How, according to Leibniz, are the relations of the parts of a goive, damned, a glove! different for you and me?
— Hillary

What does human anatomy have to do with the structure of the universe? — Jackson

L says the relations between the parts are dependent in the observer. So how does this apply to a glove? It fits for you but not for me?

Exactly what Einstein meant. — Jackson

Not so sure. The distance between objects varies, according to L?

The relation between objects stays the same fir every observer in Leibniz' view,
— Hillary

No. — Jackson

How, according to Leibniz, are the relations of the parts of a goive, damned, a glove! different for you and me?

Leibniz explicitly said time and space are relative and not absolute as Newton stated. — Jackson

What did he mean by that?

This is a western, science-based forum, my friend... Accurate as your panopticon vision is, it will be met with fierce resistance, as the above comments show. Two of the comments pointed to the Eden story. Which in a modern interpretation could be viewed as a paradise that got lost after biting the apple of scientific knowledge. A knowledge compared to which the knowledge of good and bad shrinks into insignificance.

Don't forget: I'm on your side!

think Leibniz is right. He stated a principle of relativity Einstein demonstrated to contemporary physicists. Again, the left and right thing would be based on an absolute measure of space. — Jackson

Leibniz didn't use relativity as Einstein did. The relation between objects stays the same fir every observer in Leibniz' view, contrary to Einstein's. And Kant proved him wrong with the glove. A relational view denies the difference between left and right.

It is trivial. But it was used to show Leibniz was wrong. All relational properties of a left hand and a right hand are the same. Still they are different.

Yes. He considered space as the relation between objects only. Which would make a left glove the same as a right glove. Which the aren't. Left and right are fundamentally different.

The possibility of god is an equally untenable belief, in my mind. — NOS4A2

How so? Only because it can't be proved?

then why couldn’t one remain Kantian in his thinking, no matter the advances in empirical science? — Mww

One can stay Kantian, obviously. Kant had a wrong view on spacetime though. You could incorporate all scientific progress, spacetime being relative and left-right asymmetric (he offered Leibniz the glove left example to refute his relational concept of time), but in his view space is no material, which is the question.

But in the empirical sciences that would make no difference.

That the noumon can't be known is questionable.

The Russian people should be in complete revolution right now. — universeness

Between the "should be" and "how it is" there lays the unbridgeable gap of reality.

We need to show more respect to children. Nurture their imagination and their playful fantasies, yes, but never suggest such fantasies are fact! — universeness

The whole point being of course if your "Universe", and the means investigating it, is a fantasy just as well. If people wanna base their lives on a "Universe" fantasy while trying to get to know all infinite aspects of it, thereby forcing Nature into all kinds of unnatural postures its up to them just as much as it up to the people if they wanna life life based on a God fantasy and gaining knowledge of Nature as it is, with no nightmare dreams of omnipotency or eternal life, and children should be offered all views in growing up, because if not, your society is closed and unfree, and we see what chaos that has caused in the modern day and since science and technology were introduced in old Greece the world has become not a better place but a worse place, that just can't be denied, which makes me conclude that cience and "the Universe" is just one myth amongst many and Mill already told us that in the freemarket of ideas the exclusion of many in the favor of the One is bad.

In one sentence! So is it not upto the children to decide instead of us telling them what is fact?

No autocracies/plutocracies/aristocracies/cults of personality/cults of religion/cults of celebrity and yes no currencies.
Humanism all the way. No nurturing of profits only the nurture of people and the flora, fauna and ecology of the Earth.
29m — universeness

Religion could actually play a role here. I we teach the children nature is a divine gift, a divine creation, they think twice before engaging against it. Not with hell threatening but just because it is a gift.

Still... There are about 10 000 active nuclear warheads scattered over the world. Whatever MAD entails, the laws of chance are such that they will one day be employed. And I'm sure so-called patriots won't hesitate to use them. WTF do you and I or Vincent have to do with the power quarrels of a few?

Your last comment of "we will then 'mutate' to transhuman" does leave me with the feeling that you may well be slightly mad!! — universeness

He's right though! For sure the radioactivity will induce mutations!

If we had the same mother, she really would have been a terror! — universeness

Her life would be f***ed! :lol:

"Quark, have you seen Uni?" "Yes mum, he sat crying in the washing machine, so I closed the door. The program must be done now. I put it on 90 degrees, to be sure..."

@universeness and me already have had the pleasure of meeting. We have a MAD relation! Without the D!

