Kants moral evidence of existence of God is quite. What is empirical model of pr.Geller (q) Its impossible.

Ivaman, Kaliningrad, Russia

what science proposes is not so much "there is a god" but the possibility to think that "there is no god".

heleen, new york, ny

Humans are very self centred to believe a god created the entire universe and then came and spoke only to a select few races on a planet named earth. Does not add up.

I would say a creator and God are two different things. We ourslves have created beings, not sentient but if you look at our brain it basically runs off tables when a query is put to it, same as a database. I believe in the universe and if that can be described as god so be it. Earth is our mother and the universe is the father - Lets just concentrate on living in harmony with our mother first. If we can show we are not complete animals still, maybe we will get the chance to learn more.

You can not trust religious company's as they stand. Historically they have been about control via a war on terror type aspect. If you are fearful of X, then you will be compliant in certain areas. So i am sorry but anything written by a religous organisation needs to be taken with a grain or 'pillar' of salt.

Love is all we need.

Max, Sydney, Australia

Never fail to be amazed, even awestruck, at the utterly preposterous rubbish that some supposedly educated people believe and say.

Rog, London, UK

i tink there is a god and he proves his existance everyday we however i think we will never be able to proof that god exists until jugdement day.

Katie, Brighton, England

i also love felines of all kinds, and horses, dogs, flowers, etc, I could go on. But I am most inspired by the creator of all thse wonderful things. How amazing is His wisdom and how complex His designs for all mankind to enjoy. Our problems come from all men mesing up this great world that God created. I feel God's presence most days of my life and often come close to tears when I think about His love for us.
I am ruly blessed.

John

john, hamel, us/minnesota

Oh dear, hard enough to agree on God as the sole First Cause. Here I go confounding the issue. Assuming there has always been a God, should it be obvious that He/She/It takes a close interest in the lives of every one of us, processing every prayer or insult to Him, every good and bad deed, organising our weather system, our genes, viruses and so on ? Does He inspire us to be "religious", reveal Himself through a variety of Holy Books? Is He the "Super Monarch Caliph reigning in a special place called Heaven? I am skeptical. Humans are making it all too anthropomorphic. Resembles monarchies of the times holy books were written.

"Time and space are perceptions of our minds" says Eugene in Heidelberg - a point that figures in Sankara, the Indian Yogi's philosophy. So, the material world is there only as long as there is an instrument to observe it. Infra-red eye sees a different universe from a gama-ray eye. Sankara calls this "Non-reality". His philosophy does not posit a God.

Kris iyer, Chennai, India

God proves his existence every single day, just not to the living, I'm afraid if you want proof you will have to wait till the day of your own death, when all will be revealed.

Janette, Tyne & Wear,

i was brought up in 'the church,' and i 'believed' for awhile...but i ALWAYS questioned the beliefs........and i still do. i love science and i like to have things PROVED to me......the short version is i basically neither 'believe' nor 'disbelieve,' because perhaps....anything is possible?

my only conclustion at the age of 50 is that two things in this world i find much comfort in are music and the 36 species of felines.

music is beautiful, and i believe it exists for pleasure.

cats (think lion, tiger, snow leopard, leopard, cheetah, and, yes, the common housecat) are majestic creatures. i have often wondered what their 'purpose' is, and i have finally reached the conclusion that cats exist to inspire awe. their instrinsic beauty exists in their mysteriousness.

i try to enjoy life as best i can and think that kindness and love are values worthy of respect.

that's about all i know.

bd
vicksburg, mississippi,

barbara, vicksburg, usa/mississippi

Congratulations Professor Heller!
You see the truth through the prism of truth, Mathematics.
I hope people read your books and don't reject your conclusions without having read what they're rejecting.

Spiro, Herndon, VA

Jeffrey Stewart, I don't look around and think it happened spontaneously. What has happened (FACT) is that life as we see it now evolved over millions of years.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

God? What God?

Mark, Wolverhampton, U.K

Geoff Read maintains that actually something does come out of nothing, because “a vacuum will spontaneously generate matter by borrowing energy from the future and using it to create particles with mass.”

The physics behind “Borrowing energy from the future” is beyond me Geoff, but the plain meaning of “borrowing” isn’t, “borrowing” not being the same as something coming from nothing, so I maintain that nothing comes out of nothing (latin ‘ex nihilo nihil fit’) and pose the question "why is there something instead of nothing?"

Barry Holroyd, Leeds, England

Alex, London - You're going to have a struggle with evolution then. It doesn't even have the Bible.

