The sphere is not flat but 2d. You can know your triangle is in 3d space by counting the sum of the angles.

My wife has the uncanny habit to wanno know everything of my whereabouts. I tend to forget taking my phone with me when I go to Amsterdam to visit my mum and granny. Now she is worried that Im gonna buy oxazepam at a local pharmacist. She should be, as I left an addiction to that shit behind me. I took 10 50 mg pills a day. I quit when my provider died (and let me tell you, quiting cold turkey can better be framed as a zero Kelvin turkey!). But I can also buy it on the net. During that zeroK turkey I lost even the ability to buy a train ticket at the automat... But a few months ago, I couldnt resist. I bought some of it on the net (I had to buy bitcoins first). To my surprise an envelope did indeed arrive. She gave me the envelope. "This one's for you. What's in it?". I told her I bought some stamps I saw at an auction. That they were very cheap and I could sell them for more. Now Im not sure what happened the following 24 hours. I cant remember. But certainly she must have noticed something. I couldnt find the rest of the 3 strips of 10. I surely didnt eat them. She didnt say anything about it. Was it wrong to lie about the stamps?

I ask the question, what is a flat triangle on a round paper? — Winner568

No longer flat.

what are the original presentations being re-presented? — Joshs

Good one.

All this stuff about symmetry breaking. From the moment I learned it had donuts, no, doubts about this. When already the Higgs mechanism is non-existent (modern day phlogiston) then what about the other two?

But mathematical physics is certainly not dogmatic about these kinds of things. — apokrisis

Mathematical physics no. Physicists yes.

At / below the Planck radius, "before the BB" makes no sense to speculate about; — 180 Proof

Why not?

only if you have a few billion years to run the trial... — Michael Zwingli

Not true.

You have clashing brane theories that make use of string theory’s higher dimensionality — apokrisis

I said, the prevailing view. Branes and pyrotechnics dont offer a good explanation to confine matter (except gravitons) on a brane.

@Seppo is suddenly very quiet! Now why should that be?

As Koelmans says, — apokrisis

WTF is Koelmans? Sounds Dutch: The cool man.

Physics is.. sort of broken right now (cosmology and particle physics at any rat — Seppo

Then it needs a fix.

my background is in philosophy not physics — Seppo

Then who tha hell are you to criticise me? My "background", as you put it very imaginatively, is physics. And my foreground is philosophy. On top, it's raining on me. I have two lions of science on both sides.

Facts describe the way things are. — Shawn

Very true. That's the definition. But what and how or why is the way things are?

Appropiate emoticon! :cry:

Watch the film "Loving" and reconsider. — tim wood

What's the film about?

I don't see as having a chance. — Prishon

The native Americans see the invaders as Hitlerian. They were slaughtered and put in concentration camps. There hunting fields were taken from them. Compare with the treatment of jews. That attitude is still there.

However you look at consciousness, be it materialistically or attributable to some metaphysical stuff, it doesn't resolve pain nor explain it. Though some material called heroin can make metaphysical pain go away. I guess that's why the substitute of heroin is metadone.

"Good morning, sir"
And you responding :
"Oh my friend first we have to clarify the definition of what good is. After what you define as morning since it's almost 12, so you could easily say noon. And last but not least to define what you mean with Sir. Since I could easily be a transgender woman dressed like a Sir! ". — dimosthenis9

Good one! :lol: .

Absolutely no. The constitution is as it ever was. Equal chances and opportunities for all. If Im not mistaken as an outsider Dutch guy. The US is an abstract entity, like the constitution. And which anti-authoritarian is against equal for all? It are the people who authoritarian. They fill in the abstract constitution. But the US itself, about which the question is asked, is not. In practice, freedom for all cultures, seems still farawy, though a new Hitlerian I don't see as having a chance.

From this, one must consider that, while the fact of our human existence might not be a miracle, it is yet miraculous. — Michael Zwingli

A miraculous wonder that can be addressed! ☺

Once upon a time, it was the Planck-era, spaceytime was wildly fluctuating. Virtual gravitons were causing uproar again. This happens periodically as all know. When real mass and energy are absent, they get scared and behave in unpredictable ways although hidden variables make them more determined. To give both fluctuating rishon fields, from which they stem, a chance to get real. The rishon fields are in fact the instigators. They wanna become excited and thereby give the gravitons something substantial to cling on.

