Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The infinite space of the Universe
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 226 of 380 (469226)
06-04-2008 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Agobot
06-04-2008 3:36 PM


Re: Who we are
But there's also the possibilty that you might be right - life and the universe could just exist for absolutely no reason.
On thing I have wondered is, "Why would the universe even have to have a reason for existing?"

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 3:36 PM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 5:12 PM bluescat48 has not replied
 Message 234 by IamJoseph, posted 06-04-2008 8:02 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5530 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 227 of 380 (469235)
06-04-2008 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by bluescat48
06-04-2008 3:49 PM


Re: Who we are
quote:
One thing I have wondered is, "Why would the universe even have to have a reason for existing?"
What a terrible waste on cosmic scales it would be, if the universe served no purpose. But let's stick to our logic - it hasn't failed us so far, so there is no reason to believe it will in the future. Logic tells us "there's got to be a reason", we're just too feeble minded to know.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by bluescat48, posted 06-04-2008 3:49 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2008 5:20 PM Agobot has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 228 of 380 (469236)
06-04-2008 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Agobot
06-04-2008 5:12 PM


Re: Who we are
What a terrible waste on cosmic scales it would be, if the universe served no purpose.
If there was no purpose then there couldn't be any "waste".
You think bacteria cares if there's a purpose or not?
The only reason we think there should be a purpose is because we've attained cognizance. Had we not, we couldn't care less about a "purpose".
Cognizance, in and of itself, doesn't indicate a purpose either.
The purpose is what you make it. Outside of that, there's no indication that there really is a purpose.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 5:12 PM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by bluescat48, posted 06-04-2008 5:36 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 230 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 5:45 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 236 by Libmr2bs, posted 06-04-2008 8:21 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 229 of 380 (469238)
06-04-2008 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
06-04-2008 5:20 PM


Re: Who we are
Thanks for saying what I was going to.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2008 5:20 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5530 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 230 of 380 (469240)
06-04-2008 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
06-04-2008 5:20 PM


Re: Who we are
quote:
If there was no purpose then there couldn't be any "waste".
Huh? Waste means to "To use, consume, spend, or expend thoughtlessly or carelessly" which would turn your sentence into
"If there was no purpose then there IS waste". Or initially, what you wanted to say was "If there is no logic, then there couldn't be any waste".
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2008 5:20 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 231 of 380 (469246)
06-04-2008 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Agobot
06-04-2008 3:36 PM


Re: Who we are
From our human perspective, I can see only one way that the universe would make sense. It would be if life was an illusion and we were all actors in a running movie.
We could possibly be actors in a movie but in a movie that plays in our heads. A Cartisian theater,
Cartesian theater - Wikipedia
as proposed by Dan Dennett. Thats why we would say that the Universe doesn't make sense, because we are the stars of our movies and give ourselves top bill. We think we need things to make sense because we think we deserve it. Its a self centered subjective quality that we have about us, it controls the way we experience the Universe.

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your fuckin' mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 3:36 PM Agobot has not replied

Libmr2bs
Member (Idle past 5727 days)
Posts: 45
Joined: 05-15-2008


Message 232 of 380 (469249)
06-04-2008 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 222 by lyx2no
06-04-2008 9:50 AM


Re: Twerp!
Models are simply a representation of our imagination doing its thing. There is no realty - only memories and expectations, neither of which are dependable.
The earth is an ellipsoid.
I don't use the word "tramp". It would be demeaning to an individual and would only serve to protray myself to be superior in some way to another human being which I am not.
My computing power is limited to a slow laptop, pencil and paper. Of course I could get out my circular slide rule with the periodic table on the back but it would take me too long to find it in my pile of antique stuff and I think that maybe a few transitional elements have been added since I last used it. Maybe just maybe I'll go back looking for that repulsive particle that keeps space expanding. Or maybe I'll revisit my last version of a unified theory and see if I can isolate the variable that keeps twisting my string into a knot. Maybe I'll just have some more fun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 222 by lyx2no, posted 06-04-2008 9:50 AM lyx2no has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3669 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 233 of 380 (469251)
06-04-2008 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Agobot
06-04-2008 3:08 PM