Bruce Budd, Pudsey, Leeds, UK

There is no prohibition to prove lack of God's existence by mathematical statements and equations... and maybe get Templeton Prize for that...But for my scientific mind who EXPERIENCED God's existence it is something I will never believe.
How human beings which have so complicated minds, thoughts, emotions, feelings not covered and explained by science could be created due to some 'coincidence' ? The whole world has some purpose and therefore there has to be Someone Who thinks, had some idea and aimed at world's creation. And He has to be OVER, OVER, and OVER everything to manage it!
I believe and have experienced He is Goodness and Love and I am happy to have (I believe everybody has) such creator and carer at the same time :) God bless you all! :)

Ania, Wroclaw, Poland

This is nothing more that retro-fitting the figures until they match and agree with his pre-conceptions.

It is meaningless.

I could mathematically 'prove' there is an invisible pink fluffy unicorn on the roof of my house using his methods.

Is this a theory? No. The predictions? Nowhere.

This is not science but a paraody.

Patrick Walsh, Worthing, West Sussex

There is no prohibition to prove lack of God's existence by mathematical statements and equations... and maybe get Templeton Prize for that...But for my scientific mind who EXPERIENCED God's existence it is something I will never believe.
How human beings which have so complicated minds, thoughts, emotions, feelings not covered and explained by science could be created due to some 'coincidence' ? The whole world has some purpose and therefore there has to be Someone Who thinks, had some idea and aimed at world's creation. And He has to be OVER, OVER, and OVER everything to manage it!
I believe and have experienced He is Goodness and Love and I am happy to have (I believe everybody has) such creator and carer at the same time :) God bless you all! :)

Ania, Wrocław, Poland

To Joe Smith, London, UK - A little scientific knowledge is a clearly a dangerous thing. Occam’s razor says that you should make as few assumptions as possible. Essentially, the simplest explanation prevails. But as always, care needs to be used in applying theorems. We need to know what the simplest explanation is. Vaguely derogatory remarks regarding the existence of pink unicorns and the like are not at all illuminating. If I were to ask myself “do pink unicorns exist in my garden?” I would happily apply Occam’s razor and conclude that it was most likely not the case. But what if I was to ask myself “do pink unicorns exists somewhere in some universe at some point in time?” Would it the application of Occam’s razor be justified? I do not think so.

Richard, London,

Heh, here my word about this:
GOD can not be validate through mathematics only! This essential problem of our existence, requires the entire pure logic that mankind can perform! You will certain not belief in GOD existence, if you are a believer.
Indeed, what we call GOD, exists! You can even feel it! He is always present in the moment of death, as a gentle wind, barely significant, seeking the reason of death. Yes, the reason. This, because the ONLY sin that we are capable of, is TO KILL POINTLESS! The most important LAW of what we know about (universe, life, etc), is the ANTAGONISTIC law, or BINARY law (if you are a math addicted, as our parson that we are talking about). Everything we know comes from this simple rule. Chinese philosophers revealed this, thousands of years ago. In my opinion, it is time to reconsider what we have been taught all along.

sorinul, bucharest, romania

To Clive, Surrey
"worshipped the Sun as a God, as it was not understood. Now it's just a star"
- in 4 dimensions, yes, but what is it in 10? Do you know?

"thought the Earth was flat.. Now we know it's spherical"
- in 3 dimesnions yes, but ditto.

"So it goes, each mis-understanding resolved by testable knowlege. So it will be with God(s)"
- that is pure speculation, not science.

To Jeremy, New Zealand
- I have read the God Delusion (twice). It does not explain anything. It is just a rant. Frankly, I am sick of people citing this text as prima facia evidence. It is nothing of the sort. There is no science at all in that text.

"As there is no evidence for God as of yet, it is as logical to say he doesn't exist as to say fairies don't exist."
- er, no, actually, that is not at all logical

"We may never know what caused the universe to exist, but is better to accept our ignorance than to make up the answer."
-The big-bang theory is, as yet, a made up answer.

Richard, London,

I thought the answer was 42. Please send the dosh a.s.a.p. thanks.

Iain Rae, Tunbridge Wells, U.K.

God is, was, and will be. As far as cold hard evidence, simplicity should enlighten you. Look around you. Do you actually think you and everything around yourself just happened spontaneously? It is hard for me to understand how anyone could need more proof that God exists. Are some people really just too smart for their own good?. It is so obvious to me that they definitely are and there phd is absolutely useless for them and definitely useless to society if they are affecting someone else's belief with there tiny brain.

Jeffrey Stewart, Rockingham, USA/NC

Those of us who know God, and the affect he has on our lives, do not need mathematical proof of His existence. We just know.

Bryan, Crewkerne, Somerset

My respect and admiration for Ricard Dawkins grows stronger.............

Esther, London, UK

If i didn't believe in God, I would kill myself rather than live in this absurd, cruel, pointless world.

