THE INTERNET IS FOR PORN!end of discussion.
Quote from: metal on February 16, 2007, 12:24:35 AMLOL @ quadz straight up deleting my last post...There must be some mistake.
LOL @ quadz straight up deleting my last post...
That would require short term memory.
Quote from: Godz on February 22, 2007, 05:38:19 AMThat would require short term memory. lol, guess my posts are really having an affect on Godz (paradise i'm guessing) for him to be making such pathetic attempts to fuck with me. Its ok, its just a forum buddy
Quote from: metal on February 15, 2007, 04:11:29 PMno, the ball isnt in my court. you just got dunked on and you're still trying to figure out who did it. Well so far you seem to make grand, unsupported statements based on your private theory of reality, that appear to me to be at least questionable from both a scientific and logical standpoint.Next, instead of defending your statements against counter-arguments, your tactic seems to be to use bluster and condescention to claim that anyone disagreeing with your statements merely "doesn't understand."It seems it would be easier to move toward some mutual understanding if you would deign to make some of the private details of your theory of reality public.Quote from: metal on February 15, 2007, 04:11:29 PM you continuously avoid the ONLY THING i have stated: That infinity cannot exist physically (and by this, i mean tangibly).Avoid it? I've done nothing but attempt to tackle your statements head on!I still don't know what you mean that infinity cannot exist physically. Does the singularity at the center of a black hole have infinite density, or not? Theory predicts it does. Do your private theories agree or disagree?Quote from: metal on February 15, 2007, 04:11:29 PM IT DOES EXIST, AS A CONCEPT; not as a number, nor does it pertain any quantifiable entities. In real life, history consists of real life events, where things happen in the physical realm. I argue that such events do not extend backwards in time to infinity, because i do not feel that it is possible. Everything that exists today must have been created at some point. Since this "creation" seems to break the law of conservation of matter, it makes sense to me that a powerful entity facilitated such an event.Your explanation is merely a recursive tautology.You do not feel it is possible for matter & energy to have always existed, so you posit that a powerful entity facilitated its creation.As I asked before: Did this powerful entity always exist? (Or are we headed for the classic "we will introduce a powerful entity whose nature is unfathomable and incomprehensible in order to solve the problem of existence by rendering it unquestionable" manoeuvre?)Quote from: metal on February 15, 2007, 04:11:29 PMconsider clarity provided.Consider uncertainty reintroduced. Regards,quadz
no, the ball isnt in my court. you just got dunked on and you're still trying to figure out who did it.
you continuously avoid the ONLY THING i have stated: That infinity cannot exist physically (and by this, i mean tangibly).
IT DOES EXIST, AS A CONCEPT; not as a number, nor does it pertain any quantifiable entities. In real life, history consists of real life events, where things happen in the physical realm. I argue that such events do not extend backwards in time to infinity, because i do not feel that it is possible. Everything that exists today must have been created at some point. Since this "creation" seems to break the law of conservation of matter, it makes sense to me that a powerful entity facilitated such an event.
consider clarity provided.
Dahang argued that "there's no evidence that there was ever any true nothingness." No offense, but.. No shit buddy. For now, i simply cannot fathom history going back in time indefinitely, and i must say that something quite powerful (but not omnipotent, this term, again, is yet a concept which reeks paradox) was involved in whatever true "beginning" undoubtedly occurred.
I"m not sure what this obsession with evidence is
Quote from: metal on February 22, 2007, 07:44:28 AMDahang argued that "there's no evidence that there was ever any true nothingness." No offense, but.. No shit buddy. For now, i simply cannot fathom history going back in time indefinitely, and i must say that something quite powerful (but not omnipotent, this term, again, is yet a concept which reeks paradox) was involved in whatever true "beginning" undoubtedly occurred.None taken, but it's interesting that your private theories are very inconsistent with the more mainstream (and generally agreed upon within the scientific community) theories. All your assumptions are based on a narrow point of view, not on proper investigation. If what you thought was so evidently true, then these so called scientists who have theorized of an infinitely dense particle in the beginning could not attempt to keep such concepts alive (since they're so idiotic). We see, however, this is not the case. I have a feeling they simply know more about this concept than you do. I have been reminded of the "Oh and where is this so-called evidence for the big bang? You're an idiot if you believe in such a thing."
I think the concept of infinite simply references a huge unknown number (5.6 x 10^856 for example).