ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 29th September 2019, 11:13 AM   #81
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Singularity or relativity; or both? - that is the question.

Eruption, balloon/manifold or funnel shape?

A simple concept would be that particles form objects in space (within the Infinite). Objects in turn by occupying space cause the particles that form the space-fabric to move, causing currents/ripple effects, like pebbles in a pond. Such an outcome has the effect to cause space to move somewhere else. The bigger the rock the bigger the ripple. But when a rock falls in a pond, it causes a funnel shaped disturbance in the water under the surface, and bubbles. So is the Universe of a ripple, a bubble, a funnel; or is it a burst?

If we accept the Big Bang -- Big Crunch circle of events, and therefore that the singularity brought about a burst/eruption, then we could have the singularity theory stand, but not General Relativity. If we reject the Big Bang - Big Crunch hypothesis, and we assume that no burst/eruption was caused then we could have General Relativity but we should not be talking of a 'Big Bang" but of a "Big Balloon/Manifold." We simply cannot have a bursting balloon which has also regained its surface after the burst ("have the cake and eat it too").

The only way we could have the Singularity and General Relativity and even a Manifold outer surface (on a funnel shaped Universe due to perhaps other further interconnected disturbances, such as incremental/varying resistance from outer space), is if matter/energy (pebble example), was driven through space (in order to cause movement - generate energy and therefore existence); and as it was driven, it reached a point of becoming a singularity in a seemingly infinite long funnel (lost mass due to friction in the case of matter - considering the size, energy/particle matter more likely). The outer surface of the funnel, pressing the planets, stars and other parts of the Universe against the resulting surface of the outer space, would account for the enhancement (as in not the sole source) of gravity on the whole surface of the stars, planets etc.; enhancing the effect of gravity on both poles, and rendering both Hawking's theory of the Singularity and Einstein's theory of General Relativity, valid.

Of Course at some point the expanding energy that forms the Universal Funnel, will be exhausted. Then the gravitational/opposing forces between the two surfaces; along with the gravitational forces among the planets, stars and other parts of the Universe will prevail. In turn space will return to its pre-singularity phase; till a new cause (if ever) for a new singularity will occur; and as a result a new Universal Funnel may come to be. We could call this the "Big Splash" theory.


Infinitism considers all possibilities; all concepts are possible within the Infinite.

Last edited by tazanastazio; 29th September 2019 at 12:50 PM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 02:08 PM   #82
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
We could call this the "Big Splash" theory.
Or rather the "Big Plunge" theory
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 05:45 PM   #83
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,818
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Singularity or relativity; or both? - that is the question.

<SNIP>

Infinitism considers all possibilities; all concepts are possible within the Infinite.
That's a characteristic of any religion, else the proponents would be saying things like "our religion doesn't have all the answers, soz folks..."
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 07:06 PM   #84
p0lka
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,658
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Matthew, if you want to believe that the Earth is sitting like a round egg and curves a flat space with everything sliding down the curve by all means suit yourself (towards the North or the South pole?).
I think down tends to be toward the centre of mass and not towards any of the poles.

But hey, maybe you're correct and that explains why penguins have flippy flappy wing like things and polar bears don't?
Gravity's a bitch when it's going sideways.

Last edited by p0lka; 29th September 2019 at 07:07 PM.
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 07:20 PM   #85
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Brother, you loose no time! Perhaps one day over coffee or tea, after 20 hours of in person conversation, I may get to convince you.
Convince me about what?

I already know what the scientific method is. You don't have a clue what it is. All you are doing is stringing together incoherent sentences and spamming them onto our science forum.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 10:18 AM   #86
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Convince me about what?

I already know what the scientific method is. You don't have a clue what it is. All you are doing is stringing together incoherent sentences and spamming them onto our science forum.
Convince you in recognizing that since we don't have clear answers, we should not discard the possibilities.