Mark, Castle Rock, USA/CO

Do you believe a tornado could assemble a 747? If not, how could you possibly believe a big bang could assemble creation without a Creator with a plan and purpose? There may have been a big bang when God created the universe.... I'll ask Him when I see Him face to face.
FACT is, you don't have to accept love, joy, peace, patience, kindness goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control from the Creator of the universe, but you can.
If everyone accepted those gifts, what a wonderful world we would have.

Julia, Yukon, ok

Like all Professor Michael Heller's theories, this one starts from the premise "There is a God therefore everything else must be modified to support that FACT and not allow it to be considered a conjecture". From such a starting point of course one can "prove" anything ... it's the philosophical equivalent of dividing by zero in mathematics. You won't see many mathematicians peer-revieving his stuff. He lives, moves, works, and has his duplicitous being in a hothouse of the Catholic propaganda machine (The Pontifical Academy of Theology in Cracow) which is anything but scientific in outlook. In a word, drivel. Nice little earner though.

Sean, Coventry, UK

I think it's best to leave the scientific method to the pursuit of science. God will never be proven or discovered in the laboratory or in a test tube. The existence of God must be ascertained by other means than what science can provide through experiment and observation.

Perhaps paraphrasing of the words of Paul is appropriate here. "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him... Even so the things of God knoweth no man but the spirit of God...for the things of God are foolish to him, neither can he know them for they are spiritually discerned..."

Shayne, West Point,

Once again something written 2000 years ago is proven true, despite the collective genius of the so-called "scientific" community:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things."- Romans 1:18-23

Evan, Eau Claire, USA/WI

Lil from Orangeburg said: "At least everyone should admit that there being a creator is a possibility as well as there not being one. Just to be truly unbiased".

It's also a possibility that a giant (but invisible) green marshmallow is floating in the sky above the Statue of Liberty.

Everyone would admit, if asked, that this is a possibility. Unfortunately it is nowhere near as credible to believe in the Giant Green Marshmallow as it is to believe that no such marshmallow exists. The same argument stands against belief in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Russell's celestial teapot.

It also stands against belief in a creator.

See Occam's Razor for a more erudite explanation.

Joe Smith, London, UK

I suggest you read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, it might explain just why it is more logical to assume that God does not exist. Just think, why does God get to scapegoat the question of his origin, what is so much more probable about God existing forever than the universe existing forever? To say God is an explanation for the universes creation just delays the question. Rather than just say "God did it" we should be trying to find out the truth. Scientists are trying to find an answer whilst theologins have just made one up. As there is no evidence for God as of yet, it is as logical to say he doesn't exist as to say fairies don't exist.

We may never know what caused the universe to exist, but is better to accept our ignorance than to make up the answer. Besides, all Atheists are really agnostics, but we know that the chances that god exists are so low we might as well assume he doesn't until some hard evidence appears.

jeremy, New Zealand,

This is a very misleading article. Nowhere in it does it mention what the Templeton Organisation is. That information is vital to a non-biased reading of what the "world's richest academic prize" is. (another, I strongly assume, misleading description).

It is the equivalent of "Creationist Museum awards scientist with £1m for proving Noah's flood could have happened."

Please present the facts in less distorted way next time.

Ciro, Madrid, Spain

"God" is a concept humanity has created. The ultimate and infinite reality is the NOW: the present moment. It has always been the present and will always be the present. Time is also a concept. Time does not exist except as concept. The secret is realizing that "You" , that deep sense of being, teh "I AM" within each of us, is the All!

Religion and science will eventually disappear, along with all manifestations of matter and energy but it will always still be just NOW!

mark, woodbridge, USA / New Jersey

Oh dear, oh dear, what muddled thoughts we have here

"To believe the universe and all its diversitys,are accidental..is absurd...colin johnson, Glasgow"

No, Colin, that's your assumption.

"I was a complete atheist untill one day i decided to LOOK for the proof. ..Daniel, Bristol, UK"

No, Daniel, you decided to look at things and take them to be "proof"

"The trouble is we don't WANT to believe in God...Chris, UK"

Personally Chris, I want to believe in Santa Claus bringing me a Ferrari for Christmas, but that doesn't make it true, just wishful thinking.

Look at the history of mankind

-worshipped the Sun as a God, as it was not understood. Now it's just a star.

-thought the Earth was flat, as it was not understood. Now we know it's (kinda) spherical

-thought the Labour party were left of centre. Now we know they're just to the right of Putin.

So it goes, each mis-understanding resolved by testable knowlege. So it will be with God(s)

Clive, Surrey,

'...can offer circumstantial evidence' - clear proof that religious idiocy knows no bounds, in its desperate efforts to 'prove' the validity of an oppressive fairytale, then!

