Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Shadowy Man · 07-10-2002, 07:38 PM

True.

phaedrus · 07-10-2002, 10:25 PM

*imagination/cynical cap on* Just think of it as infinite both towards a macroscopic level as well as down to the infinitesimal. A continum of which we are but a small part and any definition of "frontier" or "boundary* is merely provisional with a huge foot note saying subject to change on further evidence

We will continue to analyse and theorise sitting here on our planet, but for all we know we are just some sort of cosmological insignificance. So lets just get along with our lives while the postulations and evidence keeps coming.

WJ · 07-11-2002, 04:38 AM

Here's an oldy but goody:

Nothing. Let us consider it as a term. Now, et us try and define Nothing. Is Nothing the lack of Something? If we try to find an example in the existing Universe, can we succeed? Nothing should be the lack of:

Matter. Obviously, if there is matter, then it is defined as something, excluding the existence of Nothing.

Energy. Another word for matter, or vice versa; same logic applies to it as well.

Emanations. Or, not-matter, not-energy. Just in case we haven't covered everything with the first two.

Space. Space? Space is not exactly matter, nor energy.. more in category of our next term

Perception. Why perception? Because if Nothing is there, then simple perception gives it definition, and Nothing is void of anything, including definitions.

The following conclusion is that Nothing simply excludes itself. If it exists, then by its very act of existence it gains definition, thus rendering it into Something (for example the definition of Nothing), which definitely is not Nothing.

---------------------------
NOTHING COMES EASY

Nothing is the opposite of everything.

Thought turns Nothing into something.

You get something from Nothing.

Thinking makes Nothing something.

Nothing only exists in relation to its opposite only if we choose to think of it in relationship to something.

Nothing cannot exist without thought.

Nothing comes easy.

As a matter of fact, there's Nothing to it.

Mr. Sammi · 07-11-2002, 04:40 AM

I disagree that there is no outside the universe.

Outside the universe lies infinity. QM would show that it is difficult to pin the exact boundary due to the "infinity of possibilities" of where the edge of the universe actually lies.

When a measurement is taken, and the universe disclosed, the expansion set is indeterminate, thus when the next measurement is taken, it is seen to encompass the last measurement, the universe actually expanded.

Looking back the universe was expanding, so what was it expanding into?

It was expanding into the infinity of quantum possibilities...

Concluding that outside the universe lies infinity.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

Shadowy Man · 07-11-2002, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Sammi:
Outside the universe lies infinity. QM would show that it is difficult to pin the exact boundary due to the "infinity of possibilities" of where the edge of the universe actually lies.

When a measurement is taken, and the universe disclosed, the expansion set is indeterminate,thus when the next measurement is taken,it is seen to encompass the last measurement, the universe actually expanded.

What does all of this mean?? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Mr. Sammi · 07-11-2002, 08:29 AM

Shadowy Man, It probably means your brain is also growing, however at this point it is indeterminate about what you know or what you do not know.

In the end you will know, and your brain had expanded.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

Shadowy Man · 07-11-2002, 10:41 AM

I guess my problem with understanding what you wrote is that you use some terms that have specific meanings in Quantum Mechanics in a way that is not congruent with my current understanding of the subject. Of course it has been a few years since my last QM class.

Mr. Sammi · 07-11-2002, 11:10 AM

Shadowy Man,

In the light, I need particles to work with. oh oh, cross out the particles, i meant particulars.

Did you mean my use of infinity, in a cross-disciplined manner. The predictability of the edge of the universe is bounded by infinite possibilities. And infinity as an approximation of the bounds.

Or did you mean expansion set, which would be the set of quantum indeterminates, which dictates the next set of state changes.

Not(expansion set) would mean a coherent topology.

Sammi Na Boodie ()

Liquidrage · 07-11-2002, 01:14 PM

Sammi,

Your view has the presupposition that the universe has an edge.

I have never seen a serious model of the universe in which there is an edge. It would be like saying that because of the BB there is a "center" of the universe that all things are expanding away from. Which isn't how it appears to be.

QM wouldn't tell us that the edge is difficult to pin down, because QM doesn't tell us there is an edge to measure.

