The facts (as they stand): — Agent Smith

Unsurpassable!

but literally interact with and is made up of many many particles — MAYAEL

You see? The particles are real!

We could at least form some kind of coherent weltanschauung with this method, yes? — Agent Smith

A coherent Weltanschauung? WTF are you talking about Agent? God is alive and kicking but his legs are too short to reach us.

So are you... Can you prove yourself?

Literally painting philosophical issues is an assurance for making good money. Every rich snob wants an intelligent painting to hang around instead of Christ. Philosophers are the most intelligent people on Earth. Or at least they seem. Magritte made superbly intelligent stuff. With a touch of sterility, probably due to his lack of technique. Don't we all love his canons ready to shoot a bullet through the surface of reality? Who can't admire his floating English men or his paintings in paintings? You could copy his mind's eye with lightning instead of blue sky with wooley white clouds. Sell it for 799,95 and give a nice reduction on the second painting.

An ontological commitment though can't exist before you have had pragmatic confrontation. The ontological commitment is based on a knowledge of the object/subject in question. It has to be admitted though that there seems an a priori knowledge of, and an accompanying ontological commitment to most objects/subjects one approaches. These might be innate or gathered by myriads of (unconscious) encounters one has during life from which a new (conscious) approach can follow.

We are not different from animals. Animals have fixed clothes and thought patterns. We are free to create them. Which is not intrinsically different. We have a moral obligation though towards other kinds of clothes and thought patterns. One pattern is no better than another. Same for clothes.

The ticking of a clock is an example to test an infinite chain of events (in this case the infinite ticks). Each of the "infinite succession of beginnings in time" you refer to is like the tick of a clock. — Down The Rabbit Hole

I don't refer to each tick as beginning of a new chain. I refer to beginnings in time for each new big bang. Suppose a big bang starts of like a 3D closed spatial structure on an infinite 4D substrate. When the two 3D structures have accelerated away towards the infinities on the 4D structures, conditions are set at the origin on the 4D substrate for two mirrored 3D universes to break free from the real, reversible perfect clock state. This state is a Planck sized 3D volume going back and forth , hence the perfect clock state. Then again, entropic time starts, not from t is zero but from the the slightly bigger Planck time (about 10exp-43 seconds). Again, two universes (matter/antimatter) are existent. The matter in these 3D pair can accelerate away again on the 4D substrate space (dark energy!). And again conditions are set at the origin of the 4D mouth to "shout" two new universes into existence. And again (entropic) time starts at about t=0 (slightly more actually, but precisely enough not to cause trouble).

I think the nonlocal, perhaps nonelectromagnetic field that is probably responsible — Enrique

You think it's perhaps probably responsible? What is a nonelectromagnetic field? A hidden variables field?

It strikes me that in neither case (the planets and the clock) is there a logical problem. It’s just that there are things missing or that you can’t do given the nature of infinity. — AJJ

The thing missing is an initial state. Time needs an initial state and is irreversible because any state cannot serve as a begin state for the reversed process. There are two types of time. Coordinate, clock time, an imaginary for i entropic time, and the real (reversible) clock time, in which entropic time is still absent, the pre-inflationary state of our 3D universe on the 4D substrate space.

the final cool down — Manuel

Sounds intruiging! That's how the story should be told to the public! Apart from the pictures it expects something more for 10 billion. Luckily there is Wayfarer!

Your modesty adorns you! :smile:

Point-set topology. Sounds delicious indeed! I had a dream about related stuff (I think). I got entangled between loads of things resembling Feynman diagrams in empty space. With all kinds of colors. Somehow the dream told me something. The continuum not being point-like maybe?

Yeah man! Only the anticipation of the first photo makes it worthwhile. Are "ordinary" pictures taken too? What if it looked at Earth? Could it see me? No... seems too much.

Sorry to move the goalposts, but what if instead of the orbiting planets it's an infinitely ticking clock — Down The Rabbit Hole

Ah! It's here that you make a wrong assumption. There is no clock tic-tac-ing eternally. Only an infinite sequence of clocks taking of from perfect clock states. The universe is eternal but there is an infinite succession of beginnings in time. An infinite eternal universe isn't a physical possibility. If there were no point zero in time life could not develop. It would be a time and spaceless universe devoid of matter. I.e. a nothing.
The steady state universe enjoyed some popularity but was not tenable.