Mike, Cowbridge, Wales

God appeared to me this afternoon and said 'The Templeton Foundation is a great force for good in the world'. Please can I have a cheque for £820,000 within seven days? Pilgrims who wish to to visit the holy place where God appeared to me will need to wait a couple of weeks until I've got the gift shop and tea rooms built. Credit Cards will be accepted.

eric campbell, harrogate, uk

Ro, London says ...
"gross ignorance and folly to say that there is no GOD."

I guess you must be a religious person to be able to so easily dismiss everybody who would disagree with you. You succinctly prove how foolish is this man-fantasy of gods.

Ian, Edinburg, Scotland

i believe in god as it happens...but if they are arguing that is something has a beginning, it must have a creator,... the creator must have had beginning, so where did he come from?

Julia K P, wirral, wirral

I believe Felix

Colin, Truro, UK

Even if there would have been a beginning of some kind for our universe, I can't see at all how this knowledge would support the notion of the vile being as described in the Bible, Koran, and the primitive ideology that goes along with it. These are two completely different things.

Matt, Berlin, Germany

Read Romans 1:28.

Eric, OC, CA / USA

I think narrow mindedness is a problem for both sides of this issue, and will lead to folly in any case. To say that God doesn't exist because the theories that I believe in say it isn't so is just as narrow a view as the christian's. BTW scientific theory is turned on it's head quite often with new facts. Science will never prove the nonexistance of God, so what is the point in that? I think that prophecy is very strong evidence that God or something beyond our understanding has been at work. Why has science left that one alone? Most people have madeup minds on this and some have made rediculous statements for one side or the other that prove nothing more than ignorance. I love science and God. I have no problem accepting scientific facts, only some of the theories. Facts are grouped and interpretted to form theories. Theories establish nothing.

We're all biased one way or the other.
The real question one must ask is "Which bias is the best bias to be bias by?"

mike, seattle,

I'm 77 and have been agnostic all my life, even when I was a child. Professor Heller's theory of a creator, however, is much more persuasive than the belief that our universe came from nothing An ealier letter posted on this site states that energy could have been borrowed from the future to give the big bang a kick start. What the writer does not explain is that there was no future to borrow from. Time did not exist, past or future. Space did not exist. To me the idea that our universe gave birth to itself from nothing to become the vastness we see today is harder to swallow than Professor Heller's speculation that it was created by a God.

Taffy , Warrington,

Rob Shef....I dont have control of anything and neither does many other millions of believers.
Just because humans made a mess of religion as we make a mess of everything due to corrupt flesh we live in full of grred and a lust for power doesnt disprove the existence of God.
I believe in God.....cant prove it to you but i believe in God
You dont but cant prove it either..why is science so emotionally charged with disproving ...they are starting to behave like medeival
priests! Seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened.
Open you mind but more importantly your heart and God will reveal Himself to you.

Paul H, epping, uk

There appears to be a consensus from a lot of people commenting here that the existence of God cannot be 'proven'. Unfortunately, it also appears they don't have a good enough grasp of the epsitemology of what 'proof' entails. There are roughly three types of truth: analytic (derived via logic from axioms) synthetic (derived empirically) and testimony (believing something somebody else tells you). All three forms are valid and all different. Most people seem to wish for God's existence to be 'proven' or not in the first two realms- which is a non-starter: if God exists he must transcend logic and is not readily testable. Therefore any reason for God's existence is usually reliant on the third. As such it is not proveable in the manner people might wish and is instead reliant on trust. Whether people choose to trust in God or not is a matter of their own, but since this lies outside analytic and synthetic propositions it cannot be directly challenged scientifically in this way.

Stuart, Cambridge,

We may be involved a semantic argument here. When we say that God exists what do we mean? Do we mean that God has a physical presence or do we mean that God is a concept? Either way we can legitimately claim that God exists. If God has a physical presence then it is possible that science will ultimately find it. If on the other hand God exists a concept (a meme in Dawkins terms) then our chances of finding a concrete demonstration of His existence are much less. This also gives rise to interesting side issues. Is my concept of God exactly the same as yours? Or, is God a personal creation? Does the Bible contain universal truths, or do we turn them into our own needs? Is it necessary for Mr. Pickwick to exist, in order to get some benefit or enjoyment from the Pickwick papers? I think that we have to spend some time carefully defining each word that we use in our discussion of these matters. Mathematics might reveal underlying patterns in our knowledge,.

Bob Gibson, New York, USA

There definitely aren't any "misunderstandings" between science and religion. Each openly requires the annihilation of the other. In the left corner, Science, the immovable, undeniable bedrock of human knowledge and welfare. In the right corner, Religion, the unceasing, unquenchable, pit-bull of oppression. Let's get ready to rumble! (By the way, religion wins big-time. Science is actually beaten to death in the third round... should never have laced-up in the first place).

chris Pyne, halethorpe, MD

Aah, Templeton. Stopped reading after that, checked back, and realised I should not have doubted my initial decision.

