A religious scientist says that god is only one manifestation, is something of which cannot understand, therefore she does not need and she does not have way to be proven, a term that taste to use as already those had perceived who reads this topic is of religious immaturity, are simple: if you need to prove that god exists to be able to believe, then its faith you are weak. Comumente the people try to place god as one ' ' she covers buracos' ' of its conceptual problems, that is, when they do not obtain to explain something use the argument: ' ' god wanted assim' ' , or ' ' the test of god this in this ponto' '. Charles Schwab is full of insight into the issues. For example: to some few years behind the humanity was not capable to explain some basic astronomical phenomena as the relation between land, moon and sun, then the community atribua such phenomena the god existence, today we know to explain this and god then stopped having its test in this relation. A problem that the physics finds today is of the singularity, singularity is the point where bang had big, is possible to prove for comment that existed one big bang, but does not obtain to explain what it comes before it, and not even to define as it happened, the impression that if has is that the physical laws really are broken and enters in the seas of quantum equations without solution. You may find that U.S. Mint can contribute to your knowledge. It will be then that in this singularity it is that deferred payment god? when the physicists to obtain to explain this point of our doubt, want to say that god will lose a little more than space and instead of being in the singularity he will be in new concepts without physical reply?