thinker for his time.


If you were to use Descartes's philosophy, not only are bitcoins backed by god but every image you see, perfume you smell and the texture of everything you touch are also backed by god.


I have a maths degree from Cambridge University and have thus have seen hundreds of mathematical proofs. I can honestly say that not a single one of them started with an axiom:
1) Suppose there is an omnipotent, omniscient being god, which we will call G.

Interesting though that Descartes asserted that there is essentially an absolute chasm between mental and physical reality which leads him to completely contradict himself.

Whether universe is a mathematical structure depends on what mathematics is, and not the other way around. Are laws of physics mathematical in nature because we can only perceive in mathematics, or is it because mathematical objects are real? If it is because of our perception/interpretation, where does the mathematics that shape it come from?

Either way, calling it God is pretty redundant, but it's interesting that we can still write "In God We Trust" on Bitcoin bills. ;)

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_universe_hypothesis

Bitcoin is backed more by physical laws than math. Basically it all rests on computing power being scarce.

It the laws of our world were different or changed doing a 51% attack might be easy.

Even if a God or Gods created the universe he/they may no longer control it, who knows?

"Backed by current physics" might be more correct.

the bitcoin network functions only, iff P != NP. We cannot proof this (and probably will never be able to). Hence, maths doesn't help you.

Still, ECC is cool :-)

That is one of the assumptions we  built our logic, language, and science on, then forgot about it. Any "proof" would only be based on circular logic. The same goes for the idea that laws of physics are universal, and that constants are constant.

All that aside, I totally think we should try and convince evangelicals in the US that the OP statement is true. I suspect all that's needed would be to offer a big btc donation to one of the megachurches.  The problem is how to do all this without making bitcoin seem ridiculous in the eyes of  the rest of the world.

P.S. not serious
P.P.S. this should be moved to a different  board

Ok, sure.  If God is math, and bitcoin is backed by math, then bitcoin is backed by God.  Just as if a bachelor is an unmarried man, and John is an unmarried man, then John is a bachelor.  Your argument is certainly valid, but it's definitely not sound; at least not until you offer a compelling argument why anyone ought to believe that God is math, which, BTW, is going to entail you making an argument for why people ought to believe there is such a thing as God*.  Good luck.

*This is assuming that you really are trying to get to the conclusion that bitcoin is backed by God.

I hate to be the one that breaks the bad news to you all, but God is not a mathematician, but a civil engineer, for whom else would put a sewer dump right next to a great recreational site?


Unless, of course, God is backed by BTC.

~Cackling Bear~

My problem with it is that he assumes all mental activity arises from the will.  Did they not have a concept of the unconscious mind in the 1700s, or does he define will differently than we do today?  I don't know anyone who has complete, intentional control of all their mental activity, although it sounds like it would be nice.

I'd just like to note that under no circumstances will I ever advertise... "Bitcoin is backed by god" lol

lol



Looking at my argument, It might be better to say math is a universal representation of god (Assuming that we did find the formula for "everything" aka string theory or m-theory or what ever the universal theory is called these days)
I believe something is keeping everything consistent, as suppose we did find a formula for everything.... we will always be left wondering "Why does it do that?"

So how do you think the argument should go from this new premise that math is a universal representation of god to the conclusion that bitcoin is backed by god?

Also, you can trace back mathematics to something more fundamental, such as language...

All that is needed to constitute a language is syntax, content, and grammar.

Math is just a subset of language.

We already had "In God we Trust" on our money and look how that went.

Bitcoin is backed the same way as gold:people's desire for it. Nothing more is needed or possible.

When people say "Bitcoin is backed by mathematics", they don't mean the language.

You are talking about "representation", but I think the topic is "form". Mathematics as a language is just a projection of forms that exist regardless. These forms, or let's say mathematical facts, are what we are talking about. Cryptography would work the same it does now if all humanity disappeared, and even if we have never existed, it would function the same.

However though, Bitcoin's security depends on scarcity of computing power and some assumptions of human behavior, which is why the claim "Bitcoin is backed by mathematics" is ultimately wrong anyway.