Telling that this falls under the 'faith' section. If his findings were that revelatory I would not have had to look under the 'most curious' category.

What a waste of another obviously intelligent mind.

mat, berlin,

Barry Holroyd asks:

"Something doesn't come out of nothing does it?"

Well yes, actually it does, quantum theory shows that a vacuum will spontaneously generate matter by borrowing energy from the future and using it to create particles with mass. A given volume of 'empty' space at the quantum scale, 'prefers' to contain something rather than nothing. Experiments show that the odds are 60/40 in favour of this spontaneous matter creation.

Paul from Damascus, says:

"Ahh the classic if you are religious then you just accept things but if you are an atheist then you have studied all areas of science..."

Actually, there's a process called 'peer review'. Look it up. I trust it, I don't need a degree to understand it. It frustrates the hell out of creationists and IDers, but there you are, its designed to root out bad science, and it usually does.

Geoff Read, Southampton, UK

The comments on pages like these are often of the form science versus theism; as if there is some form of consensus within the scientific community that a god does not exist. Of course, there is nothing of the sort. A great many scientists are deeply religious and a true scientist is open minded and would not come to honestly come to the conclusion that something does not exist just because it has not been shown that it does.

Richard, London,

This should be more frightening than satisfying to fundamentalists. There's no sanction here for a *particular* god, much less a personal one. A question like, "what if there is a creator---and it's alien or some kind of menace?" doesn't count among the speculations.

Angie, Dallas,

He's missed a simple but subtle point: If the universe has a creator, then that creator needs a creator, and his creator needs a creator, etc. Unless of course, we stop at just one creator, who "just is".

Christopher Mitcins, London, UK

All the pro-religious statements in these comments, and the statements made by the professor himself, and the article, presuppose the existence of god. This is a corruption of science. Various sides are throwing around the phrase "open-minded", but true open-mindedness comes from having NO presuppositions. It is open minded to start from the premise that there might or might not be a god, then to prove, or find proper evidence for, the existence of god. If you cannot, then the proper scientific (and open-minded) position is to either dismiss the existence of god, or to count it as irrelevant to the subject in hand. This is the position taken by most scientists - that god is irrelevant to cosmology, physics, beginnings, life, humans - because there has never been any evidence that god exists.

The suggestion in the article that a "link" has been found only goes to demonstrate that the writer is biased. You can only find god in this research if you put him there yourself.

Steve, Altrincham,

One of the main purposes of the Templeton Foundation is to promote religion. You make it sound like he got a Nobel Prize.

paul newbold, sheffield, UK

It does gross ignorance and folly to say that there is no GOD. We don't need science to prove HE exists. HE may be misrepresented but does HE exist and did HE create what we see and do not see? Without a doubt, YES!

Ro, London,

Here's an alternate theory: the entirety of space and time is composed of a vast number of spheres, which are fruit-flavoured. A load of fruity balls. You must be open-minded and admit that this is also a possibility.

_Felix, Nottingham,

I don't think that proving God exists beyond a shadow of a doubt is something that science can ever do. The purpose of this research should be to prove that God can exist not that He does. That is why creationism is a theory, so is evolution and the big bang. They do not prove that the world started with a big bang or even with God saying, "Let there be light", but that both are possibilities. I think the comments posted on this page are further proof that science cannot prove the existence of God to anyone. You either believe He is or you don't. At least everyone should admit that there being a creator is a possibility as well as there not being one. Just to be truly unbiased. *Smile, today is full of possibilities*

Lil, Orangeburg, SC, USA

Yet again religion grasping at any straws it can. Its truly pathetic.

"His theories do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us."

There's nout like cold hard facts. Period.

Come back with proof of something (anything in fact), rather than yet more attempts to undermine scietific theory and hold onto what little control you have left.

Rob, Sheff,

Science and theology..two paths merging into one..the search for creation..the creator..what came before something..nothing what is nothing..it is just space methinks..without beginning or end..for creation needs space to exist..definition of the creator..I am all things seen and unseen..I have no beginning and no end..not my words..
Scientists, maybe not all ,believe the universe sprang into being from nothing..physics explains you get nothing from nothing..so this theory flys in the face of logic..no?..
And then all the complexitys of the universe sprang into being..planets, suns, seas ,life, Intelligence..and all this is an accident..that is some theory..To believe the universe and all its diversitys,are accidental..is absurd..and only blind Intellectual arrogance would countenance this..the same peoples in the past that told us ..we have the facts to prove our arguments.. told us man could not fly..man would not leave earth..etc..etc..arguments is all they have..

colin johnson, Glasgow,

If God wanted to prove that he exists he would have done so by now. If he had done this we would all believe in him, not because we wanted to but because we had to.

