COSMOS: WHY A FINE-TUNED UNIVERSE?
The universe exists and plays host to a wide variety of those laws, principles and relationships (LPR) of physics. These LPR of physics make it such that the universe exists in the ways and manners we observe. We observe the universe because we too exist (as a representation of life and thus of biology in general). If many of those LPR of physics were slightly different we wouldn’t be here to observe the universe and tell the tale. The question is why this is so. Why do the LPR of physics make us so? The typical answers are: 1) Mother Nature or supernatural deities had no wriggle room. There can be one and only one set of LPR of physics. 2) Supernatural deities (or God if you will) picked and chose those specific LPR of physics from the set of all possible LPR that would allow for Him to have little biological playmates He could torture with universal floods, ten plagues, and 40 year treks in the wilderness along with other disasters before casting them all into Hell. (This is what is referred to in the trade as a “loving God”). 3) All the possible LPR of physics get an equal opportunity and their moment in the ‘sun’ – one set of LPR per universe. The resulting Multiverse, through sheer brute force, statistical probability produces at least one bio-friendly universe and it happens to be ours for obvious reasons although there could be other bio-friendly universes too as well as well as numerous universes that are sterile. Each explanation has sparked lots of debate and each is flawed and relatively unsatisfactory.
I have a variation on explanation number two, equally debatable and unsatisfactory but vastly more probable. It goes something like this. Replace an infallible supernatural deity (like God) with a fallible, mortal, ‘flesh-and-blood’ being, probably a human, maybe an extraterrestrial, who has programmed and thus created a Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe starring ourselves and all the other life forms as simulated beings. Let’s call this entity the Supreme Programmer. Just as human software programmers when creating Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universes – video games – ensure their software is fine-tuned to allow their virtual characters to do the various things required of them in order to make the ‘game’ a viable and logical experience for the players (and virtual participants too), so too would our Supreme Programmer fine-tune their software to allow all of us (and other terrestrial life forms) to exist in a viable and logical way.
COSMOS: COULD OUR UNIVERSE BE A FAKE?
I find the Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe concept quite compelling because: 1) It allows for an afterlife – end subroutine Joe Citizen life; start subroutine Joe Citizen afterlife. 2) It explains why there is no Theory of Everything (TOE), why quantum mechanics and relativity are not compatible – there just happen to be two separate and apart sets of software that run the cosmos, just like separate and apart software programs run your PC. 3) It explains various macro anomalies like crop circles, those Easter Island statutes that, according to the natives, walked by themselves, and even Biblical impossibilities like the Sun and the Moon standing still on command. 4) It explains those micro anomalies like why are all electrons identical to the apparent awareness and albeit restricted ‘free will’ exhibited by particles, as in the double-slit experiment. 5) It explains all those fine-tuning bits that allow life and humans to exist, survive and thrive.
COSMOS: HOW VAST IS THE COSMOS?
The universe is infinite in both time and space because that’s the easiest way via Occam’s Razor to come to terms with those two very nasty philosophical problems. 1) What happened before (and what will happen after) this happened? For time to have any meaning something has to happen or change. 2) What’s beyond this boundary or hill or horizon or wall, and so on? Skeptics note that the Earth is finite but you can keep on keeping on going around and around it for all eternity. There is no boundary yet a finite area or volume. The flaw there is that there’s another direction – up! So you can have a Multiverse of universes all in one infinite space extending over infinite time, which theoretically could mean there are, have been, and will be multiple copies of you! Such is the logic of dealing with infinite time and space in which to play around in.
COSMOS: DID OUR UNIVERSE HAVE A BEGINNING?
