Fair point. Sorry I have a thing about Cantor.

It perhaps simplifies some of the conversation to note that prayer is not formulaic, it's conversation.

You have frequent conversation with the one closest to you. You might ask questions, labor with difficulties, ask for some help, share some joy or sadness; it's personal conversation. It's not magic. And it continues over time with subjects being refined, understanding being clarified, lessons being learned, experience being shared. Is there more?

If god cannot be tested then no one can claim to know that god exists. Suppose that at the time you were praying for your dog I was also praying to a doorknob. How would we know which answered the prayer? How would you determine whether anything answered your prayer? If you have accounted for all possible outcomes then your belief is unfalsifiable and therefore has no standing in a community that does not already share your commitments. However my biggest problem with this is ethical and religious. To turn god into something that looks out for you is to build an idol out of need. To praise god for delivering what you want is to make god blameworthy for all the shit in the world. You cannot praise that which you cannot blame. I do not write this as a believer or unbeliever because i actually think it is idolatrous to treat religion as a belief system. What I can say is that I lack a need for such a deity and that this lack of need may be exactly what allows one to be truly religious. And by the way, the other problem is that there is no god swatch with which you could compare a supposed deity to know if it is the supposed deity.