Life after life" (anti-anxiety placebo) is nonsense like e.g. north of the North Pole. — 180 Proof

But there is above the North Pole. North is up, south is down. Reflecting the Boreal Imperium being on top of the globe. Like after this life is a logical necessity actually.

What's your avatar about? A tear in a building?

Haha! His soul secretly leaped in my body... Funny guy, though a somewhat heavy load to carry. Many more have made attempts, with varying success.

it has reference to sexist ideology. — L'éléphant

Sexist ideology? Is women being different from man an idea only? Or is it the stupid idea that women have less value? Women are different.

Look at the orbit of Webb:




Webb orbits L2! So it's not stationary. It takes 6 months to complete one full orbit.

Michio Kaku, in his book "The Future of Humanity," states that if the human race can survive another 200 years (from 2015, so another 193 years now), — Zolenskify

So we just have to make sure we survive the coming 193 years? Doesn't this sound...hmmm... funny maybe?

My response to this is that seven billion people on Earth has not hit the minimum headcount that would make my advice work by way of creating a critical mass of willingly paying customers for philosophical insight. — god must be atheist

It depends on the insights one has to offer.

(1) Describe data collection method and problem data is being used to study.
(2) Identify derivable statistics for problem and their distributions.
(3) Aggregate derived statistics into a statistical model appropriate for research question.
(4) Model fitting - instabilities? weirdness? go to (1) .
(5) Model checking - violated assumptions? go to (1)
(6) Fit checking - what purpose is the model to be given?
(7) Impact assessment - what does the model mean for the problem at hand?
(8) Interpretive conclusions? Ambiguities? Quantificational results? Improvements for further study?
(9) Return to (2) until all avoidable violations and weirdness have been removed or accounted for and fit is adequate. — fdrake

In other words: insofar as possible, isolate the piece of world you wanna investigate, hold it against or in bright light, turn it upside-down, inside-out, vice-versa, squeeze it, pull it, throw it, heaten it up or cool it down, while you mentally paint a picture of a state of affairs. Try to write up your mental model, by every means possible. Repeat the process until the desired level of understanding suffices for the use of the piece of world.

Yeah, I remember it well, I cant state the title, director, date first released etc. I don't have those geek level credentials (I don't judge those that do) but my geekness does remember the main points of the 'episode'. The species below considers the arrival of this new 'star' in the sky as 'from the gods' or 'is god', so its a parody of the 'star of Bethlehem fable — universeness

Yes! That's the one! Seems an appropriate episode for this thread!

On the issue of gods we'll never agree, I guess. Sorry for you... (just kidding!).

I'm not sure where your preoccupation with number of periods of planets? If you increase the number of the revolutions of one planet in particular, what's the problem?

There is one episode of Star Trek, with the female captain, I can vividly remember. They arrived near a planet and saw the planet developing in a crazy pace. They could see history of ages in hours. From the surface of the planet the Enterprise was a static appearance in the sky. Contact was difficult. Can't remember the details but it made an impression!

No religion should NEVER be forbidden but its tenets should always be challenged and its claims must be proved before accepted. — universeness

Agreed! So, me too shout, fulfilled with pristine joy, inviting praise, righteous surrender, and obedient voice: "Hallelujah! Brothers and sisters of the Glorious Conglomerate! Brothers and sisters of the Eternal Erect and the Unvincible Dual Ejaculate, let's hold hands and ask that MF to just leave us alone! Let's...etc."

How can a claim of the (a)theist be proven right or wrong?

There are things I disagree with. The time in the Planck era volume can be considered not as a new clock but as a perfect clock by itself.

Are they first cousins, or even siblings? — ucarr

They are mother and child. Solipsism is the belief that all perceived reality is a perception without an actual content. That all we can be sure of are our perceptions. Believing this means believing other people and God are not real. Not believing in god doesn't mean that you believe other people are not real.

So solipsism can be seen as a mother or father of atheism. Atheism, consequently, is then the child. The child though can revolt though. The mother can be solipsist, giving life to non-belief in God. The atheist son can always claim God to be real, rebelling against his pagan mother, who even thinks her son's newly found belief is utterly unreal, making making love a chimera, it seems.