Did our universe have a beginning? Yes and no. Yes because there is a lot of observational evidence for a beginning to our universe roughly 13.7 billion years ago – that Big Bang event. However, that Big Bang event occurred in existing time and space (and the universe is expanding in space not by space itself expanding). No cosmologist can create time and/or space, nor is there even a theoretical equation how to do that. Time and space cannot be created since both are abstract concepts and not physical things. Nor did the Big Bang event create matter/energy since such a creation would violate those conservation laws drummed into us in high school. Therefore our universe had a beginning but in pre-existing space and time composed of pre-existing matter/energy and the consequences that follow from that is that there must have been a before-the-Big-Bang and more than that we cannot say.
As a related aside, the Big Bang event couldn’t have been a quantum sized event. You cannot have infinite density in a zero volume (a theoretical singularity). Therefore you must have a finite density in a finite volume. There’s a maximum level to density and it’s not infinite. So, once that density maximum level is reached, any more stuff added on will just increase the volume until such time as the volume is beyond that which could be termed quantum-sized. There is no evidence that you can cram the contents of the observable universe into a volume the size of a pinhead or less. Cosmologists cannot ‘see’ further back in time than roughly 380,000 years post Big Bang so any extrapolation farther back than that is pure theoretical speculation and in this case it’s so bad it’s not even wrong. Just because you can extrapolate backwards theoretically to time equals zero doesn’t mean you’re going to get the correct answer.
CONSCIOUSNESS: WHY IS CONSCIOUSNESS SO MYSTERIOUS?
It’s not consciousness that’s really mysterious, it’s the subconscious.
In psychology, there is the concept of the subconscious, or the unconscious, mind. Whatever you call it, you have no real apparent control over it and it’s not subject to your introspection. As such, you have no free will over this apparently automated non-awareness part of your mind (not to be confused with your automated nervous system which holds sway over your body).
Have you ever had a complex thought leap suddenly, almost or even unbidden, into your conscious (the self-aware or self-conscious) mind? Why? Was it your conscious mind that brought it to the fore, or your subconscious (otherwise more technically known as the unconscious) mind? Chances are it was your subconscious (unconscious) mind. It’s been shown that your subconscious mind makes up your mind for you split seconds before you’re consciously aware of it. It’s almost as if it was predetermined.
Your subconscious mind bubbles along under the radar without an actual conscious input from your self-aware you, processing, ever processing. What should be random bubbling should result in a mess – a hodgepodge. Instead, you seem to get a purposefully and linearly directed nebulous something which at the least expected time pops through your grey matter’s ‘wormhole’ that links your subconscious mind with your conscious mind. Your conscious mind cannot seemingly draw out of your subconscious mind the nebulous something you need when you need it.
Here are a few examples where the subconscious rules your roost.
Creativity: It’s not your conscious mind that connects the dots, it’s the subconscious. How often do you hear, or even tell yourself, “I’ll sleep on it” (which is why it is probably a good idea to always have pen and paper or a Dictaphone next to the bed)? How many people can relate to solving an out of the ordinary mental puzzle in their dreams, or the solution comes to them ‘out of the blue’ while preoccupied with something else. There are no tools, only the resources in your own mind. In fact if you consciously try to come up with an original creative idea, you’ll probably fail, but when you’re in mental neutral gear – eureka.
Is creativity pre-programmed or an act of free will? How many things do you do during the course of your day that you did not consciously plan to do, yet could have so planned in theory? Those spur of the moment things, even little things that you didn’t wake up having on your agenda, must have originated (been created) from your subconscious. You really, apparently, didn’t have any free will over doing those agenda items – that is your doing them consciously with a before-the-fact intent.
Decisions: Do you take a right turn or a left turn at Oak Street? That was the issue at hand in a popular song, and surely the resolution of the issue is a conscious decision and subject to free will. Your subconscious cubby-holes will store and provide you the positives and negatives of either choice when you drag them to the fore. But what if it’s the very first time you are required to make such a decision and you have no prior knowledge to draw on. Surely that decision will be 100% a demonstration of free will. Or will it? How can you make an informed decision when you have no data on which to make a decision? The easy option is to toss heads or tails, but there’s no free will cigar awarded for that. In such a scenario you will often rely on a gut feeling but that feeling doesn’t come from your gut or your consciousness but from your subconscious.