God has always given mankind free will. The books of the new testament talk much of faith, and that faith is important to God. God wants us to believe in him, to desire holiness, to hate sin, to love everyone, and to confirm that we cannot be holy unless we come to the Father through Jesus the son.

We have Biblical prophecies that are coming to pass, and still we brush them aside. The trouble is we don't WANT to believe in God.

Chris, UK,

To those who do not believe in God, but are open to knowledge, please go to http://www.conversiondiary.com/

Julie, Cedar Springs, MI/USA

Yet another attempt at religion to hold society under their dogmatic grasps. It humours me though, that if he was a freind of the late Pope John Paul the 2nd he would know of his words to Stephen Hawking- "it is great for young men to chase knowledge of the universe around us... but it is not too try and explain what happened before it."

Uniting science and religion is a no hoper... science will always strive to argue and disprove itself for a better understanding of the world and universe around us. Religion will always try to disprove anything that threatens words laid down thousands of years ago and revised for the needs of government and the corrupt.

This is another attempt to bring mankind back to the dark ages due to the lonely and scared who have to believe in another life or world to take away whatever fear they have that most of us have gotten past.

Nick, Coventry,

As for PROOF as some people are asking for.....

I would say they is no scientific EVIDENCE that would be acceptable in court. But i would suggest that the proof is everywhere to be seen clearly. If only you open you mind and heart to it. I was a complete atheist untill one day i decided to LOOK for the proof. I asked and made my peace with what ever was outhere (if anything). I spoke my reasons for my current theories on the world and i accepted that i was completely justyfied to feel the way i felt. Then I kept my awareness open....

Daniel, Bristol, UK

All this article and its numerous supporting comments have demonstrated to me is that some people will believe anything if it means they don't have to think or criticise themselves.

The question "why is there something rather than nothing?" isn't even a meaningful question. It has no answer and doesn't need one, it isn't suppoed to inform or enlighten, it's just a weaselly insertion of the concept that nothingness is somehow a more appropriate default state than somethingness, that somethingness *needs help*. Why should this be so, hmmm?

SM, Edinburgh,

It all becomes very clear when you relise that the Templeton Award is not for Science or Maths per se but for supporting a religious doctrine through the corruption or obfuscation of science

Owen Biggs, London, England

"if the obvious question "who created god?" has a circular response, why do we need god?"

sorry if i was unclear, i was trying to say that "who created God" is not the "obvious question" if whatever preceded the univerese (God or whatever) is outside the space and time. Hard to think about but time and space started with the big bang, which came out of a true nothingness. Then there is no need for him to be created because being outside of time the need for creation of God no longer applies.

"a god who asks us to have faith, but would allow us to prove his existence, is a non-starter."

Well this isnt what the Christian God says. The bible says Jesus (a historical figure that can be studied, considered etc) "is the image of the invisvible God" So the Bible calls for us to look at the historical figure of Jesus as our first port of call in understanding/ proving his existence.

"chances of a god as understood by religion equals zero" why?

Paul, Damascus,

Mohammed from London

Your brain teaser is made even more interesting by the mathematics at a quantum and universal scale. At a quantum scale, smaller than the atom, an observer would be unable to distinguish his observations from those made at a cosmological scale (R and 1/R produce equivalency). So God really does hold the universe in his hand (mathematically speaking).

Peter, London,

"Without the mind, there is no time or space."
welcome to the matrix.
our unitary understanding of time is man made i.e. hours, minutres. things taking place in the past and things taking place now and it the future is the way the universe operates. the battle of hastings did not happen in 1066 in my mind, it took place a period of time before the current nowness is occuring. the amount of time (units of time etc) it was preceding my nowness is arbitary. "time" has progressed since then. not just in an abstract way but in a reality that is the same with the physical realities of the universe. unless there is no spoon?

Paul, Damascus,

As an engineer I would be more inclined to believe in a god if some quantitative proof can be produced, rather than reliance on superstitions, faith and belief.

If Prof. Heller can achieve this then he will accomplish the unification of science and religion, surely an achievement of even greater significance to the human race in general than the unification of quantum mechanics and relativity?

Ben Garside, Loughborough, Leics

Templeton Prize - that says all I need to know about the quality of Prof Heller's work. When he gets awarded a prize from a recognised institution that isn't totally biased and dishonest, then I might think it worthwhile to read what his work actually says, in the meantime I'll not be wasting my time.

If Conservative Central Office awarded a prize to someone who "proved" Labout was wrong on something, or McDonalds awarded a prize to someone who "proved" that BurgerKing weren't very nice, would you set much store by the supposed proof?

