by D wiltshire 29 Replies latest jw friends
D w,
The laws of thermodynamics, for one. Heat energy goes from a warmer to a colder object until both have the same temperature. If the universe had always existed, everything would have the same temperature.
- Jan
--
"Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets
Mindchild,
You touched on to something here:
Are you playing Devil's advocate and want to question everything or are you looking for information about an issue important to you?
I want to question what people tell me. It's my right as a human being to question, when I was in a cult I could not question some men in Brooklyn. When people tell me things that effect my life I will question as much as I like not as much as you like but as much as I like.
So please don't get offended if you don't have a satifactory answer to my question. It's only me and I don't mean no harm, I just have to question, I not looking for you to give me information, but if you offer it, it is my perogative to question it's soundness with relevent QUESTIONS, dig.
And as regards this:
In science, very few things are 100% sure.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
Here's a (probably stupid) thought: doesn't the existence of the present proves that matter has not always existed?
For matter to have always existed, historical time must be infinite. This means that the current present moment is an infinite amount of time in the future from a point sometime in the infinite past.
Infinity cannot be reached however, by definition. Therefore it would be impossible for time to progress to the present moment, since we are located at a point in infinity on the path of time. In the same way, we will never reach an infinite future.
Since we are here, in the present, which has obviously been reached, the past is therefore finite. Which means matter cannot have an infinite history.
Alternatively, time is infinite, and anyone you meet is a product of your own deranged imagination.
Next week: the Douglas Adams proof that the population of the universe is zero.
Expatbrit
DW;
You said;
And if you don't accept their beleif, you are said, not to be intelligent.
Personally, I said nothing of the sort and in fact stated the contrary, and I didn't notice anyone saying, "YO!, D Wiltshire knows shit about physics, he's stoopid!"
You seem to fail to realise that stating that maybe you don't understand something because you haven't the required level of knowledge to grasp the concept is different to saying you are not intelligent enough to grasp the subject.
Example; a child as smart as Einstein would not understand the theory of relativity (either one) unless it had the required level of knowledge. The child would not be stupid, it would not be educated enough.
As such, your claim of 'straw man' (as already pointed out, actually ad hominem) attacks seems groundless.
In fact, I think you are either playing silly buggers, or are being unfair. Unfair, how? By expecting US to teach you fairly elementary stuff.
I don't know about other posters here, but since leaving the Borg I have not grown more intelligent, but I have gained abilities and knowledge. I am now far more able to dissect arguements and spot falacies, or identify underhand arguementative techniques (I was taught how to use them as a Dub, but didn't know they were underhand or had names). I also have a far higher level of knowledge about Science than I had before. And I was geeky science boy growing up, and as a Dub fancied I was quite well educated. It's only now I can see the intellectual dishonesty and lack of understanding behind books like the 'Creation' book.
I didn't learn the basics by posting 'but why?', 'but why?', 'but why?' on discussion boards... I'm sure there is a library near you, I'm not expecting you to go to College (although I and others have), hell, you have Internet, check out some Newsgroups...
You are right to say;
I want to question what people tell me. It's my right as a human being to question, when I was in a cult I could not question some men in Brooklyn. When people tell me things that effect my life I will question as much as I like not as much as you like but as much as I like.
And people will answer until they get bored with TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOU. Now you are leaving a cult it is time to take responsibility for yourself. It is UP TO YOU to learn and move on. People here can help, but YOU have prime responsibility now. If you don't understand what we are talking about, FIND OUT! Don't just say, in effect "I don't understand, it must be wrong".
You also say;
I not looking for you to give me information, but if you offer it, it is my perogative to question it's soundness with relevent QUESTIONS, dig.
With respect you ARE looking for us to give you information, and that's fine up to a point. But when your questions are so basic as to be irrelevent, don't be surprised if peiople react funny.
Please take this the right way; I respect your efforts to come to a better understanding of the world. But you seem locked in a circle where if you don't get it, or it's an alien concept, you assume falsehood rather than lack of knowledge on your part.