Only by killing the pagan father and the solipsist brother the theist son can, happily undisturbed, rape his pagan solipsist mother to make her truly realize he and God actually exist.

The mother can still stubbornly maintain that both her son and God are mere illusions. Then she's seriously fucked...

Like Einstein said, "Not everything that counts can be counts can be counted, not everything that can be counted counts."

Great analysis Scotsman! I tend to agree. Many modern day loan slave drivers, the corporate owners, are directly connected with the old landlords somehow. Of course there are selfmade ones. And isn't the system wonderful: we all can become selfmade millionaires! Krate! We are all offered the means to become slavedrivers...

The book that I thought of when reading your well written thread (it keeps you reading till the end! Not a very common feature) was "Lord of The Flies". I'm not sure if children in reality would be like that (I assume you know the book). Evolution can also be viewed from a purely altruistically angle, an altruistic gene, so to speak. So they "serve" us instead of we being their submissive slaves (is that a tautology?).

The way you describe the rise to power of the capitalists seems a true description. Once they have power its easily maintained by the weapon. Nowadays the loan slaves are kept satisfied by offering a small part of the cake. Enough to keep them alive, and they are even supposed to be thankful for this!

Coincidently, I saw Star Trek "Into Darkness" yesterday evening. I'm not sure I want to live in that society. You only see interstellar bars with a wide variety of creatures having fun, battles, the extensions of the final frontier ("made in a Hollywood basement"), or political gatherings of the federation leaders in defense of the Klingon threat, which is always present.
But how do people on Earth actually live? What's the role of Spock? Why didn't he join the Klingons? Should religion be forbidden?

Heaven could be an anticipation of virtual reality (some aspects of it). — Agent Smith

I think you mean hell... otherwise :up:

The cost of a piece of art tells absolutely zero, nada, niente, about the work. I think you are absolutely right when you say that these money values are created by money hungry wolves in the guise of arty snob clothes. Van Gogh, poor during his lifetime, would have turned in his grave had he witnessed the abuse of his art.
80 000 000 for his sunflowers! God damned!

But still... The eternal can be created from outside of spacetime.

How is it that every physical process has an analogue on the neuron network? Are you referring the neuron network of the brain, or the artificial neural network, or both? — pfirefry

The brain. There is no program stored in the brain. There are no commands, executed on the rythm of a (computer)clock, that tells the electric pulses on our neural network how to run on the circuit (by applied voltages). The pulses run autonomously, stimulated by our senses, and these follow the lightning like axons, to encounter more or less resistance at the synapses (a broader synapse offers less resistance, ie the connection is strengthened). A parallel bundle runs rather on its own on the neuron substrate, given direction by the connection strengths. Every physical situation we encounter there is a corresponding path of collective parallel neuron pulses, depending on how our body is situated relative to the process. Connection strengths are enforced by being in more or less the same situation often. That's memory forming. If you find yourself in a similar situation, bang! Recognition. The process falls in the path, so to speak. No program involved. If you calculate possible paths, the number is astro astronomical: 10exp(10exp30)! More or less... A 1 followed by 10exp30 zeros... Damned, that's a lot!

Too muuuuch...

Usually by playing with existing mathematics. At first a conjecture, then comes a proof. — jgill

Yeah, you have to jump in math to swim in math.



Are philosophy people weird? I think there exist no weirder people.

The 7 most eccentric philosophers

Question: If you can't tell where the "art work" ends and the "vandalism" begins, then how much creative value does the work have? — Bitter Crank

Considering this work: clearly yes.

Are petroglyphs more archeological in value, or is this "art" — Bitter Crank

None of both. Just old "killroy was here".

I once tried to prove the Goldbach conjecture. To no avail... Did construct a 16x16 and 32x32 hypermagical Franklin square by hand + calculator (afterwards only I saw how I should have started...). Man these numbers got me mad! Most math is ordering numbers or symbols representing them. Be it group theory, functionals, path intergals Manifolds are something different though. But you can put numbers on them. Or in spaces and sets. Are there other non-numerical things? I mean, not related to numbers? Integrals, space time algebra, diifferentials, etc. are all connected to numbers. Are there math formulae you can't put a number in? A Klein bottle maybe? Or Boy's surface?



You're indisposable Agent! :wink:

By the way, the Riemann hypothesis is obviously true...

Is this question the same as asking if God exists?