Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Sudden Dawn of the Cosmos and the Constancy of Physical Laws
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 76 of 244 (888380)
09-17-2021 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Percy
09-17-2021 10:18 AM


Re: Paul Steinhardt on Dark Energy.
Percy writes:
Christian7 writes:
Nothing can begin without a cause; the beginning of something is not in itself, therefore an outside being or object began it.
What's makes you think this? We know of no causal event for the Big Bang, for virtual particles, or for the time when a radioactive atom decays. Our observations of the natural world reveal some phenomena with causes and some without.
What is so funny and typical of the Christian Cult of Ignorance is that if they truly believed such nonsense they also make the God they market irrelevant and impossible.

My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Percy, posted 09-17-2021 10:18 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 1:34 PM jar has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 77 of 244 (888381)
09-17-2021 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by jar
09-17-2021 11:22 AM


Re: Paul Steinhardt on Dark Energy.
quote:
What is so funny and typical of the Christian Cult of ********* is that if they truly believed such nonsense they also make the God they market irrelevant and impossible.
God has no beginning and no end; therefore your conclusion is false.
The universe must have a beginning, because it is animate. If something is animate; it cannot have always been, for change cannot occur eternally in the past, otherwise the present would never come.
The universe is limited and governed by non-physical reality, like logic and math. These are not physical; these are mental. Therefore, being mental, they must have predated the universe. In fact, they never had a place in time; they are eternal, not from the present to the future, but in a timeless fashion. Seeing the universe is governed and limited by them, it must have had its origin with them; but since they cannot act, they could not have created them. Therefore, since no inanimate mental object could have produced them, and all animate objects must begin, and eternal mind must have created them, not in time, but as part of time, a thing originating from this timeless, eternal mind.
This is not doctrine, but logic, derived from the premises, but likely not against sound doctrine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by jar, posted 09-17-2021 11:22 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by jar, posted 09-17-2021 2:12 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 80 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 2:29 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 161 by Percy, posted 09-18-2021 12:14 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 78 of 244 (888382)
09-17-2021 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Christian7
09-15-2021 9:04 PM


Weeeeeeee
Christian7 writes:
How do you know the laws of physics are the same as what they were yesterday?
By the best way of knowing. Testing and checking.
How do you know the laws of physics never changed?
I don't.
But we know they've never changed since we've been testing and checking for as far as we can test and check.
It depends on what kind of Creator we're talking about.
Regardless of whether or not a Creator wants to change the laws of physics... if a Creator with the ability exists, then the possibility of those laws being changed is greater than if no Creator exists that can change the laws of physics.
For if no Creator exists that can change the laws of physics... who else could possibly change them?
You either have faith in God's word or you have faith in something else.
Heh.
That's like a child saying "You either give me candy or you don't love me!"
Naive and simplistic.
Personally, though, I have faith in Love.
The world is much more complicated and wonderous than you seem to want it to be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Christian7, posted 09-15-2021 9:04 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 79 of 244 (888383)
09-17-2021 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Christian7
09-17-2021 1:34 PM


Re: Paul Steinhardt on Dark Energy.
Yup.
The Christian Cult of Ignorance loves to wallow in such fantasies.

My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 1:34 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 80 of 244 (888384)
09-17-2021 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Christian7
09-17-2021 1:34 PM


