Home > Philosophy, Religion, Science > A Logical Explanation of God

A Logical Explanation of God

“The idea of God is a pseudo-religious anthropomorphication of an extra-dimensional force of nature.”



y very first blog entry delved into the concept that we live in a very logically structured mechanised universe. My second entry sought to explain the nature of the master of this domain. Now considering all things, neither entry delved any deeper than our common understanding of these things. I say “common”, because those are ideas that anyone, given some careful observation of the world around them, could have derived on their own. The truth of the matter however, is that our understanding of God and the Universe is still a very human one. In the post immediately before this one, I explained that our obsession with love is not much more than our obsession with ourselves. The same can be said of our understanding of God and the Universe. What is really going to blow your mind, is that for the last 10,000+ years of recorded human civilization, we’ve always imposed a human image upon our understanding of our universe. Everyone from the native American Indians who worshipped the great spirit right back to modern day Christians have always worshipped a humanised God. 

What this post is going to do, is to throw everything you think you know and understand about God and our universe out the window – and start with very simple ideas, layering them with progressively more complex ideas, until we have a logical explanation of that concept we collectively refer to as God. Eventually, you will realise that we’re not doing anything different today from those who worshipped forces of nature that they barely understood. Now follow me closely, as this is going to be a very deep mind assault of epic proportions.


Can you imagine “nothing”? Do you know what nothing is? It’s not empty space – since space is something. It’s not a vacuum, since a vacuum is also something. So what really is nothing? The question falls over onto itself, since to question what nothing is, is to insinuate that nothing is something. It is logically fallacious, thus making the very question itself absurd. You cannot ask what nothing is, since nothing cannot be imagined without some reference to something. Therefore, in our attempt to imagine nothing, we will always first imagine something, and then remove that something to create the idea of nothing. That’s how our mind works. That’s how it’s always worked. The truth about nothing is that the human mind cannot conceive of it, since our minds cannot work with without some existential point of reference. Therefore, conceptually speaking, nothing does not, and never did exist – and that is a logically accurate discription because:

  1. The expression “nothing does not exist” defines nothing and simultaneously;
  2. If nothing does not exist, then there was always something…

Confused? The statement “nothing does not exist” has dual meanings which are both accurate at the same time. Quite simply, nothing cannot exist without there being something (since this creates the counterbalance that causes the possibility of nothing to exist). Therefore if something had to exist for nothing to ever have been, then nothing never existed in the first place. There was always something there; something infinite, something persisting, something that kept nothing from ever existing in the first place. This undefined something is the first existential point of reference for the rest of the universe.

A Point

A pointImagine a point. Not a dot, but a point. If you imagine a dot, it defeats the purpose of imagining a point. For even though a dot could be considered a point, a point is not necessarily a dot as a dot takes up space. However, in order to make this easier on your brain cells, you can use a dot for reference purposes. However, in the vast emptiness that once was, the only thing that existed was a point. This point has no mass, no weight, no length, no depth, no breadth – it is just a point. To your understanding, this point might not exist, since as it has none of the qualities that would make it visible to your mind. But it does exist. Your mind’s inability to perceive it will be fixed momentarily. This infinitessimally simple idea of a point is the zeroeth dimension.

A Line

A LineNow imagine a second point, and imagine a line between these two points. Now we have something we can recognise. This line only has length. From the moment you drew a line between the two original points, you added another dimension to the point you imagined in the first place. A point has no physical characteristics. Adding a line to the point, now causes it to enter the first dimension.

A Shape

A closed shapeA line can be lengthened, shortened or even bent into a curve. We can use mathematical equations to describe this line. However, it is ultimately still just a line. A system which is made up of several disconnected lines is still a first dimensional system. That system takes on wholly different attributes when those lines are connected into a closed shape. You can now modify it’s length and breadth on the various sides to produce other shapes. Thus once several lines are connected to produce a closed shape, we enter the second dimension.

An Object

A cubeLet’s say you have a closed square shape. Create a second closed square and connect all the corresponding corners of the second square to the first. Now you have a cube. What you’ve just done is to add depth to your original 2-dimensional object, thus allowing a whole new range of mathematical operations to be performed on it. Objects we see and interact with in everyday life contain these properties. Once we added depth to a conceptually flaw two dimentional object, we automatically move it into the third dimension.

