Summations Only

I see you've decided on insisting that your's are the only two options. I have provided other options. If I find time to waste arguing about it with you, then I'll post here again. Until then, good day sir!

Now you're just cheating so you can insist that your's are the only two. Funny how I knew that was going to happen #1 is an alternative to beginning to exist from non-existence, and it doesn't have to be in some form if it begins to exist.#2 is neither existence, nor non-existence as it is quasi-existence. That whole "some form or manner" bullshit isn't flying. You've added to your claim to try to maintain it. That's not you hearing out any alternatives.Look, you can try to challenge your belief to see if it holds up to scrutiny. Or, as you're doing, you can just dig your heels in and do everything you can to hold up your preconceived notion. Just realize that you're lying when you say:

quote:

---

If you have something I would be intersted in your hypothesis.

---

You're not interested at all. You just want people to lob you softballs for you to swing at. And if they ain't slow enough, then you'll just twist them into something you can hit. That's dishonest, ICANT, to both us and yourself. Sure, but perhaps the Universe itself is oxymoronic. This remains an alternative to your 2 scenarios. But the Universe did not exist. Half-versus existed and they are not a form of the Universe. You're just adding that to it to maintain your position.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

No. And atoms didn't even begin to exist until some time after the Big Bang.

He also unnecessarily assumes that existence is a binary state - that is something either exists or not. But we don't know that there aren't other states of quasi-existence. If there's upwards of 10 dimensions then who knows what kinds of states of existence there might be.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

Not in a place such that the question "where" makes any sense.

lol, wut? I directly answered your question Did you just not understand it? The word "where" implies a location within the 3 spatial dimensions. The 4th dimension, time, doesn't really exist in a place such that you could ask "where does time exist". Similarly, higher dimension aren't really in a place such that the question of where they exist makes any sense.Wait... what the fuck am I doing? I'm trying to explain something to you as if you'll honestly try to understand it rather than just insist on your preconceived notions. Gawsh I'm stupid.

Why? Huh? Oh, I dunno, I was just offering a hypothetical conjecture. It was about being between absense and presence, did you notice? What? Do you understand at all the exchange that was taking place?

I'd like to call it pseudo-trolling. He's just looking for slow pitches to swing at...Here's my assessment of ICANT from about 18 months ago, from Message 427:

quote:

---

So he's not really this stupid but he is pulling our leg?

He's playing dumb and banking on you not fullfilling his unreasonable requests (but still, he's not really that smart).

​

Recall that he loves to claim that he's been posting something here for X-timeframe and nobody has shown where he's wrong yet. When they do show he's wrong, he backs up the goalpost a bit and plays dumb like he doesn't understand why he's already refuted.

​

The least he could have done is to put a smiley face in there.

​

No, no, no. That would break the illusion of sincerity and then he wouldn't get replies to defend himself against.

​

Unless your saying he is deliberately lying being intellectually dishonest and an insufferable troll.

​

Sort of, but not really. ICANT is *old*. He's happy with just tricking himself into maintaining the beliefs he's always had. (recall that he loves to claim that he figured this thing out when he was a kid and nobody's proved him wrong yet). He doesn't expect to convince anyone else, he just wants his position to be able to withstand any attack. If that means playing dumb to avoid a direct refutation then so be it.

​

He gets his jollies from appearing to all the world to be as dumb as a stump?

​

I figured this all out while debating my grandfather at his kitchen table. When its his turn to make a point, everybody better shut up and listen to him because its serious business and he has something important to say. When its your turn to make your point, its all fun and games and he jokes about whatever your saying and doesn't really pay attention much. Especially if its going to show he's wrong or make him rethink something. Its the same tactic ICANT uses.

​

Why would anyone do this? Does the man have no pride?

​

He does it to reinforce his beliefs. He's already got them a priori, now he'll put them up against the onslaught and when they survive and nobody's proved him wrong (because of the dishonesty he employs), then he can remain victorious and feel comfortible in holding a belief that he hasn't seen refuted yet in all these years

---

And this is from the thread Straggler linked to earlier, from over 3 years ago, Message 310

quote:

---

Do you have scientific evidence that time is a property of the Universe?
If so I would like to see it.

​

I want scientific evidence not somebody said so.

​

How can I show you scientific evidence that somebody did not say?

​

You'll deny anything scientific that goes against your pet theory anyway and glorify any psuedo-science that supports it. Plus, you use Hawking's "say so" when it suits your pet theory and deny others' when it doesn't.

​

Sorry ICANT, but I don't want to play your game.

---

Nor does he appreciate the scope of the opportunity he has here; to discuss GR directly with people who understand it and are willing to go baby-steps through it with him.Thank god all the rest of us benefit from reading their posts and they're not just a waste of time the measure of the duration it took.

I think the fundamental concept behind relatively (spacetime has pliable dimensions) can be grasped at a fairly low level of education and without much understanding of physics nor knowledge of math... if you're willing.But anything can be failed to be understood on purpose.

Rest assured that everyone else is benefiting from reading your posts.And thank you, Son Goku.

The OP might as well have been Bill Cosby: Fortunately, smarter people started talking and we ended up with some good explanations that were worth reading.