Re: The inevitable paradox
quote:
If the space is infinite we'll be hitting a wall in our quest for knowledge
Someone's reading my posts. For sure this is the last remnant cornering anti-creationists to that brick wall. In a runaway desperation from the finite premise, they are inventing illogical, unscientific new slants. IMHO< space is the final frontier, and should be/must be the proof the universe could not have emerged of itself. It is also the real reason today's neo athiest [illogical] science clings to this desperation: because they know that when push comes to shove, they are confronted with this brick wall, which negates their conclusions of ToE's conclusions, and other major premises such as speciation and adaptation: how can there be adaptation from nothingness? Here's one of them:
quote:
as we don't know what infinite is, since we have never seen anything that is infinte. If space is finite, we'll have to ask what's outside of it? Nothingness? Cannot be as nothingness does not exist.
Firstly, let's get one thing straight. This notion is in opposition to humanity's leading scientific minds: Einstein, Newton and Hawkings all subscribe to a finity of the unive, including time being finite. That we cannot imagine 'nothingness' is not an anomoly, and here's why:
Secondly, the antithesis of 'thing' is no-thing. And 'thing' represents anything which is universe contained. If we could fathom no-thing, we would have to be capable of reconising something the universe has never contained. Understandably, the human eye and senses were not given this facility because it was not required! We humans may be the superior being, but we are still very limited - we have to invent clever means of seeing basic forces [radiation, radio waves, etc], and we cannot even see relatively small distances in space-time. How would we even recognise no-thing, when this represents no matter, energy, forces, particles, heat or time? What instrumentation would we use? The only posibilities here of 'nothing' is that it is made of things which are not universe contained, or that it actually does exist and is a paradign beyond our senses. Simply saying nothingness cannot exist is not coherent or evidence of its negation.
Thirdly, from a science and maths view, a finite entity cannot contain an infinite component: 1 cannot contain 2; a pineapple cannot house our galaxy. IOW, if space, as with time and matter, is seen or percieved in the universe, it is proof space is not infinite. Space was not infinte 10 seconds ago - it is expanding. You cannot add or subtract $5 from an infinite amount of $'s - that only proves it was not infinite 10 secs ago.
quote:
But being 3d beings we cannot see anything that might be more-dimensional(outside our 3d universe) nor can we even begin to grasp the idea of 5 or 6 dimensional space and what it's supposed to be.
The issue is not related or limited to what we cannot see. Today, even dimensions such as the non-corporeal [ghosts, spirituals, polterguist, non-matter, dark mater, black holes, halos, aspirations, thoughts, etc] can be detected, via imprints, indents, remnants and after-effects of particles. Nominating other potential dimensions does not render space being infinite any credibility, and even if there were such dimensions, this does not impact what is already post-uni or within the uni. You have to say, coherently & scientifically, what we cannot see or ercieve, does not exist.
Thus, if we see that space is finite and a post BB occurence, we have no choice [save for 'denial'], but to accept a total and unconditional FINITE universe, along with all its components, including all that we cannot see or percieve. And subsequently, all theories must conform with this premise. When we erred previously, prior to the spectrum shift discovery, we had some basis for considering a infinite space, because then we held the universe as infinite. That notion has been foiled, negated and put to rest. Now, a new science will emerge - and one which has been getting ever closer to genesis, creationism and monotheism. And if your alarmed at such a premise - you are finally on the right track.
Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 3:08 PM Agobot has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3669 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 234 of 380 (469252)
06-04-2008 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by bluescat48
06-04-2008 3:49 PM


Re: Who we are
This is proof there has never been a true/real revelation since the OT - excepting of individual discoveries in science, philosophy and other faculties. A messiah's primal job is to give the purpose of creation. I believe this answer [revelation] will come from science, which replaced ancient, but once real, occultism and prophesy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by bluescat48, posted 06-04-2008 3:49 PM bluescat48 has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3669 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 235 of 380 (469253)
06-04-2008 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Agobot
06-04-2008 3:36 PM


Re: Who we are
quote:
life and the universe could just exist for absolutely no reason.
There is nothing in the universe which is superfluous - else it would not have existed or evolved. We may not know the reason a pineapple has nutrition or why we have appendics - but there is surely a purposeful and critical factor here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Agobot, posted 06-04-2008 3:36 PM Agobot has not replied

Libmr2bs
Member (Idle past 5727 days)
Posts: 45
Joined: 05-15-2008


Message 236 of 380 (469254)
06-04-2008 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by New Cat's Eye
06-04-2008 5:20 PM