Emotions: Emotions are strange in that you may see a picture of X and burst into tears, or laugh out loud, whereas I’m totally ho-hum, under-whelmed, boring. However, another image may cause me to rant and rave, while you just yawn-the-big-yawn. In either case, you seemingly have no control over your feelings. You don’t seem to have much free will in terms of who you like or dislike or who you fall head-over-heels in love with, so again, I’d conclude that emotions are part of your subconscious.
Memory: The entirety of you long and short term memories cannot reside in your consciousness. They are storied in subconscious cubby-holes (for lack of a better analogy).You read the word “tree” in a book; hear the word spoken, or see a “tree” in the movies or outside your window. You must immediately reach back into that subconscious cubby-hole and draw back out what a tree is in order for the work or image to make sense. Or say you see something you’ve never seen before (or never heard or learnt about). There’s incomprehension because there’s no subconscious cubby-hole to reach back into that contains that something that will enlighten you.
Ever immediately forget something you thought of just minutes before and cannot now for the life of you consciously recall? Throw your mind into neutral, rely on your subconscious and when you least expect it, there it is back to the fore again. Now quickly, write it down!
Free Will: As noted above, when it comes to the subconscious you have no control over how it operates. So, if you are not in control of your subconscious then that implies a lack of free will of the mind and your mental processes. You certainly don’t have mind-over-matter free will (you can’t flap your arms and fly or run faster than the speed of sound), but you no doubt think you are in charge of your own mind. Free will means having control over your own mind. It’s mind-over-mind. You’re in command. But you’re not in command over your subconscious.
Conclusion: It seems however unnecessarily messy to have both a subconscious and a conscious* mind. The question arises, might the subconscious actually be doing ALL the number crunching and feeding the answers to your (illusionary) consciousness or conscious mind, sometimes unexpectedly – that eureka moment, but more often as not, humming a constant feed along to you in the background, a feeding which as far as you’re concerned is your (illusionary) conscious mind in action but it’s all just the subconscious in action. So in fact there is no consciousness housed separate and apart as an organic structure, only the illusion of one. Your automated nervous system runs the body; what we now call the subconscious runs the mind – the entire mind.
By the way, when you lack free will over the workings of your own mind, well that suggests something or someone else is pulling the strings: translated it is evidence for a Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe.
* Though I might concede consciousness to equate to your awareness, awareness being that you are conscious of nearly all that goes on around you RIGHT NOW, and self-awareness, which is just the concept that you think and you respond to your awareness. Therefore, I am personally self-aware that I am aware of my surroundings (even if they are only virtually real).
CONSCIOUSNESS: DO PERSONS HAVE SOULS?
The Concept of a Soul: The trouble here is that ‘the soul’ has so many diverse definitions that it can mean just about anything you want it to mean. Probably no two people would describe the concept in the exact same way. However, I think we can agree that an egg cell has no soul – however you define it. A sperm cell has no soul – however you define it. Therefore, at conception, you have no soul. No cell has a soul, therefore no tissue (a group of common cells) has a soul, therefore no body organ has a soul (an organ being composed of various tissues), therefore you, as a collection of various organs and organ systems must have no soul!
So when did you get a soul (assuming there is such a thing and that it has some degree of tangibility)? Did you get your soul at birth? Perhaps it was on your first birthday? Perhaps you received you soul when you became of age, say 21. Perhaps it’s just as likely that you don’t receive a soul at all – there is no such separate and apart physical thing you get from any higher authority. Perhaps your soul just develops or evolves naturally as part and parcel of your growing maturity over the years, in which case it can’t be totally separate and apart from the body. In other words, if you develop a soul akin to your developing a sense of morality or spirituality, then it can not ‘leave’ the body after death. Translated, your soul (however you define it) isn’t your ticket to an afterlife. It resides somewhere in that brain-thingy of yours, locked somewhere within that maze of biochemistry that collectively makes up your grey matter. As an aside, if you were to clone yourself, would your clone have a soul?
