Religion, science and theology, similarity and differences

Abstract

In this short paper I explain why the discovery of the universal machine is a major discovery, totally unexpected, and quite extraordinary. I will explain, as much as possible in layman terms, what meant “theology” in the general sense of the Greeks who invented the theological science, and I will explain why the universal machine has a canonical theology in that sense. Some knowledge of the notion of functions is required. I do not claim any ontological truth. I will make my hypothesis, Mechanism, clear, and all statements that I will assert must be understood as belonging to the consequences of the hypothesis. The hypothesis itself cannot be proved but can be refuted, and so it will appear to be scientific in that sense. I will compare it to the human theologies, but also to human religion, and try to find an explanation of why religions, which are supposed to be “good thing” can sometimes look so bad. Unlike some of my previous paper, I will abandon a bit of rigor for reason of length, clarity, and ease, but everyone is invited to consult my other publications for more rigorous exposition of the basic theory. Any critics or comments are encouraged, cela va de soi! I use the hypothesis of Mechanism, not because I would believe in it, but because it makes possible to translate the problems into mathematical problems and to test the consequences empirically. Nevertheless, I begin to expose the basic theory of computability, so that the reader gets the taste of the “real thing,” before providing a sort of panorama of the machine’s theology, before a loose and succinct application in the human domain.