I do not denounce science, I accept the validity of science, but I also recognize its shortcomings (taken conventions would be one of them), as any rational person should.

Science has failed so far, to provide the answers to what and why, caused the cause of the Universe (and a good bet is, it will never provide one; or an answer to what caused that cause).

I cannot think of any-thing in life that was caused arbitrarily, without its cause also have been caused by something else that came to be due to a reason/for a purpose, can you? Why would the Universe be the exception?

Till science can answer the aforementioned, and provide the prologue to the main theme, philosophy (Infinitism is a philosophy not a religion) will suffice.

We will disagree to agree I guess; the truth lies in the mind of the thinker.

Last edited by tazanastazio; 30th September 2019 at 11:27 AM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 10:58 AM   #87
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 22,322
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Convince you in recognizing that since we don't have clear answers, we should not discard the possibilities.
A common sentiment, but nevertheless nonsense: The fact that we don't know everything does not mean everything is possible

Quote:
I do not denounce science, I accept the validity of science, but I also recognize its shortcomings (taken conventions would be one of them), as any rational person should.
You may not denounce it, but you obviously do not understand science.

Quote:
Science has failed so far to provide the answers to what and why, caused the cause of the Universe.
So what?

Quote:
I cannot think of any-thing in life that was caused arbitrarily, without it also have been caused by something else that came to be for a reason, can you?
I don't really think that makes sense. What do you mean with "for a reason"?

Quote:
Why would the Universe be the exception?
Why not. And who says it is?

Quote:
Till science can answer the aforementioned, and provide the prologue to the main theme, philosophy (Infinitism is a philosophy not a religion) will suffice.
That is false. Again, the fact that we don't know all does not mean anyting goes.

Quote:
We will disagree to agree I guess; the truth lies in the mind of the thinker.
False. The truth lies in reality. Even if we don't know the answer, the truth still lies in reality. Whatever we know or don't know has no effect on the truth of the universe.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 11:07 AM   #88
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,298
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
I cannot think of any-thing in life that was caused arbitrarily, without it also have been caused by something else that came to be for a reason, can you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

Quote:
Radioactive decay is a stochastic (i.e. random) process at the level of single atoms. According to quantum theory, it is impossible to predict when a particular atom will decay,[1][2][3] regardless of how long the atom has existed.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 06:14 PM   #89
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
A common sentiment, but nevertheless nonsense: The fact that we don't know everything does not mean everything is possible

If "we don't know everything", how then do we know that something is impossible?


You may not denounce it, but you obviously do not understand science.

I understand enough to consider whether the more probable deduction is that you need something to get something, as opposed to getting it out of nothing.

So what?

Well, simply put, when you assume, and accept conventional stand points you may be wrong. And if you cannot give crystal clear, definitive answers you cannot nullify other possibilities, especially when reason and common sense tilt more towards those possibilities.

I don't really think that makes sense. What do you mean with "for a reason"?

As in "something else caused it, often times to provide a function."



Why not. And who says it is?

Because for all the good reasons a person would thing that to come to an outcome you have to have a start point to lead you to the venue; to get you to the destination.

If it is not, then something caused it due to some cause, or for some cause; and perhaps for a function.



That is false. Again, the fact that we don't know all does not mean anyting goes.

If we don't know it all, how then do we know that something doesn't "go?"



False. The truth lies in reality. Even if we don't know the answer, the truth still lies in reality. Whatever we know or don't know has no effect on the truth of the universe.

Universally unknown reality, is a probable reality. As such, it lies in the mind of the contemplator, who follows reasonable deductions and derives to logical, and plausible conclusions; till proven otherwise.


Hans
Taz

Last edited by tazanastazio; 30th September 2019 at 06:43 PM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 07:08 PM   #90
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 15,561
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
If "we don't know everything", how then do we know that something is impossible?