So, do you have a soul? Nope! The burden of proof is on those who advocate that humans possess an indestructible, immaterial ‘soul’ that exists separate and apart from the body and which survives the body’s demise. If such proof (or even evidence) were set in stone the is-there-or-isn’t-there debate would have ended long ago. No one can demonstrate where the soul comes from, how it becomes a part of you, or where it goes to after you’re gone. No one can explain how an immaterial concept can contain hardcore data – your essence in other words. Does a person with a multiple personality disorder and sense of selves have more than one soul? I think not. There’s also the double standard of humans anointing themselves with a soul but not animals. This is another example of humans patting themselves on the back without justification.
CONSCIOUSNESS: LIFE AFTER DEATH
Is There Life After Death? Nope. You get one go, and when you snuff it, that’s it, the bucket’s well and truly kicked! Your consciousness (and subconscious) – collectively termed ‘the mind’ does not survive your death. But, and there’s always a but…
There can be an afterlife if we exist in a Simulated (Virtual Reality) Universe. Terminate Joe Citizen’s life software subroutine; run Joe Citizen’s afterlife software subroutine. Otherwise, I’m afraid the answer is “no”. If you assume an afterlife, you are probably also assuming that you will have possession of all of your five senses, and the ability to process input from those senses and also have your intellect (memories, creativity, emotions, IQ, etc.) intact. Unfortunately, that requires an afterlife where matter and energy exist and your existence will also be grounded in matter and energy. That means, something of your essence, what makes you, you, has to be also grounded in matter and energy and survive your biological death. There’s no evidence that that happens. The entirety of you when you die stays grounded and intact. Your neural network doesn’t detach itself from your deceased body and waft away to La-LaLand.
If what makes you, you is entirely nebulous and has no actual substance and structure, like a ‘soul’ (whatever that is it is certainly not composed of matter and energy) then even if that nothingness survives your biological death (which is a pretty nebulous concept in itself), it would not be physical and thus not able to process any stimuli in wherever your afterlife is, and in any case how nothingness can store and process memories, creativity, emotions, IQ, etc. is far beyond the realm of what’s rational.
Finally, you really may not want to die, but you really don’t want an eternal afterlife either, so be careful of what you wish for. I mean you’d be bored to ‘death’ after the first million years with billions and trillions of years yet to come and that’s just the beginning! Sounds a bit more like a hell to me! But since your afterlife must take place within the Universe, somewhere, what happens to your afterlife when the Universe finally hits its heat death or collapses back on itself in a Big Crunch (the opposite of the Big Bang). Regardless, it’s curtains for your afterlife. It’s also clear that your body, when it dies, doesn’t go to an afterlife. If you go to an afterlife, it’s your mind, your consciousness, the essence of what makes you, you that has to make the journey. But what kind of afterlife would that be for a one day old infant or for a 110 year old with severe dementia or for someone middle aged who was an ex-boxer or ex-gridiron player whose head and brain had been so pummeled as to now leave him just a fraction above a vegetative state. The same might apply to someone who had been starved of oxygen for a lengthy time, like a near drowning victim. What if your afterlife were pretty much the same as your life with a nine-to-five job, a rotten boss, bearing a heavy email galore and unproductive and worthless meetings burden, lots of bills, taxes and a lawn to mow, plus those in-laws and horrible relatives. Add to that mix now a supreme deity that’s cracking the whip at all hours. Now think back to pre-life. Wasn’t it peaceful and tranquil and tax free? What if your post-death were the same as your pre-life, wouldn’t that be ‘heavenly’, and as an added bonus, it’s all somebody else’s problem now.
GOD: CAN RELIGION BE EXPLAINED WITHOUT GOD?