A State

A cuboidImagine that the length of four of the adjacent parallel sides of your cube was extended. Your cube is now a cuboid. However, you are conscious of the fact that your cuboid was once a cube, but now the state of your cube has changed. Subconsciously, we register this as a differential change in state of the cube over time. We know this since we remember our cuboid was once a cube. Since we only exist in the third dimension, we are only able to see the current state of the cube in snapshots of its change to a cuboid. We rely on our memory to recognise the change of state over time. However, there is another dimension in which all of the states of the cube exist in “plain view” and can be seen simultaneously and perpetually. In this dimension, the actual change of cube to cuboid is seen as one elongated object of change in a state of perpetual actuality in which it is neither cube nor cuboid, but every state of cube to cuboid at the same time. This dimension is Time, which is the fourth dimension.

Quantum Possibilities

Imagine that your cube didn’t actually change into a cuboid. Imagine that instead of the length along four of the adjacent parallels changing length, one of the faces of the cube collapsed into a point. Then your cuboid would have turned into a pyramid. This is an alternate timeline from the one in which your cuboid turns into a cube. Theoretical physicists refer to this as a quantum possibility and they exist as a timeline which branched off from the first where both the pyramid and the cuboid started off as a cube. If you built a machine to traverse the fourth dimension and changed the history of the cube so that it became a pyramid instead of a cuboid, you would have “created” a branching alternate timeline. Theoretically, there are an infinite number of branching alternate timelines in which the cube could have become a pyramid, a cuboid, a sphere, a diamond – any shape you can think of. All possible branching timelines exist in the fifth dimension.

Parallel Timelines

What if our three-dimensional object didn’t start as a cube? What if it started as a pyramid and then evolved into a cube? What if it was a sphere first, but lost its infinite number of surface points to become a diamond shape? These changes of state do not have the same starting point, and thus do not belong to the same timelines. These completely alternate timelines do not exist in the same dimension. They each have their own branching timelines where in one a cube becomes a cuboid, in another, a pyramid becomes a cube, and yet another, a cuboid evolves into a cube and so on. So therefore, you cannot travel back in time to change a cube into a pyramid if it was never a cube to begin with. You’d have to travel to a parallel timeline where the three dimensional object was a cube to do that. To travel to a completely parallel timeline, you have to go to a place where all of these completely unrelated, completely parallel timelines, each with their own start states, end states and branching parallels are all collectively visible. This place is the sixth dimension.

Universal Timelines

What if all simple shapes evolved into more and more complex shapes until no shape exists? For example, imagine that all pyramids became cubes, all cubes became cuboids, all cuboids became diamonds, all diamonds evolved into shapes with more and more sides until they became spheres, until all shapes became spheres, then spheres became something else that couldn’t possibly exist until everything ceased to exist? This represents a possible end to a universe where cubes exist. Of course, it could end differently where when all shapes begin as spheres and the process is reversed until they become a point and the universe collapses and ceases to exist. This is another possible ending to the universe of cubes.

In fact, there are an infinite number of possible outcomes to the universe. Some scientists say that the universe will continue to expand until all energy forms become inert, thus bringing about an end and yet others say that all the stars in the universe will eventually nova until the universe is filled with black holes thus collapsing all matter into an infinitely tiny, infinitely dense object. The bottom line is that there are many possible ways that the universe could end. As it exists now, one end has already been predestinated by how the universe began. This is realised through an immense and indeterminately complex chain of cause and effect. If we wanted to view alternate outcomes for the universe, we would have to travel to a place where we could see all the possible timelines for the entire universe, where we could see every possible end for every possible object that could exist in the universe. That place would be the seventh dimension.

