I was over at some anonymous agnostic's blog and he/she basically outlined a seemingly (to her/him) logical argument on why God does not exist. It went something like this: If God is everywhere, then God is in Heaven and Hell, if God does not exist in Hell, then there is no God. To parallel this argument he said something like this: nothing exists in a vacuum, if nothing is in a vacuum, then nothing exists. Forgive me if this is making no sense to you. It made no sense to me either. This argument just went round and round in circles.
The only problem is the bible states that God is everywhere. Well, maybe the author does not believe the bible. I am sure he/she would believe science right?
An object the size of a speck of dust would provide the perfect test. At this scale, an object is small enough to be strongly affected by the rules of quantum mechanics but large enough to observe directly. Current theory predicts that such an object could exist in more than one location and could remain in that split state almost indefinitely. If there were a way to observe the speck without disturbing it, we would see quantum strangeness laid bare: a macroscopic thing sitting in two places at the same time, confounding reality as we know it. SOURCE
It's called Superposition. If you have time read the article in its entirety. It is quite interesting. I am no physicist but I enjoy pop science like others.
So if electrons, particles and waves can exist in two places at the same time, is the idea of God omnipresence such a far-fetched idea?
Another interesting tidbit of info, Einstein suggested that our interpretation of reality is based on observation (or the observer's interference) and there could exist an alternate reality independent of observation. Things that make you go hmm?