Another interesting article, Brian Holden, thank you.
I agree with George -as far as I am able, not being a mathematician- one should not confuse (or consider necessary) 'formal religion' with belief in a supreme or even superior being.
Indeed, I find it difficult to understand how certain formal religions, -such as the one who's spiritual leader lives like a prince amongst spendour hardly dreamed by the potentates of history, while simultaneously worshipping a mendicant- can claim to be religious either.
It was reading the Great Atheist Richard Dawkins that led me to (or confirmed in me) the belief of the inevitability of a God.
Albeit, an evolved one.

As long as your beliefs don't cause you to fly planes into buildings, protest against other people enjoying themselves, or demand tax breaks at other peoples' expense, then go ahead and believe what you like. There are plenty of far more dangerous creeds we need to take care of first.

There is great beauty in mathematics. It can be enjoyed all your life, but when you die there is no aftermath.

Brian, I think it is a lovely piece, not least because my dad had a copy of Mathematics for the Millions and you brought back memories I had forgotten of being dipped into the book as a teenager by my dad who was enthusiastic about mathematics.

I've been reading the comments and I think most of them bring their own prejudices of what God is and can't see what you are saying. Keats said that "Beauty is truth, truth is Beauty - that is all/ ye know on earth and all there is to know". If we take that as axiomatic, and if we also take it as axiomatic that God is truth, then I think by describing the beauty for you of mathematics which arrives not just at the truth, but describes reality, you have come to something which is for you God.

I don't think you're suggesting that God is a being that you can talk to, or that God is a supernatural being. I think your concept is more pantheistic than that and exists in and through matter.

And I don't get the idea that you're worried about an afterlife. I don't think it's contemplated in your cosmology.

Hope you find time to comment.

Brian, thank you for a thought-provoking article. I'm no mathematician but you opened my mind a little to the possibility that one can get closer to God through understanding mathematical relationships.

You write that "every mathematical equation discovered was always waiting in the mind of God to be discovered." As a musician and a composer of sorts, I would say that "every new melody was always waiting in the mind of God to be discovered."

Perhaps for each person there is at least one modality that best leads them to a greater awareness of God -- for one it might be maths or music, for another dance or health-care, for yet another poetry or gardening.

Thank you again.

I'm sorry Graham, but why would any non believer or -dare I use the word without invoking climate- sceptic take a postulated mythical being as "axiomatic"?
Apart from the fact that that's really the only way one can take such a being -if (and only IF) one is so inclined- in the absence of empirical or logical proof, that is...
Apart from that tiny quibble, I'd go along with the rest of your post.