|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Spherical Issues | |||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
Languages are un-vindicated prior to 6000 years. But getting back to the topic at hand, and to move on, the issue has widespread impact, namely that of a finite universe. There are only two possible explanations for the emergence of a finite universe.
1. It occured using different materials/forces not contained in this universe whatsoever - else it violates a finite universe. 2. Ex Nehilo. This however is not science, but a premise unique to Genesis. I see no other alternatives. And in both the above scenarios, ToE becomes vindicated only as an after the fact process as per Genesis' mode of evolution, and one which negates the Darwinian mode: the seed factor prevails as the instrument for speciation, and this leads to the premise the universe's growth and progression was factored in a programme outside of the universe's structurism. Today's chip technology gives this even more credence, which works on its embedded program, rather than belated environmental impacts. In both cases, an outside, independent impact is signified. Here, the notion of a gradual, self-developing and self-accumulating process for the universe becomes non-plausable. The latter can be explained by allowing all belated impacts, such as the environment, being recipient based and intergrated; IOW, sunlight and water cannot sustain life - if the elements and objects they impact does not behave in a critical reciprocratic mode. We cannot cause life, for example, with sunlight, water and gasses in terrains which are not reciprocal: thus two programs are needed in two objects which produce a new one. This signifies a hovering force able to direct and know the attributes and limitations of both objects. An intergration negates a random: if we find a lock on Jupiter, we can deem it a plausable random occurence; but if we also find an exacting key for that lock - the random possibility is negated. Thus I find when we track a process as close as we can to its origin premise, the logic fails to accomodate or validate the conclusions held in sciences concerning the BBT. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4716 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
IaJ writes: for a brief moment, consider what that says or signifies? Yeah, cavediver, why don't you spend more time hitting the books and less time with fast cars, fast women and rock-n-roll. Don't you know nothing. IaJ does. Kindly Ta-da ≠ QED
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4716 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
And now I know why we don't use waffles to shingle dog houses.
Kindly Ta-da ≠ QED
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Percy writes:
But he claims to care for other people and that washing his hands before but not after is good for other people. Just like with IamJoe, though, everytime I ask him why he always gives me an answer that is impossible to understand. We'd go around in circles. The issue is transmission of disease, and the hands are a common communicator of disease. You wash before for yourself. You wash after for others. I'm not saying my father's way of thinking would be in sync with IamJoe. But at least what they have in common is they both think on a different level than the rest of us and it's nearly impossible for us or them to understand each other. I've been rereading Joe's messages and I still can't figure what the hell he's talking about. Edited by Taz, : No reason given. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Yeah, cavediver, why don't you spend more time hitting the books and less time with fast cars, fast women and rock-n-roll. I currently drive a Civic Type-R (slow for me)My wife runs I was fourth row at the Roger Waters gig on Sunday You may just be right
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
I've been rereading Joe's messages and I still can't figure what the hell he's talking about. Gotta say, Taz, I'm with you there:
IaJ writes: cavediver writes: The "surface analogy" as you call it is specifically demonstrating a *** FINITE UNIVERSE *** ...'IN ACADEMIC [MATHS ONLY]' terms. Thus its centre in also a virtual one, depending which position on the surface one stances on. In all actual cases [eg. w/actual demonsions] - a centre is a fact. Anyone care to translate this in light of what I said above? Edited by cavediver, : No reason given. Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
cavediver writes:
The closest thing I can think of to what IaJ is talking about there is optics. In certain frame of reference or certain medium, we could have an actual image and a virtual image of an object. I'm not sure exactly how I could connect this to IaJ's statement there. But may be we could go from here? Anyone care to translate this in light of what I said above? I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4190 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
.'IN ACADEMIC [MATHS ONLY]' terms. Thus its centre in also a virtual one, depending which position on the surface one stances on. In all actual cases [eg. w/actual demonsions] - a centre is a fact. Could you explain the above statement in terms someone with a science background could understand and not in josephwocky. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
Lol, just for the record, the washing of hands was first mandated as a law in the OT. I see it as deficient this is not acknowledged when discussing this issue, specially from otherwise IamLearned folks. Bet you guys are not yet clued ypto where the faculty of medicine comes from: no - not from where you think!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
In all physical examples, a centre is not negotiable. With regard a 'surface', my position is tow fold:
1. It does contain a centre and boundaries, as does all surfaces of all entities, including the universe. 2. A surface, when presented w/o physical dimensions [miles, inches, etc] - is not a physical entity, but an academic one. It only exists on paper, such as a mathematical premise. And the surface, in its academic premise, is the only one which has been presented to evidence a sphere, and thereby the physical universe, does not contain a centre or boundary. This is manifestly incorrect from a science and maths premise - unless one uses casino maths - namely, to prove a physical conclusion via manipulated academic provisions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
Do you accept the universe is finite?
Do you accept a finite entity cannot contain anything infinite? Yes/No will do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Yes, why do embrace such denial. Are you unable to look at a 3D analogy to a 4D model? Do you understand what the terms 'finite but unbounded' would mean?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Please give me a for example. Show me a thing which is w/o a boundary? Please say - the universe of course!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4716 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Infinite is not the issue. Unbounded is the issue. This has been stated repeatedly.
Kindly A mind changed against its will is of the same opinion still.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3668 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
I know. So pls show me an unbounded entity.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024