If i do the same thing again that is 8. If i die tommorow and never do this process again and at the same time have never heard of the term 12 i might conclude that `12 doesn't exist. — christian2017
Perhaps if there were other universes (not sure why scientists say there are other universes) where the laws of physics are different then i think the above might not be the case. — christian2017
christian2017
47
↪Devans99
if i add 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 that is 4. If i do the same thing again that is 8. If i die tommorow and never do this process again and at the same time have never heard of the term 12 i might conclude that `12 doesn't exist. The problem is our ability to testify what we believe is true is limited by our time on this earth. Infinte is not necessarily a fake construct its just we personally only have a limited time to testify to the things we hold to be true. If the universe keeps expanding i believe it is certainly possible that it could expand to twice as big, three times as big, 4 times as big and so on. — christian2017
Devans99
1.1k
Perhaps if there were other universes (not sure why scientists say there are other universes) where the laws of physics are different then i think the above might not be the case. — christian2017
The laws of math should be invariant across all such universes.
I am of the opinion if there are other universes, they will be like this one. They are all made of the same stuff, go through the same processes and end up at the same temperature/density so all universes should end up similar. — Devans99
Under that logic why don't we just sit around on this forum and discuss our favorite type of icecream or what we think is the best color. — christian2017
I believe the belief that objective truth exists is paramount to having a stable society. — Christian
I do not believe it is arragant to say that objective truth exists but i will say it is very hard to come by. — Christian
Devans99
1.2k
↪Frank Apisa
I am finding your don't know / can't know attitude to most questions a little defeatist. — Devans99
I think you should place more weight in inductive reasoning; it is this, rather than deductive reasoning, that guides us though our daily lives. — Devans
If CERN published an article claiming detection of a new particle at five nines certainty, what is your attitude? Do you adopt a working assumption that the particle exists? Or do you continue to assume it is unknown whether the particle exists?
christian2017
51
↪Devans99
I agree with that statement. I lost the quote but you said something to the effect that modern cosmologists are very often athiests.
I'm not going to say what religion Isaac Newton was but he did have a religion and what alot of people don't realize is that much of modern technology can be built using nothing more than physics principles that were discovered in the 19th (1800s) century or even just using Newtonian physics. The point i'm trying to make is people over estimate the ability of alot of modern scientists to solve all the world's problems. I believe science is great and the healthy person of belief will embrace science but that being said we shouldn't just bend over backwards to listen to modern scientists. — christian2017
Devans99
1.2k
↪Frank Apisa
99.999% certainty of the finding. It's a sort of gold standard for empirical evidence.
My point was at what threshold do you admit inductive evidence into the set of assumptions you hold about the real world? — Devans99
christian2017
53
↪Frank Apisa
"I would just like to point out that Einstein, Sagan, Feynman and many other scientists identified as agnostics rather than atheists...and those three actually got angry when people called them atheists. "
I do agree with that in that there is an enormous difference between an atheist and an agnostic. — christian2017
Devans99
1.2k
↪Frank Apisa
We all have a set of assumptions or axioms about the real world we work to and that are mainly inductivity derived. Any inductive truth is prone to a certain margin of error. So I was wondering what your margin of error was?
I'm not dismissive of your questions... sorry if I missed any. — Devans99
Where do we go from there? What are the implications of that? What is the point of you insisting that the universe cannot be infinite? — Frank Apisa
Devans99
1.2k
Where do we go from there? What are the implications of that? What is the point of you insisting that the universe cannot be infinite? — Frank Apisa
- It is a step in the road towards a better overall understanding of the universe. Cosmologists have models that are infinite in space or time. If we can eliminate these models, then the cosmologists can concentrate on the models that are possible. — Devans99
- It is a step towards understanding the nature of infinity (it does not exist).
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.