If we know anything, then we know that some things are impossible. If we know the moon is about a quarter million miles away, we know it's impossible to walk there during your half-hour lunch break. If we know today is a day in September, we know it's impossible tomorrow will be Christmas.

To say nothing is impossible is actually to claim we know nothing.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 07:59 PM   #91
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,106
Quote:
If "we don't know everything", how then do we know that something is impossible?
First, I have no idea how the second part of the sentence follows from the first.

Second, this is just logic 101. Logical possibility (the absolute broadest definition of "possible") precludes certain propositions, such as "A is not identical to A." If you think "A is not identical to A" actually is possible, then you will need to define what you mean by "possiblity." Thanks.
I Am The Scum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 08:25 PM   #92
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,818
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
First, I have no idea how the second part of the sentence follows from the first.

Second, this is just logic 101. Logical possibility (the absolute broadest definition of "possible") precludes certain propositions, such as "A is not identical to A." If you think "A is not identical to A" actually is possible, then you will need to define what you mean by "possiblity." Thanks.
Because Infinitism is different to other religions. Oh, wait....
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 10:23 PM   #93
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
If we know anything, then we know that some things are impossible. If we know the moon is about a quarter million miles away, we know it's impossible to walk there during your half-hour lunch break. If we know today is a day in September, we know it's impossible tomorrow will be Christmas.

To say nothing is impossible is actually to claim we know nothing.
How's it that you said something different here?

When you know something for certain, namely "the moon is far away and while you can walk on it, you cannot walk to it; but you could fly round trip in about 20-30 min during lunch break provided you have a very fast spacecraft parked outside" then you are clear about the possibility.

But when you have no clue what caused the cause of the cause of the Universe, a better bet is on something caused it as opposed to nothing caused it. But either way you cannot nullify the possibility that something caused it, since you have no knowledge to back up your opinion. On the other hand I could say, "We know of nothing that was not caused of/by something, therefore since the Universe is something and we now truly spending our time blogging about it; a safer bet is, something caused whatever caused, the cause of the Universe."

Last edited by tazanastazio; 30th September 2019 at 10:28 PM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 11:01 PM   #94
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
Because Infinitism is different to other religions. Oh, wait....
If you had ever claimed that Newton, Einstein and Hawking had divine intervention, and you have faith in that notion, and if you have decorated the walls in a corner of a room with their pictures, and worshipped them by singing hymns and burning essence to them, then you would have made a religion out of science.

For more info on the difference between religion and philosophy, Google it. Food for thought, if you wash your hands prior to googling to not jinx the quick finding of desired results, you would be one step closer to making religion out of Google or developing OCD.

If you had ever claimed that Newton, Einstein and Hawking had divine intervention, and you have faith in that notion, and if you have decorated the walls in a corner of a room with their pictures, and worshipped them by singing hymns and burning essence to them, then you would have made a religion out of science.

For more info on the difference between religion and philosophy, Google it. Food for thought, if you wash your hands prior to googling to not jinx the quick finding of desired results, you would be one step closer to making religion out of Google or developing OCD.

I don't believe in the cause that caused the cause of the Universe because someone said if I didn't it would be a sin! I conclude that it must be so because the alternative appears nonsensical to me. It would be like saying that the Mona Lisa painted itself, and its paint found itself on the pallete and mixed on its own; or that Leonardo appeared out of thin air and got into the whim all of a sudden to start painting; or that the bacteria that evolved to the humanity that lead to Leornardo decided to do so out of sheer boredom or chance; ... That the whatever-shaped universe appeared like a genie out of Hawking's oil lamp. That time instead of simply being a concept so that organized society could function during the course of a day, and history could be segmented; it is instead a physical object; a street you can ride on back and forth, a book which if you flip the pages forward you can read and tell us what happened; or you can flip the pages back re-write them and change the outcome of Tolstoy's "War and Peace" all - together! BULLFLAKES!