After the the bang, order is restored and all fields happily move on in unity, holding hands by virtual fields

in the right environment...in this case the warm primordial sea) — Michael Zwingli

That's not enough. There is needed a periodic inflow and outflow of heat.

My wife says that I truly joined the bed with another one. It's true for her. (she actually rubs it into my face right now telling me to move from behind my phone) I know for a fact this hasn't happened! When I say to her that it's she thinking that she says its me thinking that it hasnt happened and Im delusional because it diid happen. Cant we divert this to a Platonic realm?

Keep saying funny things like that and I'll never argue with you. — TheMadFool

:lol:

the answer seems to be probability. With localized random intensifications of energy in pre-universal space having occurred throughout "time", there was bound to be an intesification profound enough to begin the inverse reaction of the mass-energy equivalence reaction described by E=mc^2. — Michael Zwingli

This comes very close.

After all, I'm sure you would agree with the conventional reply when folk ask what is the Universe expanding into. Very quickly you will say it is just the expansion of the metric itself. The Universe is not embedded in some larger space. — apokrisis

The prevailing view (the dogma) is that space can't be embedded in a higher dimensiolal one. But thats questionable, although the dogma forbids asking this. But 3d space can be immersed in 4d space. Causing expansion to be an illusion.

We're not talking about knowledge and ability. What we're concerned with is the reality of math. Is it discovered, in which case Platonism would be true, or is it invented, Platonism false? The reat of my argument follows from that. — TheMadFool

If it's already there in the mind (which I dont think, but the inner world could be the Platonic realm) we only have to look in there with the mind's eye to discover it. We can then apply it to the outer world. It depends on you willing to find this math. Does math exist in the physical world, as that dopey Tegmark conjectures (and even an infinity of "Parallel level-4 universes" full of it!)? Then where can I see Einsteins equations, supposedly written in Nature, only to be read by us? Galileo talked anout the book of Nature, Hawing said that God is a mathematician, math is thought to be "unreasonably effective" (hinting to its objective existence). But maybe the book of Nature is written in the language of freedom, is math reasonably effective, and is God a freedom fighter.

Last time I looked at the wiki page I could have sworn there was a theory about smoke getting in the eyes of early hom sap at its funeral pyres. — bongo fury

Could that be the reason we cry at funerals? Or is it just smoke of the crematory exhaust pipes, blowing the remnants of granny in our eyes?

But the whereabout of Platonic realm is not conclusive is it? It does not preclude possibility of its locus in the human mind, does it? — Corvus

:ok:

Life on other planets different from the life here but the base is the same.

Indeed! So, the thought/thinking is like travelling. It can be done by foot (brain), by car, by plane, by ship, teleportation, etc i.e. the brain is just many ways thinking can be achieved. In other words, thinking isn't exclusively brain and that, in a sense, liberates thinking from biology onto other substrates. — TheMadFool

I think there is only one boat, the biological boat. Why wouldnt other boats have been around us? The information whirling around in the brain (not being able to do this withou a body or a physical world in which its immersed) cant be separated to continue in a non-biological man-made substrate.

TBD — 180 Proof

So was I wondering! To Be Discussed? Two Balls Dick? To Be Daft? Togger Beaf Dunckle?

Signing out for the night my time. — Wayfarer

Ah, youre on the other side. G'night!

SORRY, BUT YOUR SOUL JUST DIED

It is the great intellectual event of the late 20th century: new discoveries in neuroscience are challenging our established ideas about morality, free will and human nature. But can science really tell the whole story?

Yet somehow the same! What recognizes that? It would be nous, right? — Wayfarer

It's the numbers equalizing.

But that doesn’t do justice to the predictive ability of maths, to make discoveries about reality that could otherwise never be made — Wayfarer

New predictions can be made indeed. But whats the quality of these prediction?

If you can recognise ‘=‘ then you’re pretty well on the way, aren’t you? What kind of basic intellectual machinery would you have to have to recognise that this equals that? Pretty advanced — Wayfarer

Left and right of the = there are different things.

. I assume that if biology can produce thinking organisms, then nature does not constrain a sufficiently advanced thinking organism from, at least in principle, engineering a 'synthetic thinker'. — 180 Proof

I principle, this is impossible.

This reminds me of quantum phyiscs ... — Alkis Piskas

I was thinking exactly that too! :grin:

Terra incognita indeed.