A reasonable future view! Let's hope Putin and the west dont go MAD. Jezus, that guy Putin sounds like he actually wanna use nukes!

Do you have a twitter account? — Vincent

More than one!

Yeah! Great song! "That's not my name!" What's in a name! "They call me Feynmann, they call me Feynman, they call me names..." "You're surely joking Richard!" By the way, I know what my writer's name gonna be! Thanks to you! "The Dark Solution" by Ninja Quark!

Pleased to meet you, hoped you guessed my name! :naughty:

that's right, "who knows".
therefore not an explanation of how universe come to be — SpaceDweller

Well, partly. We can investigate the stuff made. And describe how it evolved into life. Thats what's usually called an explanation for the origin of the Earth, the stars, or life. And we could describe the happenings before the current universe came into being. But where did the space and particles in it come from? God?

Yeah, I think we have exchanged many times before! — universeness

I think so too! :naughty:

People stop fighting each other. We are on the eve of WW3. Instead of testing each other, wouldn't it be better to look for a solution? — Vincent

Ha! Already here WW3 is immanent! Word War10.

Well, you haven't set the bar very high so far have you? — universeness

Well, this is a philosophy forum, not a computer science one. I could talk about Bloch spheres but that wouldn't be very enlightening for the philosophical discussion.

It is time to leave humanity behind and mutate into a being that is one across the planet. — Vincent

Yes! And technology will help us in reaching transhuman status!

This was meant for Vincent...
— Hillary

It's not my fault that you also have a bad aim to add to your dodgy intentions. — universeness

All part of the cos play you perform. Well, being a troll makes you see trolls everywhere. I get it now. Calling me a troll before you can be called one. Ingenious!

A small mindless spark to start the cycle and then wink out of existence forever would suffice. — universeness

Then where came that spark from? What parallel worlds and bounces are you speaking of? And it clear it's all just alien-produced? If quantum computing has grown up we might be able to contemplate our makers. After nano-bots have made us immortal and quantum computing AI merges with our brain or even replaces it, we might be able to contemplate our makers.

and I don't even know it! — universeness

This was meant for Vincent... I doubt there hides a poet in you... Though they generally are paranoid!

Well, that's the theory I cling to. Before the big bang there could have been another, and another. An infinite succession of bangs maybe. From where comes that infinite whole? Who knows...

Damned! You should have become a poet! :up:

You wrote:

"Yes I am, but not based on attempts to BAIT people by stealth as I suspect you do"

what is an explanation of why universe is there? — SpaceDweller

The big bang.

:up:

Yes I am, but not based on attempts to bait people by stealth as I suspect you do. — universeness

Bait people? What for? I just state what I think is the case and what will happen in the future. What would be my motives. People telling me that what I tell is ridiculous? Sorry, but that's not my intention!

I just answered the question. What's suspicious about that? What would be my hidden intentions? I just don't get it. Yes, probably this is part of the scam too... and this too... Jesus!

I am not a religious person, nor do I believe that science is absolutely true — Vincent

Science is absolutely true. It gives us an explanation why the universe is there. Love permeates the universe. The driving force. If we want to shed our instinctive behaviors of aggression and procreation we must turn our heads to technological progress, which can redeem us. We have made the first cautious steps, but what has been achieved in 100 years pales in comparison to natural evolution.

These are either very fringe opinions based on a very skewed logic or you are just making stuff up to see what response you get. — universeness

You do it again! Yes, of course I'm interested what response I get. Aren't you?

If we become omniscient in the vastly distant future because we have answered all questions would we then be god? This is the eventual projection of some panpsychist viewpoints. We have had a few recent threads on that topic. — universeness

This sounds suspicious.There is a definite theistic smell surrounding this statement. Is this an attempt to become like God, whose existence you secretly affirm here? God being the universe?

You made the ridiculous typings I mentioned not me. — universeness

You wrote I did theistic role playing! And said I'm a troll because of that! Who started here?

What reason then? What about just love? — Vincent

Did they do it for us?

Nonsense. — universeness

Why? All wars have shown an incredible speed-up of technology. Just look at WW2. Radar, the ENIGMA machine of Türing, etc.Imagine the speed up during WW3 or after.

It could even be argued that our development of high tech weaponry is arranged to speed up the technological development. Sad as all the suffering involved might be. You think I like it children are dying? The whole planet suffers from it but once immortality and omniscience are achieved we can create a whole new planet.