Ingot we trust. ;)

In Crypto We Trust...

http://www.bitmit.net/en/trade/i/289-bitcoin-in-crypto-we-trust-vinyl-sticker

http://www.bitmit.net/en/img/trade_uploads/0d61dadb0e6919d275e0_1319_1_thumb_gal.jpg

Also, if god is a math formula, it would be quite complex... Bitcoin would be fraction him. Therefore, I suspect, Bitcoin would be the penis of God.

While there are physical forms within the human brain that map pretty well to mathematics, there is no direct evidence outside of our minds of the existence of mathematical forms.  We have been pretty successful at predicting the behavior of nature with mathematics, but old theories since disproven successfully predicted a subset of natural behavior as well.

Can you show me how nature uses cryptography outside of humanity?  If it isn't used by nature apart from humans, how can if function at all without humans?

I agree there is more to bitcoin backing than math.  Physics and psychology are certainly involved.

I was reading Applied Cryptography (Schneier) recently about zero knowledge proofs. (It is section 5.1, The zero-knowledge cave - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof).)

Peggy is trying to convince Victor that she knows a magic word in such a way that Victor is utterly convinced (but without telling him the magic word).

It struck me that this is not so far removed from the honest signals males strive to give to females of their species in their mating rictuals. These are (unfakeable) signals of fitness that convince the female of the male's inner motivation/ reproductive fitness.

I am lucky to live right by water and so see lots of bird mating rictuals - swans necking, moorhens diligently making their nests etc. Every species has its own way of convincing their potential mates that they are the real deal.

The female of a species effectively repeatingly challenges the male to prove their fitness. This is pretty similar to Victor repeatedly asking Peggy to prove she knows the magic word.

tl;dr;
It is crypto, not love, that makes the world go round.

Depends on what kind of metaphysics you submit to. For instance, Frege makes a good argument for the existence of numbers. When you really dive into the subject, I actually find it very hard to argue otherwise. (Also, "evidence" is kind of a higher level notion.)

As an example, you won't find anything that would perfectly give you the number pi in nature; however you constantly see things that revolve around it and statistically converge to it. Why pi, if it is only an idea that only exists in our minds?

The truth is, pi is the name we assign to a fact of nature. Its existence is more convincing to me than most other things I accept as existing. I have no reason to believe that the relations inherent to geometric shapes the universe consistently produces happened somehow after humanity's arrival.


I find this question tangential. Does the nature make use of wheels for example? But it is still a fact that round objects rotating on straight surfaces make movement easier where there is a lot of friction, and the ideal round shape for this is the circle. Now, nature could use this fact (probably it does but I don't know enough biology to provide an example) or it might not. Does it change the fact?

You could argue that cryptography is more abstract, and I'd say that nature is making effective use of it through Bitcoin, and the debate won't go anywhere until I spend a few million years travelling through the galaxy to bring you the perfect example outside humanity. Either way, is it more relevant than the mathematical tricks proteins use? If you put a prime number of balls in a basket and send it to space, will aliens be able to divide them equally among themselves without breaking one?

Jim and monvola said my thoughts better than i could. This is really getting interesting.

I believe the OP tried to make the analogy between math and god, and if there is something more fundamental than math, then math isn't god.  Besides, would god 'only' have form and thus 'only' have definition (i.e. limitations, boundaries, etc.)?  This would negate the omnipotence theory...

Sure, they would put them all in a "safe" location and hand out certificates worth # of balls/# of aliens.  If someone ever acquired enough certificates for a whole ball through trade they could cash it in for one of the balls.  Just like gold used to be divided without physical division.

As for the rest of it, I'm satisfied with the answers.  I sometimes just like to throw up positions I don't fully believe just to see how people handle the thought experiment.

Just placed an order for that sticker, I live in country Queensland and its hard to talk with farmers about Bitcoin where most are not PC savvy. At least I can advertise and hopefully get a few who may go home and do a search on Bitcoin.

I think Bitcoin would be God's bellybutton.  ;D