Parallel Universes

Alternate Earths?So far we’ve been using the simplistic concept of a cube to explain the different planes of reality. So far we’ve been assuming an entire universe where cubes exist. But what about universes where cubes cannot evolve into pyramids or vice versa? In such a universe, the rules of mathematics are different. In fact, there could possibly be an alternate universe where mathematics doesn’t apply and discreet concepts are irrelevant. In such a universe, a discreet shape such as a cube couldn’t exist, since the fundamental laws of that universe such as physics and mathematics are different. This universe would have started differently from the universe in which cubes exist. Let’s say that the universe where cubes exist started with a big bang while the universe where cubes cannot exist started with silence. These two beginnings represent two different universes with two different laws, two different timelines, and two different sets of possible endings. If we wanted to travel to a universe where only spheres can exist or where cubes cannot exist, we’d have to go to a place where we could see every possible universe. That place would be the eigth dimension.

Time Travel is actually Dimensional Travel

Every dimension above the fourth embodies the idea of a place where alternate or parallel outcomes exist. If you wanted to jump into a flux-capacitor powered DeLorean and travel through time, you’re not actually traversing time as much as you are traversing dimensions. Time is constant. You can’t change it. Changing a timeline means changing the the sequence of cause and effect throughout the entire universe, thus creating an alternate timeline. However, technically speaking, you didn’t actually create an alternate timeline as much as you travelled to one. It only appears that we’ve created an alternate timeline through our time travel because we’re only viewing a snapshot of the current dimension. Every possible timeline from any given object in the universe already exists. However, as three-dimensional objects, we can only see a snapshot of the current state in time. Our memory is what cues us into the reality that time exists since we remember when the state was different. If we were 4-dimensional beings, time would exist to us as a single plane. There would be no past, no present, no future; just a constant expression of simultaneous beginning and end. Neither life nor death exists in the fourth dimension, since both describe a snapshot of a state in the third dimension. Therefore, if we were fourth dimensional beings, we would be eternal and “live” forever.

Examine the popular Science Fiction comedy “Back to the Future“. When Doc Brown and Marty McFly go back in time to stop Biff from preventing his dad from marrying his mother, they’re not such much changing the timeline of the universe they came from as much as they’re simply partaking in the events of an alternate timeline which already existed. The very act of traversing time is a part of a sequence of cause and effect in the dimension above the fourth, which caused the intrepid duo to discover an alternate timeline of the same universe. To do so they would have had to go to a dimension which contained the “visibility” of alternate timelines. This dimension would have be one level higher than the one they’re trying to traverse. This is because the one being traversed only contains a snapshot of the current state of itself while the one above contains every state of the dimension below. Therefore, if Doc Brown and Marty McFly wanted to travel from their 2015 to an alternate 2015 from their current 1985, (both are points in the fourth dimension), they will have to traverse the fifth dimension which contains all possible 2015’s branching off from their 1985 to get to the one they want.

Similarly, if we wanted to travel from a universe that started with a big bang to a universe that started with silence, we will have to travel to one dimension above the eigth dimension, since the eigth dimension contains all of these possible alternate universes with all their possible beginnings, timelines, and endings. This dimension only facilitates travel between alternate universes in the eigth dimension, since the eighth dimension only allows you to exist in only one universe at a time. This place of traversal where all possible universes with all their possible beginnings, timelines, and endings are simultaneously accessible, is the ninth dimension.

Where God sits

The 10th DimensionHeh, now as immensely gargantuan the cognitive task of imagining what I’m trying to present here, there’s actually more. What if you were to imagine all of the possible universes, with all of the possible beginnings, all of the possible timelines and all of the possible outcomes as a single snapshot, or better yet, a point in an even grander system, where else do you go from here? We would have to imagine an alternate plane of reality which is so different from any of the infinite possibilities represented by the ninth dimension. However, no other infinity exists other than the dimension which contains every possible infinity. But that still doesn’t explain the wherewithall of energy. At this level, theoretical physicists have created a concept known as Superstring Theory, based on 10 dimensions which eventually evolved into M-Theory which is based on 11 dimensions. In a nutshell this describes a dimension which is made up of pure energy, vibrating in such a way that it manifests the sub-atomic particles that create the existence of every other possible realm. This dimension of pure superstring energy is described as the tenth and eleventh dimensions.