Last edited by tazanastazio; 1st October 2019 at 12:38 AM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 11:08 PM   #95
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 64,252
Google is already a religion.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 11:17 PM   #96
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,298
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
But when you have no clue what caused the cause of the cause of the Universe, a better bet is on something caused it as opposed to nothing caused it.
Why, when that leads to an infinite regression, and when we know uncaused events are possible? I gave you an example above, which I notice you ignored.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 12:11 AM   #97
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Why, when that leads to an infinite regression, and when we know uncaused events are possible? I gave you an example above, which I notice you ignored.
The response of the example you gave, was self-evident. I don't doubt the manner of the deterioration of the atoms; predictable, calculable, programmed to happen so or not, or due to gravitational exposure or what have you. It doesn't answer how the subatomical particles that formed the atoms came to be and why?

Similarly, I don't doubt Evolution; I simply question "What caused the Universe and Why?" I provide a perspective through reasoning and logical conjectures, NOT faith; if not an answer, a philosophical concept (not a religion, can't help it if others ritualize it, not my intention). Namely; it was formed from within the Infinite, which was caused by nothing (being Infinite by definition everything forms from within It and deforms to It instead - it may sound strange/bizarre, but if you have a better way to describe It than "Infinite", by all means). Now at least we have a starting point.

Last edited by tazanastazio; 1st October 2019 at 12:13 AM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 12:51 AM   #98
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,298
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
The response of the example you gave, was self-evident. I don't doubt the manner of the deterioration of the atoms; predictable, calculable, programmed to happen so or not, or due to gravitational exposure or what have you. It doesn't answer how the subatomical particles that formed the atoms came to be and why?
Your argument was that the absence of known cases of uncaused events was a reason to think the universe was caused. I pointed you to a whole class of uncaused events, which negates that argument.

Subatomic particles come (eventually) from the Big Bang, which could easily be another example of an uncaused event. We know quantum fluctuations happen. We know nothing whatsoever about your ideas, as they appear to be pure word salad.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 02:56 AM   #99
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 3,028
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Similarly, I don't doubt Evolution; I simply question "What caused the Universe and Why?" I provide a perspective through reasoning and logical conjectures, NOT faith; if not an answer, a philosophical concept (not a religion, can't help it if others ritualize it, not my intention). Namely; it was formed from within the Infinite, which was caused by nothing (being Infinite by definition everything forms from within It and deforms to It instead - it may sound strange/bizarre, but if you have a better way to describe It than "Infinite", by all means). Now at least we have a starting point.
No, we don't. All you have done is to say that something must have caused the universe. You then posit this cause to be something you term 'The Infinite', which apparently doesn't need a cause.
If 'The Infinite' doesn't need a cause, then why does the universe need one?

On what basis do you assert that 'The Infinite' is caused by nothing?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 05:29 AM   #100
8enotto
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Mexico
Posts: 1,238
Why do we, as humanity , need to know of or understand this Infinite?

What benefits do we now derive of this great knowledge you impart upon us that was not possible before?
I really am curious as to what it is we need of it.

Last edited by 8enotto; 1st October 2019 at 05:30 AM.
8enotto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 08:24 AM   #101
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,106
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
How's it that you said something different here?

When you know something for certain, namely "the moon is far away and while you can walk on it, you cannot walk to it; but you could fly round trip in about 20-30 min during lunch break provided you have a very fast spacecraft parked outside" then you are clear about the possibility.

But when you have no clue what caused the cause of the cause of the Universe, a better bet is on something caused it as opposed to nothing caused it. But either way you cannot nullify the possibility that something caused it, since you have no knowledge to back up your opinion. On the other hand I could say, "We know of nothing that was not caused of/by something, therefore since the Universe is something and we now truly spending our time blogging about it; a safer bet is, something caused whatever caused, the cause of the Universe."
With respect, you seem horribly confused. Take the following inference:

I don't know how much money is in Jim's wallet, therefore it is physically possible for Jim to talk to the moon in half an hour.