Mark Allen, Nottingham,

Ron, Milton Keynes. "We have free will to believe or not. It is our choice, given by God". As an atheist I have free will. Religions do not. If you have free will to disbelieve, then you don't belong to the religion as you 'have' to believe. I know that things exist, because I trust my senses, not because something, or somebody, tells me that it is so.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

Time, my dear friends, does not exist as an entity per se. It has no objective value. It is merely, along with space, an intimate sense of perception, somewhat like sight and hearing. The time-space continuum is the webbing, the underlying structure, upon which our understanding can weave out reality for us. Without the mind, there is no time or space.

eugene, heidelberg, germany

"So long as the Universe had a beginning, we can suppose it had a creator, he says."

On what grounds?

"Professor Heller argues against the Newtonian concept of creation, that is, against the idea of an absolute space and an absolute time"

Which is what Einstein proved a century ago.

Paul, Reading, UK

once you introduce the concepts of time and space, it's hard to understand what is meant by anything the can exist or occur outside of time and space. the idea of time beginning doesn't really make sense . however, even if we can get our heads round the idea that there might be something going on we can't really explain or understand, it's hard to see how any of this points to a creator or a divine entity. if the obvious question "who created god?" has a circular response, why do we need god?

in any case, even if we might suggest there is evidence of a god (whether through logic that you have not fully explained here... not surprisingly in view of the complexity... or intuition), I think it is fair to say that the chances of there being a god as understood by our major religions is, as close as we can estimate.... er.... zero.


a god who asks us to have faith, but would allow us to prove his existence, is a non-starter.

jem, london, uk

"I really cannot go into the mind of religious people, who throw in a theory and accept it a priori just because it justifies their astoundingly baseless beliefs....."

Ahh the classic if you are religious then you just accept things but if you are an atheist then you have studied all areas of science/ philosohpy and metaphysics because you never ever accept an argument on face value without doing your own personal research on these issues. you must have several degrees under your belt.

"Who created the Creator?'. If, as Christians believe, Creators are not created, but simply are, then presumably this argument can also apply to the universe itself, thus doing away with the need for a Creator in the first place"

well the universe, according to scientist is finite so the universe needs to have a start point, which we believe is the big bang. and the big bang created space and time, so whatever cause would be outside time and space, like religious people believe.

Paul, Damascus,

I wish I was a true believer. I wish more youngsters were believers too. With a contemporary religion (call it what you like) based on equality and love, we would have far greater morale values, reason, respect and dignity. Unfortunately I'm not a believer, so can not preach to young people about religion, but if you are, please do.

TV, Preston, UK

This is still a matter of faith no matter how metaphysical ones treatise.It is difficult for those of us who begin without faith to accept the existance of a benign creator, seeing the suffering of the creatures who we are told were created in His image.
The universe may well be an act of creation and we may gain an insight to the mathematical rules but it will not get us to purpose, nor past the farytail trimmings of heaven and hell, nor the need to worship the sky.
The nearer we get to understanding the sizzle of energy that is our reality the nearer it may take us to an act of creation, but no nearer to a loving Father.

robert everitt, wolverhampton,

Oh heck what do I do since am hopeless at maths !
Sorry this is but another quirky gimmick .... Free choice is a wonderful thing Let's leave it at that + Tolerance . May seem simple but sure is good .....Err no I dont expect a prize for my theory as it is good old common sense

anna nym, Berlin ,

Imagine if the size of our Universe as being the size of one atom (as we know it) and that one atom (Universe) is part of God relative to one single atom in our existing Universe.

Just a brain twister.

Mohammed, London, UK

Is Heller anything more than an ordinary theoretical physicist who happens to be working in the field of non-commutative geometry? Why didn't Alain Connes get the Templeton Prize?

Julian, London, UK

Anything that " may provide circumstantial evidence " isn't really evidence for anything .

Personally , I am more impressed with Stephen Frys (QI) use of maths to find the root of all evil . The answer being 25.806876 .

Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,

To Barry Holroyd. Many thanks for trying to help me understand God. As an ex-choir boy in the Catholic church I like very much if someone can do me the greatest favour and demonstrate the existence of the Spiritual world.
A fellow academic used to say to his best friends that if they go the other side first then he wants a favour from them. "Come back and show me that the Spiritual World EXISTS...but do it during daytime! ".
Many things in Physics are beyond normal human feelings. How many of us know that everyday we travel through the solar system at about 20 miles a sec and we think we at rest in the universe?
Newton studied the shape of a body that will have the minimum air resistance under the assumption that Resistance is square of speed which turns out to be correct for supersonic flight. Guess what ?..mathematically you can prove that the body must have a vertical blunt nose.

B S Goh, Sydney, Australia

I really cannot go into the mind of religious people, who throw in a theory and accept it a priori just because it justifies their astoundingly baseless beliefs.....