We don’t like mysteries. Well actually we do like mysteries, but we also like to be able to solve them. There’s satisfaction in solving a mystery. If we can’t, we invent something – often a pie-in-the-sky something – to ‘explain’ the unexplained anomaly. For example, in relatively very recent times, astronomers couldn’t explain galactic stability, not enough gravity it seems, so presto, a snap of the fingers, and we have Dark Matter. Cosmologists can’t come to terms with the acceleration of the expansion rate of the Universe which makes no sense, so another snap of the fingers and presto, Dark Energy. In more ancient times, deities were the equivalent of Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Scientists don’t understand the fine-tuning that allows for a bio-friendly Goldilocks Universe. So, presto, another snap of the fingers, and they invoke a Multiverse, a cosmos where anything that can happen, does happen, or, wait for it, God! Even today we can resort to a deity, or God, as a fallback position to explain the unexplained.
If you don’t understand something and can’t figure it out, an easy option, an easy copout, as per fine-tuning, is to rely on something supernatural or paranormal since almost by definition you can’t understand something beyond the natural or beyond the normal and only something that resides in the realm beyond the normal or the natural can cause what you can’t explain. We tend to call these somethings deities, or gods, like Zeus and well, like God. But that doesn’t translate of necessity into making the supernatural or the paranormal a part of the natural or the normal. That said however, over the millennia, much of what was supernatural to our ancient ancestors is now natural; ditto much that was paranormal way back then is now considered normal.
Then or now, if we call resorting to the supernatural or the paranormal to explain the apparently unexplainable, a faith or a belief in religion (as a substitute term), can this need (to solve mysteries) be explained that doesn’t involve the concept of a supernatural or paranormal being, just say relying on some supernatural (again, beyond the natural) or paranormal (again, beyond the normal) process. Call this process the laws, principles and relationships that apply to the realm of the supernatural and the paranormal. Answer: probably not since what the supernatural or the paranormal often tries to explain involves deliberate purpose and causality via an intelligence. Nothing supernatural happens by random chance or for no unintelligible reason.
In a modern context, you can’t have religion (a synonym for the supernatural/paranormal) without the concept of a religious intelligence behind the phenomena like deities or gods or even the God that explains all by deliberate design. It’s the ‘you can’t have a watch without a watchmaker’ scenario. That of course doesn’t mean ‘watchmaker’ deities, gods or a God actually exist.
GOD: DOES GOD MAKE SENSE?
God? What God? Show me God! In fact why hasn’t God shown His face for now over thousands of years? What’s God afraid of? Show me the evidence for God. There is no evidence. There’s more physical evidence for the reality of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy than for God. That makes no sense, assuming a God of course. The only evidence for God is in the books, chapters and verses of the Bible (and related religious texts) but anyone can write words in a book. By that criterion there’s equal evidence for the existence of Zeus, Ben Hur, Siegfried, Sherlock Holmes, James Bond, Harry Potter and Captain James T. Kirk.
Speaking of the Bible, God says “Thou shall not kill” yet God is the greatest mass murderer in all of recorded history making Hitler look like a rank amateur. It’s a classic case of ‘do as I say and not as I do’. God in fact should be tried by the International Court of Justice for war crimes and crimes against humanity if what is recorded in the Bible is factual.
Speaking of the Commandments, God’s prime Commandment is not to have or worship any other gods before Him. That’s not only an admission that polytheism is real (other gods do exist) but it shows what an egomaniac God is. God and the leader of North Korea seem to have a lot in common.
God loves you; God is a loving god. Well God didn’t love the Egyptian people or pharaoh’s army all that much. Exodus doesn’t make much sense for a loving deity, but then the Bible is full of inconsistencies.
And any creator god who would inflict horror diseases on innocent and sinless animals (i.e. – beak and feather disease in cockatoos; once seen, never forgotten) is not a god I wish to have any association with.