Bad Philosophy
quote:
The universe is limited and governed by non-physical reality, like logic and math.
I don’t think so. In what way does logic meaningfully limit the universe? Consider wave-particle duality. If logic allows that, what won’t it allow ?
quote:
These are not physical; these are mental. Therefore, being mental, they must have predated the universe
That is not logical. Just because something is mental does not mean that it must predate the universe. Not at all.
Further, if they are purely mental how can they “govern the universe” ? There seems no obvious connection between the presence of minds and the way the universe behaves. Indeed, since logical truths are necessary truths, how can they be dependent on the existence of minds? That would be a contradiction. So, no this does not make sense. Probably it’s based on a hopelessly confused idea of logic.
Well, at least nonsense is better than dishonesty. But neither paints Christianity in a good light at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 1:34 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:32 PM PaulK has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 81 of 244 (888385)
09-17-2021 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by PaulK
09-17-2021 2:29 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
I don’t think so. In what way does logic meaningfully limit the universe? Consider wave-particle duality. If logic allows that, what won’t it allow ?
You reject logic, and yet make arguments with logic, supposing that truth is according to logic, but denying that the universe is limited by logic, thereby denying that the cosmos is limited by what can possibly be true. Therefore, what you say is this: The universe contradicts truth.
quote:
That is not logical. Just because something is mental does not mean that it must predate the universe. Not at all.
Further, if they are purely mental how can they “govern the universe” ? There seems no obvious connection between the presence of minds and the way the universe behaves. Indeed, since logical truths are necessary truths, how can they be dependent on the existence of minds? That would be a contradiction. So, no this does not make sense. Probably it’s based on a hopelessly confused idea of logic.
Well, at least nonsense is better than dishonesty. But neither paints Christianity in a good light at all.
The universe is limited by logic and math, and logic and math are not physical. Therefore, non-physical things can limit physical things.
If logic and math are not mental, they are nevertheless non-physical, otherwise they would appear as physical objects, and we no of no object which we call logic and math, but have symbols to represent them, which represent things that exist in our minds. And if they exist in our minds, where did they come from? If they were invented by our minds, then how do they limit the universe? And if the universe is not limited by them, how can we use them to understand it? And if they do exist in our minds, and they came from the universe, then where in the universe did they come from, seeing there is no object in the universe which we call logic and math, or which is contained in logic and math. Therefore, the universe is influenced by non-physical realities.
And if these non-physical realities are not mental, then what do we have in our minds, which is not a reference to something physical, and not a mental object, what do we have in our minds that we call logic and math?
If our minds are governed by logic and math, then how did our minds arise? For if a mind is brought forth by logic and math, then they are not logic and math. Therefore, a mind does not by necessity depend on logic and math. Therefore, if a mind by necessity does not depend on logic and math, but our own minds are governed by logic and math, where did logic and math come from? Therefore, no non-mental reality contains logic and math; therefore, logic and math exists in a mind, which in one aspect differs from our mind, that it is not governed by logic and math.
Edited by Christian7, : No reason given.

Edited by Christian7, : No reason given.

Edited by Christian7, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 2:29 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by nwr, posted 09-17-2021 3:43 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 85 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:06 PM Christian7 has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 82 of 244 (888386)
09-17-2021 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Christian7
09-17-2021 3:32 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
You reject logic
PaulK did not reject logic. He rejected the assumptions you are making about logic.
The universe is limited by logic and math
Speaking as a mathematician -- no, it isn't.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:32 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:48 PM nwr has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 83 of 244 (888387)
09-17-2021 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by nwr
09-17-2021 3:43 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
PaulK did not reject logic. He rejected the assumptions you are making about logic.
PaulK clearly questioned whether logic permits the particle wave duality, thus elevating physics above the truth of logic.
quote:
Speaking as a mathematician -- no, it isn't.
Then what's the point of describing the laws of physics with mathematical equations?
Can I have three apples, then add another apple, and have seven, without three being added instantly?
Edited by Christian7, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by nwr, posted 09-17-2021 3:43 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by nwr, posted 09-17-2021 4:09 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 88 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:14 PM Christian7 has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 84 of 244 (888388)
09-17-2021 3:57 PM


If I made an unsound or invalid or non-sensical argument, and you refute it, then I will reject that argument, and use a different one. But if it is sound and logical, and you misunderstood it, or I did not properly communicate it, then I will explain it.