Shadowy Man · 07-11-2002, 01:20 PM

I guess I don't understand things like:

Quote:

The predictability of the edge of the universe is bounded by infinite possibilities. And infinity as an approximation of the bounds.

I understand what each word means, but I don't understand what your sentence means.
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[ July 11, 2002: Message edited by: Shadowy Man ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-10-2002, 07:38 PM	#11
Shadowy Man Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Shadowy Planet Posts: 7,585	True.

07-10-2002, 10:25 PM	#12
phaedrus Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Indus Posts: 1,038	imagination/cynical cap on Just think of it as infinite both towards a macroscopic level as well as down to the infinitesimal. A continum of which we are but a small part and any definition of "frontier" or "boundary* is merely provisional with a huge foot note saying subject to change on further evidence We will continue to analyse and theorise sitting here on our planet, but for all we know we are just some sort of cosmological insignificance. So lets just get along with our lives while the postulations and evidence keeps coming.

07-11-2002, 04:38 AM	#13
WJ Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 812	Here's an oldy but goody: Nothing. Let us consider it as a term. Now, et us try and define Nothing. Is Nothing the lack of Something? If we try to find an example in the existing Universe, can we succeed? Nothing should be the lack of: Matter. Obviously, if there is matter, then it is defined as something, excluding the existence of Nothing. Energy. Another word for matter, or vice versa; same logic applies to it as well. Emanations. Or, not-matter, not-energy. Just in case we haven't covered everything with the first two. Space. Space? Space is not exactly matter, nor energy.. more in category of our next term Perception. Why perception? Because if Nothing is there, then simple perception gives it definition, and Nothing is void of anything, including definitions. The following conclusion is that Nothing simply excludes itself. If it exists, then by its very act of existence it gains definition, thus rendering it into Something (for example the definition of Nothing), which definitely is not Nothing. --------------------------- NOTHING COMES EASY Nothing is the opposite of everything. Thought turns Nothing into something. You get something from Nothing. Thinking makes Nothing something. Nothing only exists in relation to its opposite only if we choose to think of it in relationship to something. Nothing cannot exist without thought. Nothing comes easy. As a matter of fact, there's Nothing to it.

07-11-2002, 04:40 AM	#14
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	I disagree that there is no outside the universe. Outside the universe lies infinity. QM would show that it is difficult to pin the exact boundary due to the "infinity of possibilities" of where the edge of the universe actually lies. When a measurement is taken, and the universe disclosed, the expansion set is indeterminate, thus when the next measurement is taken, it is seen to encompass the last measurement, the universe actually expanded. Looking back the universe was expanding, so what was it expanding into? It was expanding into the infinity of quantum possibilities... Concluding that outside the universe lies infinity. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-11-2002, 08:29 AM	#16
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	Shadowy Man, It probably means your brain is also growing, however at this point it is indeterminate about what you know or what you do not know. In the end you will know, and your brain had expanded. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-11-2002, 10:41 AM	#17
Shadowy Man Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Shadowy Planet Posts: 7,585	I guess my problem with understanding what you wrote is that you use some terms that have specific meanings in Quantum Mechanics in a way that is not congruent with my current understanding of the subject. Of course it has been a few years since my last QM class.

07-11-2002, 11:10 AM	#18
Mr. Sammi Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Montr�al Posts: 367	Shadowy Man, In the light, I need particles to work with. oh oh, cross out the particles, i meant particulars. Did you mean my use of infinity, in a cross-disciplined manner. The predictability of the edge of the universe is bounded by infinite possibilities. And infinity as an approximation of the bounds. Or did you mean expansion set, which would be the set of quantum indeterminates, which dictates the next set of state changes. Not(expansion set) would mean a coherent topology. Sammi Na Boodie ()

07-11-2002, 01:14 PM	#19
Liquidrage Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 1,301	Sammi, Your view has the presupposition that the universe has an edge. I have never seen a serious model of the universe in which there is an edge. It would be like saying that because of the BB there is a "center" of the universe that all things are expanding away from. Which isn't how it appears to be. QM wouldn't tell us that the edge is difficult to pin down, because QM doesn't tell us there is an edge to measure.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.