That's not fair, so do something about it.
And as regards this:
In science, very few things are 100% sure.
Keep on rocking in the free world...
DW...Abaddon did a great job for explaining my own thoughts but I just wanted to add that I wasn't upset with you, only wondering if you were really looking to question Epistemology (the discipline relating to telling what is true or false) or if you wanted to discuss cosmology.
Skipper
All great deeds and all great thoughts have ridiculous beginnings--Albert Camus
Mindchild,
In answer to:
DW...Abaddon did a great job for explaining my own thoughts but I just wanted to add that I wasn't upset with you, only wondering if you were really looking to question Epistemology (the discipline relating to telling what is true or false) or if you wanted to discuss cosmology.
Just looking for truth and questioning what is truth to see if it is really Truth.
I know that some will get into a religious ferver over the QUESTION of the great first cause.
My purpose is not to upset anyone just to see what is true and test out theories with questions, question that one may be afraid to ask because it upsets their beleifs.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
DW,
Thank you for your clarification but you might be advised not to strike matches in a room full of gas fumes! LOL!
There are a lot of people who enjoy discussing the merits of truth telling tools, belief systems, and memes. I think you can even call people who get into this subject: postmodern radical constructivists.
We do create models for reality. Some of us buy prepackaged models called "religions" and try to fit that into our conceptual experiences with different results. Others choose to use more logical tools, such as science or logical constructs as truth telling tools. All known mental tools have limitations and areas of applicability. For instance, I cannot use science to disprove that invisible dancing pink elephants inhabit Kingdom Halls after hours. I see no evidence for this being true however, and give it little relevance but by knowing that all models of reality are flawed, I cannot say that this is absolutely impossible, nor can you.
A lot of people feel uncomfortable with a small amount of uncertainty. Fortunately, you can learn to live with it and science does a great job of answering the important and relevant questions. There are lots of things we don't know but there are many things we do and they follow a coherent pattern that guides us in discovering new things.
In closing I wanted to offer a thought now about testing people in their adherence to a particular belief. We are more or less hardwired to construct models of reality. We have emotional attachments to our models and our ego fights to maintain that status quo. Even scientists get caught up in their pet theories and are reluctant to let things go until the evidence is overwhelming that their theory comes up lacking and better models are more useful. Typically, I find that if someone has a rather strong emotional reaction towards you questioning their theory, model or paradigm of reality, it could be that subconsciously their model is rather weak and the Ego is just doing the standard protect the self bit. This doesn't apply if you are being a pain in the ass or getting on someone's nerves. LOL
Reality just isn't like it used to be.
Skipper
All great deeds and all great thoughts have ridiculous beginnings--Albert Camus
JanH
"The laws of thermodynamics, for one. Heat energy goes from a warmer to a colder object until both have the same temperature. If the universe had always existed, everything would have the same temperature."
I dont think thats quite right.This only works in a closed system without energy going in to it.
To prove this applies to the known universe would imply knowledge of what is outside.Which no one has.
If you think of it if this were true there would never be a universe in the first place as it would never have got different energies in different places.
Also this is an statistical phenomenon that applies to the above quantum world.In the quatum world according to current understanding random fluctuations occour meaning that in the "real"world the laws of thermondynamics do not always have to happen.Just most of the time it does .
It was such a random fluctuation that physicists belive caused the universe.
Sleepy,
That's a interesting obuservation.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
Sleepy,
I think what you have posted will make persons think.
As you bring out there are variables and facts not known that can make mans theories about the origin of the universe change drastically.
I never said in this thread that I personally beleive that matter always existed.
I just wanted to show we only have theories and not conclusive facts.
My question was for that purpose.
You statement I think does bring more light on the uncertainty.
Actually I'm more inclinded to favor, matter having a begining or perhaps a transferral from pure energy.(nothing + nothing = nothing)
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