Does that seem like a fair conclusion to you? I don't think one can properly connect the ignorance in the first half to the physical possibility in the second.

Last edited by I Am The Scum; 1st October 2019 at 09:23 AM.
I Am The Scum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 08:51 AM   #102
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,007
Who knew Ultimate Truth would be such an multichromatic eyesore?
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 10:31 AM   #103
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
No, we don't. All you have done is to say that something must have caused the universe. You then posit this cause to be something you term 'The Infinite', which apparently doesn't need a cause.
If 'The Infinite' doesn't need a cause, then why does the universe need one?

On what basis do you assert that 'The Infinite' is caused by nothing?

The term Uni-verse, inplies a segment with a beginning and an end. Their is no such limitation for the Infinite. The characterization "Infinite" does not apply to anything else, since everything else must have a beginning, an end and a cause. The Infinite was not caused. All terms derive as an outcome of the concept "Infinite." "Nothing" does not encompass the Infinite. If a physical "nothing" truly existed within the Infinite (It would mean that the Infinite had gaps and limits - unless perhaps infinite minute in comparison). If nothing is not just a concept to describe the absence of something as far as humanity can perceive, or the zero that would divide any segment to negative and positive (and any such segment can in turn be infinitely divided as far as we can imagine); then any such physical nothing, if truly existed, would be included within the Infinite and infinitely fail in comparison. In fact it could not be an actual nothing, but a transitional phase between the three fundamental characteristics of the Infinite ( "characteristics" as far as we humans can describe them)- Energy, Intelligence and Matter. Without the transitional phases we would not have space for mobility within the Infinite. The Infinite must be infinite from every perspective, inwards the infinite microcosm and outwards the infinite macrocosm. Furthermore if Energy was to be extended to actual Infinite proportion it would still not use all Infinite matter and vs versa.

Now the above is an attempt of human intelligence to comprehend and describe what we can best describe with the word "Infinite" to simply differentiate it from everything else - the Finite. The Finite exists; everything that does exist does so within the Infinite. The Finite exists as a result of a cause; the Infinite is the cause of all causes, It has no cause to be. The Infinite simply is; yet even the term "be" does not apply to the Infinite (to "be" implies to have limits).

Last edited by tazanastazio; 1st October 2019 at 11:34 AM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 01:58 PM   #104
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,618
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post

........

I do not denounce science, I accept the validity of science, but I also recognize its shortcomings (taken conventions would be one of them), as any rational person should.

Science has failed so far, to provide the answers to what and why, caused the cause of the Universe (and a good bet is, it will never provide one; or an answer to what caused that cause).

.........

Perhaps you could detail some of the shortcomings of the scientific method. I have no idea what you mean about conventions as a shortcoming, you will have to explain/elaborate on this.

Science hasn't failed in any pursuit of knowledge and understanding. That would only be true if every person threw their hands up and said "I give in" when trying to explain a phenomena.* Actually even this would not indicate a failure of the scientific method, just a failure of people to apply it.


* Only the religious do this.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.

Last edited by Thor 2; 1st October 2019 at 02:00 PM.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 04:43 PM   #105
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,037
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Convince you in recognizing that since we don't have clear answers, we should not discard the possibilities.

I do not denounce science, I accept the validity of science, but I also recognize its shortcomings (taken conventions would be one of them), as any rational person should.

Science has failed so far, to provide the answers to what and why, caused the cause of the Universe (and a good bet is, it will never provide one; or an answer to what caused that cause).

I cannot think of any-thing in life that was caused arbitrarily, without its cause also have been caused by something else that came to be due to a reason/for a purpose, can you? Why would the Universe be the exception?

Till science can answer the aforementioned, and provide the prologue to the main theme, philosophy (Infinitism is a philosophy not a religion) will suffice.