Re: Who we are
If you don't mind a short interjection, humans and bacteria have two essential purposes in life - survival and propagation of our species. Some bacteria will cause the death of their host to infect other hosts. Some people think humans are doing the same to this planet. Maybe we are not unlike bacteria in more ways than we want to admit.
Considering your statements got me to thinking. Would there be a universe if there were no people?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-04-2008 5:20 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by Agobot, posted 06-05-2008 4:16 AM Libmr2bs has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3669 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 237 of 380 (469255)
06-04-2008 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by onifre
06-04-2008 2:12 PM


Re: NATURE is a Brick Wall.
quote:
Exactly, car makers make cars. With out them cars don't get made. Humans make baby humans, with out them you get no humans. I think we both agree up to this point. The part we split at is in your introduction of a creator for all of life(to include the Universe and everything in it, lets not split hairs here). Ok. Then where did the creator come from?
But we do not know where anything comes from? The origins of all things remain an enigma. Your premise is a void and mute one.
quote:
If you say the creator is evident because we see things created, then the creator is subject to the same standard. Who created the creator?
This obvious question was taken up by Moses, and the answer given him is the only scientific definition of INFINITE:
'I am the Lord I have not changed'.
This says the creator is infinite, and anything subject to change is finite. Are you now asking me to define INFINITE as your only claims?
quote:
Cars are made by humans right? Humans are made by the 'creator' right? Then just take that question one further.
The 'further' from this point is, there must be a creator for all things - same as with cars. PERIOD.
quote:
No, I cannot. Nor is there any requirement to do so. A car does not have to answer this question in order to prove a car maker.
All that does is removes you from having to be specific.
Correct. And this is not an unscientific or wrong answer - its the only right one.
quote:
There is natural creation(i.e. sexual reproduction), and then artificial creation(i.e. car manufacturers), the 2 are not the same nor do they have the same origins.
Yes, these two ARE the same thing. The modes vary, not the basic aspect of creating. We are emulating and acting in the creator's image: Creating.
quote:
Particles to matter, matter to stars, stars to planets, planets to earth, earth to living organisms, single cell to multi cell etc...
Particles are created entities and post uni, with equal status as cars.
quote:
This process has been continuos and has required no intervening. Or at least there is no evidence that anything intervened. And a lack of understanding of how these things came to be will lead people to just accept a creator because its a much simpler answer.
There is no evidence anything intervened? How so? - if you have an initial BB particle, and it was activated/expanded/exploded, and there was nothing else around [no other particles, forces, energy, etc] - the only option remaining here is that of an external impact. Can you now see why neo science absolutely abhores the notion of finite, and why they absolutely posit that space is infinite - and that they get away with this totally unscientific and illogical premise by resting their case on the enigma of what we cannot prove or disprove?!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by onifre, posted 06-04-2008 2:12 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by onifre, posted 06-05-2008 1:24 PM IamJoseph has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 238 of 380 (469295)
06-04-2008 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by cavediver
06-04-2008 3:37 AM


Re: Straight

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by cavediver, posted 06-04-2008 3:37 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by IamJoseph, posted 06-05-2008 4:00 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 243 by cavediver, posted 06-05-2008 7:20 AM Buzsaw has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3669 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 239 of 380 (469329)
06-05-2008 4:00 AM
Reply to: Message 238 by Buzsaw
06-04-2008 11:03 PM


Re: Straight
A straight line and a curve are fundamentally the same thing, only their trajectories are different; and these are interchangeable. I would say, the trajectories of a straight line is the shortest distance between two points.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Buzsaw, posted 06-04-2008 11:03 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Buzsaw, posted 06-05-2008 6:17 AM IamJoseph has replied

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5530 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 240 of 380 (469333)
06-05-2008 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by Libmr2bs
06-04-2008 8:21 PM


Re: Who we are
quote:
Considering your statements got me to thinking. Would there be a universe if there were no people?
  —Libmr2bs
There is a pretty good fossil record that says there had been life and a universe prior to our arrival. It is also a pretty heavy blow to the religeous dogma of an early universe and man being the purpose of the universe.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Libmr2bs, posted 06-04-2008 8:21 PM Libmr2bs has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by IamJoseph, posted 06-05-2008 8:12 AM Agobot has not replied
 Message 265 by Libmr2bs, posted 06-05-2008 8:14 PM Agobot has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024