Friedrich Nietzsche [pictured] caused a considerable stir in 1882 when he pronounced (via his book Die fröhliche Wissenschaft) that “God is dead”. Since then, a great number of philosophers and theologians have analysed his provocative statement – but not all that many mathematicians. One exception is Changsoo Shin who is a professor at the Department of Energy Systems Engineering and faculty member of the SNU Geophysical Prospecting Lab at Seoul National University, South Korea. He turns to Heaviside step functions for answers :
“The paper argues that the ultra-unconscious being (God or a supernatural being) can be expressed using the infinite recursive Heaviside step function, and assumes it as the God’s potential. The sumption [sic] is that differentiation of the potential with respect to time is the process of becoming conscious, and in a world where only time exists, the energy produced thereafter became a highly dense Cosmic Egg.”
And with regard to the death (or otherwise) of God :
“It seems, however, that God did not go through another process of becoming conscious since the birth of the universe. An enormous amount of energy would have been produced if there was another unconscious-to-conscious transforming process, and the universe would have collapsed. In this sense, Friedrich Nietzsche’s famous statement that the God is dead might hold some truth. God created the universe, but did not further work on it.”
Bonus: God Is Dead? By Black Sabbath
*Note: Not everyone is in agreement regarding the academic standing of the International Education & Research Journal, appearing, as it does, on Jeffrey Beall’s list of “potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access journals”
Coming soon: The professor investigates why each person has different thoughts in a particular situation, and uses Heaviside step functions to explain remembering and forgetting.
BONUS: Caitlin Miller’s report “The Mustache that Went to America: Comparing and Contrasting Friedrich Nietzsche’s and John Dewey’s Concept of the Individual as a Formative Base for the Social Collective and the Political State.”