We will disagree to agree I guess; the truth lies in the mind of the thinker.
Why will philosophy suffice? Why is a made up, philosophical answer in anyway superior to "we don't know yet"? What makes you think you simply thinking about it and coming up with something is more valid or useful than not knowing?
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 04:55 PM   #106
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,818
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Why will philosophy suffice? Why is a made up, philosophical answer in anyway superior to "we don't know yet"? What makes you think you simply thinking about it and coming up with something is more valid or useful than not knowing?
You can create a lot more word salad by seeking alternatives to "we don't know yet". Never mind the quality, look at the volume!
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 05:32 PM   #107
Deadie
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
You can create a lot more word salad by seeking alternatives to "we don't know yet". Never mind the quality, look at the volume!
You are clearly educated stupid and do not realize the cubic truth of 4 simultaneous rotational days.

Infinite 4th dimensional quantum entangled naked tesseracts are the real alpha and omega and your inability to parse such ideas is clearly proof of said truth.

Word salad? Nah we got a solid $12 all-you-can-eat-casino-buffet-words.
Deadie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 06:15 PM   #108
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
It doesn't answer how the subatomical particles that formed the atoms came to be and why? .
This is your standard nonsense. As you are unable to set out your incoherent word salad as a coherent scientific hypothesis, you revert to a cover all, back stop, excuse "Well you scientists can't explain to me how the universe started"

However when I direct you to actual scientific theories being formed about that actual topic, like Intersecting Brane theory or string theory, you simply write more word salad and refuse to read the theories being developed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology

https://www.dummies.com/education/sc...string-theory/
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 06:19 PM   #109
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
I do not denounce science, I accept the validity of science....
No. You are lying. You refuse to set out your incoherent belief system as a coherent scientific hypothesis. You simply spam your repetitive word salad, on science forums, to get attention.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 07:40 PM   #110
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Deadie View Post
You are clearly educated stupid and do not realize the cubic truth of 4 simultaneous rotational days.

Infinite 4th dimensional quantum entangled naked tesseracts are the real alpha and omega and your inability to parse such ideas is clearly proof of said truth.

Word salad? Nah we got a solid $12 all-you-can-eat-casino-buffet-words.
No such thing as any more dimensions than 3, time does not exist, gravity does and affects everything within the Infinite; it stretches the fabric of space which is formed by particles; objects deteriorate in it. If you become small enough you'll find yourself in a three dimensional space.

Greeks invented the "A" and the "Ω", time to tell us who invented the quantum tesseracts, Genius.

Last edited by tazanastazio; 1st October 2019 at 07:43 PM.
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 07:58 PM   #111
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
This is your standard nonsense. As you are unable to set out your incoherent word salad as a coherent scientific hypothesis, you revert to a cover all, back stop, excuse "Well you scientists can't explain to me how the universe started"

However when I direct you to actual scientific theories being formed about that actual topic, like Intersecting Brane theory or string theory, you simply write more word salad and refuse to read the theories being developed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology

https://www.dummies.com/education/sc...string-theory/
That's because you have not answer yet whether you believe that the branes and the strings were always there; whether they came out of absolute nothing and nowhere; or whether they were formed by something else; and if the latter is the case what formed that and why?
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 10:17 PM   #112
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,818
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
That's because you have not answer yet whether you believe that the branes and the strings were always there; whether they came out of absolute nothing and nowhere; or whether they were formed by something else; and if the latter is the case what formed that and why?
Believe? Belief is not required. The question is irrelevant and the post sidesteps the question posed to you by Mr Ellard.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 12:57 AM   #113
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
No such thing as any more dimensions than 3, time does not exist,
That sentence clarifies that you know absolutely nothing about basic science.

How would different wave frequencies exist if there was no such thing as time?

Yet here you are seeing different colours, (electromagnetic waves at varying frequencies.)