Then there’s God the intelligent designer. Convince someone with a bad back of how intelligently designed the human back is. And why are reproductive organs a part of or cheek-by-jowl with the waste elimination organs? Is this intelligence at work? Does this make sense?
So does God make sense? Only in the sense that all of the human tyrants throughout history have made sense, since they all learned their wicked ways from the Master. Or, on the other hand God is just one of the many myths and fairytales created by grownups for grownups, tales told since before the dawn of recorded history.
GOD: DOES GOD MAKE SENSE? ROUND TWO
Here are a few further thoughts about whether or not God makes sense.
Now that God has finished with all this creation and destruction stuff, what does He actually do all day and night (presumably God doesn’t sleep) long? Attend to purely administrative details? Have a scotch and soda down at Heaven’s local watering hole? Play heavenly rounds of golf where the greens and the weather are always perfect? Or maybe he plays Santa Claus by keeping and updating the Big Book of who’s been naughty and who’s been nice. Or maybe God is eternally preoccupied with negotiating pay disputes between the various pay grade levels in the angel hierarchy.
If God has to ask a question, then God is clearly not an all-knowing God. For an example consider Genesis 3: 9-13 where God asked four questions of Adam and Eve. Why? Because God was ignorant! If you are ignorant you tend to ask questions otherwise why bother.
If God is outside of space and time, how did He cross over the boundary into space and time in order to create life, the universe and everything?
Miracles (if they exist) are God’s correction fluid (whiteout) – assuming God exists. If existence is affirmed on both counts that actually makes a mockery of an all-knowing, all-powerful supernatural deity since it would have been logical and preferable to have set in train the necessary conditions that would have negated the need for a later miracle. For example, don’t bother to raise the dead; rather ensure they don’t snuff it in the first place!
There’s an awful lot of Universe created just for little old us! If God created everything, then He created the planetoid Pluto. What was the point of expending the resources to do that? We can’t see Pluto with the unaided human eye. Even with a telescope Pluto is just a tiny dot. If Pluto didn’t exist would anything on Earth be different? Pluto adds nothing to our quality of life (or lack of it). Of course you may argue that perhaps Pluto was impacted by a killer asteroid that otherwise would have hit us and therefore would have affected our quality of life. But wouldn’t it have been easier for God not to have created Pluto and not to have created that asteroid as well? This creation of things with no relevance to the apparent pinnacle of creation (the be-all-and-end-all of the Almighty’s efforts), that is to say, us, makes no sense. It’s sort of like buying a china teapot or a baseball bat for your pet canary. What would be the point?
If God so wants humans to believe in Him, then it would have been so ultra easy to have just one sentence somewhere in the Bible that would be understandable to later generations, even if that Biblical sentence were baffling to contemporaries. The sentence would have been a sentence attributed to God that something only God (or an extraterrestrial) could have known at the time. For example, if kiwi birds had been mentioned, or icebergs, or that bright light in the sky that moves slowly through the heavens had rings around it, or that sugar was a mixture of several things, or what about another commandment akin to “Thou shall not travel faster than the speed of light”. Just one simple little sentence – that’s all it would have taken – something, anything one-off that illustrated a knowledge of biology, geography, astronomy, chemistry or physics that the natives of the time wouldn’t have known about. Methinks God missed a golden opportunity to reveal His actual existence beyond reasonable doubt. Or, updating to the present, God could fuse the Ten Commandments onto the surface of the Moon, easily visible through modest telescopes!
If God exists, yet we can explain life, the Universe, and simply everything without requiring an Almighty hypothesis, then the Almighty has gone to extraordinary lengths to make Himself a total irrelevance!