I would certainly hold more respect for religious people if they had just accepted the fact that the there is no fact for what they believe.

Instead they pose these pretentious ''awards'' to ''enlightened'' scientsists to gain the most support they possibly can, maybe to persuade themselves as well I think.........

Alex, London,

The Templeton Prize is the world's most costly joke.

Money without purpose or thought.

John Chuckman, toronto, Canada

We have free will to believe or not. It is our choice, given by God. He also tells us to question our faith at every opportunity, to not blindly follow. Heller is doing just that. How do I know anything exists? Maybe everything I see, exists only in my imagination, or perhaps I am just the result of someone else's imagination. Are we the result of some long forgotten experiment, discarded at the back Gods laboratory? Whatever the truth, as a Christian, I will continue to believe in God, because without Him, what is there? He is personal to me. Churches and religions around the world claim they represent thier gods as a way of controlling thier followers. Thats where religion gets a bad name. Accept Him as personal, question the religious leaders and concepts, read, research and make up your own mind. Does God exist? He does for me, because I believe without scientific 'proof'. Having faith is all about beleiving without proof, it is about unconditional trust!

Ron, Milton Keynes, Bucks

I was taught by Professor (now Reverend) Polkinghorne towards the end of his teaching career. I hesitate to put words in his mouth, but at least he seems to have understood the pretty fundamental point that a man cannot serve two masters....

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

At least something about his actual theory would have been useful!

Mike, Hertfordshire, ENgland

The Nobel prize is for achievement, the award that has been given here is adjusted to be greater in value than the Nobel prize. The Church is just paying for somebody to come up with a baseless theory to support their religion. Are commentators not normally wary of research that is paid for by the recipient of the research, or does all criticism fall by the wayside when the Church is involved?

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

By invoking the notion of a 'Creator' you immediately have to invoke the question 'Who created the Creator?'. If, as Christians believe, Creators are not created, but simply are, then presumably this argument can also apply to the universe itself, thus doing away with the need for a Creator in the first place.

Fred, Bristol, UK

To BS Goh

But what exactly was it that went bang? Something doesn't come out of nothing does it? and I find it takes very much less faith to believe that Somebody brought something out of nothing, rather than believing that nothing brought something out of nothing, and yes, I do believe that when "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," He did so with a great Big Bang and not a whimper.

Barry Holroyd
Leeds, England

Barry Holroyd, Leeds, England

Give me one good reason for believing that any of the thousands of gods invented are personal benevolent and merciful!

Derek, Lewes, UK

But what exactly is the maths link to God - I don't find this article really tells me anything at all but is annoyingly vague. It does no favours to Prof. Heller and his work - if anything it gives the impression that his ideas are insubstantial!

Fi, Midlands, UK

"The theories of Professor Michael Heller do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us"

So? there are a lot of theories that question our beliefs about the physical world, without invoking any religious doctrine as supporting factors.

Glenn, Wales,

Heller's very brilliant and advanced mathematics can be viewed as a way to TRY to unify Einstein's General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. It must be noted that this "Holy Grail of Physics" still remains to be accomplished. Let us not forget that Einstein for most of his working life was looking for a unified theory of the universe. Interested readers can get a sample copy of Heller's research at: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9702047. Heller deserves congratualations for his achievements. However it is a big step from Physics to argue that the existence of a beginning to the Universe implies the existence of God. The Big Bang theory on the creation of the Universe independently establishes a begining to the Universe and ?????

B S Goh, Sydney, Australia

This reminds me of that book freakeconomics, immensely entertaining but ultimately without any substance

WF, Hong Kong,

A very disappointing article.
Instead of reading about the man's life I would have liked to learn more about the man's theory's. Are you very religious yourself Ruth? Because like most religious people you don't explain anything! You just seem to take things for granted.

Joris, Woerden, The Netherlands

Time does not exist, there is only now. Time was invented by mankind in order to avoid chaos.

roger sykes, christchurch,

Congratulations to him....

We think we know everything because we have proved how many aspects of our world exist and interact. But we deffinately don't know everything. And only an arogant fool beleives we do. If you don't have an open mind to your own knoledge then you are nothing more than a "the world is flat." Its funny how men of science (of which i am one, Civil engineer). Seem to discount even the possibility of god just because we have found some of the rules that govern us. I beleive there could be much more to be discovered.....

Daniel, Bristol, Britain

Sorry what has he done?? an equation that ........... proves ???

Ben Andrews, Brisbane, Queensland

This is nothing short of a debasement of science.

Andrew Milner, Yokohama, Japan

"The Templeton Foundation". Is any comment necessary?
The All Souls of religious sophistry

RJW, Brisbane,