You really need to read a basic book on science before posting again as you are simply embarrassing yourself.......again........
Attached Images
File Type: jpg physics for dummies.jpg (41.6 KB, 1 views)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 01:07 AM   #114
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,353
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
I cannot think of any-thing in life that was caused arbitrarily,
Random and arbitrary mutations occur in DNA chains. The environment then sorts out the more advantageous random mutation chains from the less beneficial mutations for that environment.

This is called the theory of evolution. You said you agreed with the theory of evolution when it is clear you haven't a clue what the the theory is.

Please stop posting on our science forum until you have read a basic book on evolution.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Evolution for dummies.jpg (25.1 KB, 1 views)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 02:03 AM   #115
Cosmic Yak
Illuminator
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 3,028
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
No, we don't. All you have done is to say that something must have caused the universe. You then posit this cause to be something you term 'The Infinite', which apparently doesn't need a cause.
If 'The Infinite' doesn't need a cause, then why does the universe need one?

On what basis do you assert that 'The Infinite' is caused by nothing?
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
The term Uni-verse, inplies a segment with a beginning and an end.
Citation needed, because I don't think it does.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Their is no such limitation for the Infinite.
Becasue you say so.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
The characterization "Infinite" does not apply to anything else, since everything else must have a beginning, an end and a cause.
Because you say so.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
The Infinite was not caused.
Because you say so.

(Snipped yet more bare assertions)

Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Now the above is an attempt of human intelligence to comprehend and describe what we can best describe with the word "Infinite" to simply differentiate it from everything else - the Finite.
No. The above is you inventing something you call 'The Infinite', and then using all sorts of special pleading to make it do the things you want it to do, apparently in an attempt to appear superior to everyone else.
Trust me, it isn't working.
Try some kind of evidence. You could even try logic, which is often used as a last resort by the religious when it becomes apparent they haven't actually got any evidence for their claimed gods (and your 'Infinite' sounds suspiciously like a god).
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
The Finite exists; everything that does exist does so within the Infinite. The Finite exists as a result of a cause; the Infinite is the cause of all causes, It has no cause to be. The Infinite simply is; yet even the term "be" does not apply to the Infinite (to "be" implies to have limits).
Bare assertions, special pleading and some semantic tomfoolery.
Nothing more.
Do please give some thought as to how you would demonstrate the existence of this special thingy you have made up. I look forward to your presentation.
Kind of.
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 02:54 PM   #116
tazanastazio
Thinker
 
tazanastazio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 208
Originally Posted by 8enotto View Post
Why do we, as humanity , need to know of or understand this Infinite?

What benefits do we now derive of this great knowledge you impart upon us that was not possible before?
I really am curious as to what it is we need of it.
Science will almost always be able to answer the "How", but quite often not the "What" and the "Why."
tazanastazio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 03:13 PM   #117
p0lka
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,658
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
No such thing as any more dimensions than 3, time does not exist, gravity does and affects everything within the Infinite; it stretches the fabric of space which is formed by particles; objects deteriorate in it. If you become small enough you'll find yourself in a three dimensional space.

Greeks invented the "A" and the "Ω", time to tell us who invented the quantum tesseracts, Genius.
Re: the highlighted
then how do your posts appear one after another?
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 04:25 PM   #118
Deadie
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Greeks invented the "A" and the "Ω", time to tell us who invented the quantum tesseracts, Genius.
I did.
Deadie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 04:31 PM   #119
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,037
Originally Posted by tazanastazio View Post
Science will almost always be able to answer the "How", but quite often not the "What" and the "Why."

Care to show your work on that one? Secondly you still haven't answered my question, why is your philosophy in any way better that "we don't know"? What does your philosophical answer lead us to that is better than "we don't know"? "We don't know" is a far more satisfying answer and certainly more exciting than a philosophical answer that leaves us looking nowhere.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 04:43 PM   #120
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,848
Originally Posted by Deadie View Post
I did.
No, I did. As a surprise for my daughter at her eighth birthday party. She was thrilled!
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:09 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.