Can God be all-powerful? Hardly! 1) Presumably, the Almighty, like gravity waves, and anything comprised of mass and/or energy can’t operate at faster than light speed. If God wants to smite you down, and He is ten light-years away, then you’re safe for a decade before His bolt of lightning hits you. 2) Not even God can change the past. I mean, there are any number of instances where to correct some mistake it would have been easier to backtrack in time and undo something, like going back in time and post a “No Trespassing: Keep Out: Serpents Will Be Shot On Sight: This Means You” sign at the entrance to the Garden of Eden. 3) Nor can God accomplish something that is self-contradictory, like creating a spherical cube or a cubical sphere! Can God draw more than one straight line between two points on a flat piece of paper. I think not. 4) If the Almighty is so omnipotent, why did He need to rest on the Seventh Day?
It’s been claimed by those Right Wing religious fundamentalist types that whenever God is pissed off, He sends His wrath via a ‘natural’ disaster. So, any tornado or hurricane or blizzard or earthquake or wildfire, etc. isn’t really ‘natural’, rather it’s an Act of God’s punishment. However, it’s rather amazing that tornados tend to happen in roughly the same areas at roughly the same time of year; ditto hurricanes; ditto blizzards; ditto wildfires; ditto floods. You don’t tend to get massive earthquakes other than in well known fault zones and thus earthquake prone areas. You don’t get volcanoes erupting in areas not known to be tectonically active. Now if ‘natural’ disasters were really Acts of God, you might expect God to produce the occasional blizzard in Southern California in July; or how about 40 straight days and nights of rain in Death Valley; New York City becoming ground zero for a massive earthquake or volcanic eruption; a tornado outbreak in Alaska in January; or wildfires in areas of high rainfall and high humidity. Even more central, why does God have to hide behind Mother Nature’s skirts in the first damn place? Why doesn’t God take a leaf out of His earlier wrath-filled up-yours and smite the first born?
GOD: ARGUING GOD’S EXISTENCE
It is often said or noted that God exists outside of or beyond space and time. What does that actually mean? Absolutely nothing! It’s just waffle-words to give the (false) impression that God possesses some extraordinary properties and abilities beyond those of mortal men (and women). Properties and abilities like travelling at superluminal velocities; squaring the circle; being able to divide by zero and calculate pi to its final decimal place in nanoseconds.
Alas, the concepts of space and time are just that – concepts. Space and time are mental constructs that have no real reality. For time to have any meaning there must be things that change. Things like matter and energy. No change; no time. For space to have any meaning there has to be a something inside that space. If there is no something – a something like matter and energy – no space or the concept of space is required. If time (or space) is a concept, then beyond or outside of time (or space) is also a concept. But not all concepts are equal in rationality. Some concepts are as meaningless as being north of the North Pole; constructing a spherical pyramid; or that something can both be and not be at the same time and in the same place.
To say God exists outside of space implies God has no substance for if He did, He would have to exist in a container – in a space. If God is spaceless then God is just a nothing. In other words, God is not matter (or energy – same difference) which is ridiculous if you accept those Biblical tall tales where God does physical and energetic things like speaking (to Adam & Eve, Noah, Moses, Jonah, etc.). A nothing cannot speak or create a something (like a sound wave). You can’t have a deity violate the very physical laws He presumably also created. You could claim that God is everywhere, but everywhere is still inside space. You could say God resides in a higher dimension but a higher dimension is also inside of space, and in any event a dimension is also just a concept, a mathematical construct created by the human mind. You can envision a point or a line but it is actually impossible to construct one. A line drawn on a piece of paper still has width and height. One could say God ‘lives’ in one of those extra hidden dimensions so beloved by theoretical string theorists but again they exist because they are mental constructs and the mind exists within space, and even if those extra dimensions had external reality they would still be inside of space and thus God must be too.
To say God exists outside of time implies God is timeless. If God is timeless – beyond time or outside of time – then God cannot change or initiate change in anything else, otherwise time would exist for God. Deities aside, nobody has ever been, is now, or ever will be out of or beyond time and space, just like they will never be north of the North Pole, not even if they are high on drugs!