At this level, we are talking about the existence of a reality that is not a reality – not as we define it anyway. This is a reality which permeates every other dimension, since one rule always remains the same: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed – it merely transforms from one state to another. However, we have conceeded that everything that has a beginning, also has an end. Our universe began, and thus it will end at some point. The energy that creates matter is the same energy that forms universes. When a universe ends, the energy goes back to its source. With the recent confirmation of the existence of anti-matter, we know that when energy moves in between dimensions, it spontaneously (and quite explosively) spawns the creation of a new universe – with an explosive display that starts from a point and quickly expands to the sixth dimension in less than a second. Now if you recall from Genesis 1:2, the Bible asserts that God manifested our universe as a grand display of light. Now if you don’t believe in God, where did this energy come from? While many scientists are effectively agnostic or atheist, they are becoming increasingly confident in the idea that the energy that manifested the universe is:

  1. The creating power of the universe since all matter is made of energy.
  2. The substance of everything that does and could possibly exist.
  3. Everywhere, in every dimension, all the time, everytime.

I found this description to be very intriguing, because that eerily resembles the standard accepted definition of God:

  1. Omnipotent – Having the creating and controlling power of everything
  2. Omniscient – Having the knowledge and the outcome of everything.
  3. Omnipresent – Everywhere, all the time, everytime.

To me, that is absolutely FASCINATING. This is particularly so since scientists discovered that sub atomic particles (eg. electrons) are virtually untraceable. They literally flit in and out of existence in solid matter. This is what eventually led scientists to theoretically discovering a membrane universe that is parallel to and permeates everything that could possibly exist. This particular universe is made up of pure energy and none of the laws of physics we currently understand apply there. Every universe is quite literally an extension, an emanation of this membrane based super-universe. Scientists theorise that when the membranes in this universe extend into each other, it creates a massive explosion of energy that creates a new physical domain with its own laws of physics and mathematics. This means that new universes are probably constantly being created. Big bangs are probably going off all the time – with the same source of energy being the underlying trace for all of them. This supernatural, super-thin, alterate pseudo-reality, is the source of all energy, the source of all matter and all that exists, all that could possibly exist and all that has yet to exist. This source, the first cause, the functional cause, the final cause, where all energy, sentient or otherwise both emanates from, returns to and is the effect of all causes is what we’re actually referring to as God. 


Now that we have a better understanding of what we’re actually dealing with, it is easy to concede that when we refer to “God” and identify God as some kind of humanoid representation, were are actually referring to a force of nature that has the capacity to manifest itself in just one of the infinite number of forms that can be manifested. The universe is one of many such manifestations – along with everything in it. When ancient man worshipped the elements and the forces of nature, they were not doing anything significantly different from what we’re doing today. We too worship a force of nature. We just decided to put a human face and characteristics to it.

The Bible “humanises” the descriptions of God for human reference purposes. Technically God can manifest itself as anything, anyone, any shape, any idea, any way, any how at any time for any reason. Notice how I deliberately sidestepped describing God as manifesting “himself” in favour of using the word “itself”. God is not a person. God is a force of nature. God is nature. Therefore the human attribute of using a pronoun to denote sexual identification doesn’t really apply. It only exists to allow humans to be able to make some reference point of some kind to the entity. I would imagine God only takes on a human form when dealing with humans for ease of relation. If in some parallel universe there is some intelligent biological entity that worships God that is physically different from us, God would manifest itself to them in their form as well – just so that they can relate. The truth is that God is formless.

Technically, this very post cannot truly accurately describe what God really is in entirety. We are still making references to abstract man made ideas that help us to conceive of what God really is. To understand the immensity of the deepness of this paradox, try to imagine explaining the concept of world government to an amoeba. There is simply no point of reference for an amoeba to fully appreciate that idea. God is in the same way to us. When we understand how infinitely insignificant we are as beings lesser than tiny specs of dust in a recursively complex structure of reality that is so impossibly, infinitely, profoundly complex, then we can gain a better appreciation for the complexity of the idea of what God really is.