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:08 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 85 of 244 (888389)
09-17-2021 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Christian7
09-17-2021 3:32 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
You reject logic
I did no such thing. I reject your confused ideas about logic.
quote:
…. and yet make arguments with logic, supposing that truth is according to logic, but denying that the universe is limited by logic, thereby denying that the cosmos is limited by what can possibly be true. Therefore, what you say is this: The universe contradicts truth.
I deny that logic meaningfully governs the universe. I would also argue that the application of logic does not require any meaningful “limitation”. None of this denies that logic may be usefully applied to the universe.
quote:
The universe is limited by logic and math, and logic and math are not physical. Therefore, non-physical things can limit physical things.
Repeating your assertion rather than explaining it only confirms my opinion that you lack any understanding.
quote:
If logic and math are not mental, they are nevertheless non-physical, otherwise they would appear as physical objects, and we no of no object which we call logic and math, but have symbols to represent them, which represent things that exist in our minds.
I did not say that they are not mental. But then language is mental, too is it not? But you don’t say that language limits the universe even though it applies in pretty much the same way as logic and mathematics (indeed it is often stated that mathematics is a language - and one that enables descriptions more useful to physics).
quote:
And if they exist in our minds, where did they come from? If they were invented by our minds, then how do they limit the universe?
That is the question you were meant to be answering. I grant that it is a very deep question - but it is your assertion.
quote:
And if the universe is not limited by them, how can we use them to understand it?
In much the same way as we use language - and with the very many different languages in the world - and the way that they have changed over time - it seems rather likely that they were “invented” by humans.
quote:
And if they do exist in our minds, and they came from the universe, then where in the universe did they come from, seeing there is no object in the universe which we call logic and math, or which is contained in logic and math. Therefore, the universe is influenced by non-physical realities.
Let’s not jump ahead to questionable conclusions until you can defend the premises. So far all you’ve done is misrepresent my position and repeat your assertions - without addressing my questions at all. Until you can address them there is no reason to take your claims seriously - indeed they seem to be obviously false.
quote:
And if these non-physical realities are not mental, then what do we have in our minds, which is not a reference to something physical, and not a mental object, what do we have in our minds that we call logic and math?
Mental tools which we use to help us understand our experiences and - we hope - the reality that underlies them.
quote:
If our minds are governed by logic and math…
Are they? In what way? I mean your thinking is not very logical at all. Indeed you have yet to explain how logic “governs” anything.
quote:
….then how did our minds arise? For if a mind is brought forth by logic and math, then they are not logic and math. Therefore, a mind does not by necessity depend on logic and math. Therefore, if a mind by necessity does not depend on logic and math, but our own minds are governed by logic and math, where did logic and math come from? Therefore, no non-mental reality contains logic and math; therefore, logic and math exists in a mind, which in one aspect differs from our mind, that it is not governed by logic and math.
It seems to me that the same argument would apply to any mind - which implies that logic and math are more basic than mind and therefore cannot be purely mental entities - if your assumptions are correct. However since you seem unable to even explain what your assumptions mean we certainly cannot grant that they are correct. That would be very bad logic indeed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:32 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 4:21 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 86 of 244 (888390)
09-17-2021 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Christian7
09-17-2021 3:57 PM


quote:
If I made an unsound or invalid or non-sensical argument, and you refute it, then I will reject that argument, and use a different one. But if it is sound and logical, and you misunderstood it, or I did not properly communicate it, then I will explain it.
In fact it seems that you just insist that you are right without explaining - even when explicitly asked to do so. As demonstrated in Message 81

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:57 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 87 of 244 (888391)
09-17-2021 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Christian7
09-17-2021 3:48 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
PaulK clearly questioned whether logic permits the particle wave duality
Quantum particles do not need to get permission from logic before they act as they do.
..., thus elevating physics above the truth of logic.
Logic is not about the physical world. It is about our descriptions (including our descriptions of the physical world).
Can I have three apples, then add another apple, and have seven, without three being added instantly?
That's an empirical question, not a mathematical question.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:48 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 88 of 244 (888392)
09-17-2021 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Christian7
09-17-2021 3:48 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
PaulK clearly questioned whether logic permits the particle wave duality, thus elevating physics above the truth of logic.
In fact I did not. I suggested that logic permits the wave-particle duality and therefore does not impose much control (it indeed any) on the universe. But of course you never addressed that issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 3:48 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Christian7, posted 09-17-2021 4:24 PM PaulK has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 89 of 244 (888393)
09-17-2021 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by PaulK
09-17-2021 4:06 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
The universe is limited by logic and math, for it does not contradict the rules of logic, nor the rules of math. If it were not limited by logic and math, then it could contradict them. But since it cannot, it is limited by them.
Since it is limited by them, and logic and math are not the physical reality, it is limited by something other than itself, something which is non-physical, seeing they do not appear as physical entities.
We understand the universe through logic and math, because the universe operates according to it. If the universe did not operate according to it, we could not understand it through logic and math. For the universe, able to violate logic and math, would not be understood through logic and math, for logic and math would be useless for comprehending it, being violated by it.
We do not understand the universe through language, but through what our language signifies. We do not understand through words, but through the meaning of the words. Therefore, since our universe cannot contradict this meaningfulness, it is limited by this as well. It would certainly seem, following from these things, that the universe is limited by a mental reality, seeing that meaning is mental.
It is not that meaning is derived from the universe, for then the universe could have things being unmeaningful. Rather, the universe is limited by meaning, itself being meaningful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:06 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:45 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 162 by Percy, posted 09-18-2021 12:27 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 248 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 90 of 244 (888394)
09-17-2021 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by PaulK
09-17-2021 4:14 PM


Re: Bad Philosophy
quote:
In fact I did not. I suggested that logic permits the wave-particle duality and therefore does not impose much control (it indeed any) on the universe. But of course you never addressed that issue.
I never said that the particle/wave duality was a violation of the laws of logic. There are the laws of physics, and there are the laws of logic. Physical laws can be violated, (not that that is a violation of physical laws), because it is not illogical for physical laws to be violated, only for logical laws to be violated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:14 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by PaulK, posted 09-17-2021 4:52 PM Christian7 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024