The science seems pretty hard core – but it does nothing more than collectively work together to prove that:

  1. As much as there is a creation, there is a creator. The universe is an effect of the existence of an entity that transcends the existence of the universe itself. We like to call that entity “God”.
  2. There is life outside of and perhaps parallel to death (not necessarily after – that’s narrowminded sequential thinking). A 10-dimensional universe guarantees that and thus, we have reason to believe in eternal life on some extra-dimensional plane.
  3. The idea of God transcends religion. God was not created by religion. It’s more the other way around. Many religions may have gotten the details wrong, but the concept of God remains.
  4. The circle of life coincides with the first law of thermodynamics that energy merely moves from state to state. Thus when a loved one dies, their lifeforce returns to the source from which it was spawned.
  5. If there are 10 dimensions, which embody every possible permutation of every possible reality, then I’m pretty sure there is an alternate universe out there where beings are made of pure energy, where time has no bearing on life, where there is no suffering, no tears and no dichotomy of good and evil.

Irrespective of Religion, we have to concede on some level that there is more to reality than sticks, stones and death. Science has shown us that we are apart of a near infinite chain of cause and effect. There are no accidents to this simulation. Everything in it has purpose. The universe was never that simple to begin with.


There’s an incredible amount of material that I had covered as sources for this post. Many of these are pretty lengthy exegeses (not unlike this post). However, all that I’ve done is to condense a lot of this material into ideas that are relatively easy to follow – hopefully to the layman. However, in denoting other reference sources, I thought it would defeat the purpose of this post by pointing you to other websites with lots of text to peruse. Instead, I thought it would be more intuitive to scour YouTube for some videos that elegantly explain all of the material that I have posited here in some condensed form. One of these videos I discovered actually touches on the very substance of this post. It explains the concept slightly differently, but the idea is effectively the same. A lot of this delves rather deep into quantum mechanics – but not so deep that you can’t follow. If you enjoyed this post, then I’m pretty sure you’ll enjoy these videos!

The 10 Dimensional Universe:


 BBC Horizon: Parallel Universes (Parts 1 through 5)

The God Theory

  1. Dana
    June 4, 2011 at 4:59 pm

    I loved your explanation of everything until you started to put your own words into a bible sort of form. The problem is that Jesus,the man, claimed himself to be God and be the son of the God in which you described. Th father. My problem is by calling God nature, any sort of matter, or shape, it is lessening the vital importance of God and his desire to have relationship with us. Through the bible he has told us that the reason we were made was to be in relationship with him. In turn, when we worship the creation and not the creator it gives us no hope for anything beyond the here and now. So the 3rd dimension would mean nothing to us. And if we worship everything that god may be in, that also leads to us worshiping ourselves. Makes life really pointless. I mean sure we can be “good” people, but according to whose standards?

    Revelation 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”
    I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
    He says he is the only one. As far as gods are concerned.
    Isaiah 44:6 “This is what the LORD says–Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.

    They fit into your explanations of dimensions. It is amazing how God, Adoni, I AM gave us all the answers we need before all the science began.

  2. March 13, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    Wow, that blew me away. The imagining nothing point, is something that I often use to confuse and defuddle people, so you really had my attention from that point onwards. I have always believed that we cannot concieve of God, in the same way that we cannot concieve of nothing. You make my attempts at writing look like cavemen drawing on walls.

  3. October 16, 2008 at 12:14 pm

    Even though I am not a Muslim, I’ve always thought that Islam’s explanation of God was the best of all existing religions. I actually prefer their definition to the Christian definition, because Islam doesn’t make the mistake of Anthropomorphication (describing non-human things as having human qualities). I think for a while, because of Islam’s terse and scientific approach to these ideas, that this contributed to the rapid growth of Islam during the mid to late 90’s.

  4. Ownification
    October 15, 2008 at 10:28 pm

    Your Blog is very fascinating the least no doubts, I would like to bring the Islamic explanation of God in to this discussion.

    Islam Perceives God as an unimaginable, genderless being, with full control of every event in this universe. (Quran [6:59]) “With Him are the keys of the unseen, the treasures that none knoweth but He. He knoweth whatever there is on the earth and in the sea. Not a LEAF doth fall but with His knowledge: there is not a grain in the darkness (or depths) of the earth, nor anything fresh or dry (green or withered), but is (inscribed) in a record clear (to those who can read).”

    Is Islam’s explanation of God satisfactory the least?

Comment pages
1 6 7 8
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s