|
Author
|
Topic: The "Axioms" Of Nature
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
Message 68 of 297 (486548)
10-22-2008 12:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 62 by onifre
10-22-2008 8:42 AM
|
|
Re: concious perception
Onifre writes: Like I've continuously said, and has been repeated by others, there are no axiomatic truths about the state of reality at the origin of the universe. Oni, I thought there was an axiomatic truth about the state of reality at the origin of the universe. But I could be wrong maybe you can clear up my thinking on the matter. First Wiki's definition of axiom.
In traditional logic, an axiom or postulate is a proposition that is not proved or demonstrated but considered to be either self-evident, or subject to necessary decision. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths. Then Wiki's definition of reality.
Reality, in everyday usage, means "the state of things as they actually exist". My thinking at the origin of the universe. Something existed. (from this something the universe was formed) OR Something was created. (created meaning being brought into existence, from this something the universe was formed) I would like any input that would clear my thinking if I am wrong. But do not expect an answer as I do not intend to debate my thinking. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 62 by onifre, posted 10-22-2008 8:42 AM | | onifre has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 70 by onifre, posted 10-22-2008 1:07 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 91 of 297 (486654)
10-23-2008 12:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 88 by Straggler
10-23-2008 11:55 AM
|
|
Re: Woooohoooo!!!!
Hi Straggler,
Straggler writes: So if I buy two tickets I am guaranteed a jackpot!!! Woooohooooo!!! If you buy two tickets: You are guaranteed to either win or lose. If you buy 100 tickets you are guaranteed to either win or lose. If you buy 1 million tickets you are guaranteed to either win or lose. Is there any other choice if you buy a ticket? God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 88 by Straggler, posted 10-23-2008 11:55 AM | | Straggler has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 92 of 297 (486657)
10-23-2008 12:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 81 by cavediver
10-23-2008 7:59 AM
|
|
Re-Defence
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: Not even the other fundementalists here are willing to jump to your defense. Why does Bertot need anyone to defend him? No one has presented an alternative yet to unable or unwilling or a combinaiton of both with the spock example. No one has even mentioned an alternative to the eternal or created example that gave rise to this thread. You did mention it but I don't remember it being stated as you stated:
cavediver writes: your "axiom" that states "An eternal God or the eternality of matter itself."? cavediver writes: There are at least three mathematicians qualified in logic here (myself, Rrhain, PaulK) all telling you that you don't know what you are talking about, and everyone else agrees. Not everyone agrees. Do you think telling someone they are wrong is the same as proving they are wrong? Would it not be easier to present an alternative that is not covered by one or both of the parts of the axiom Bertot put forward? God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 81 by cavediver, posted 10-23-2008 7:59 AM | | cavediver has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 98 of 297 (486666)
10-23-2008 2:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 94 by onifre
10-23-2008 1:03 PM
|
|
Re-Defence
Hi Oni,
Onifre writes: It would have been considered an axiomatic truth about reality that the Earth is flat, right? Wrong. There were people over 2000 years ago that believed the earth was round. If someone had said it was an axiomatic truth all they would have had to say is no, it could be round. Somebody else might have chimed in I think it is square. Therefore it could not be axiomatic.
Onifre writes: You can see that is not an axiom though, right? Correct, it is not an axiom and I explained why it could never have been considered one. There was an alternative. Now what Bertot has put forward is either an axiom or it is not. If there is an alternative that does not fall under the unable or unwilling it could not be an axiom. All you or anyone has to do to put this issue to rest is provide that alternative. I love puzzles, and trying to solve them but after two days I can not come up with any viable alternative. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 94 by onifre, posted 10-23-2008 1:03 PM | | onifre has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 102 of 297 (486671)
10-23-2008 2:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 93 by onifre
10-23-2008 12:50 PM
|
|
Re-Follow
Hi Oni,
Onifre writes: Just because there is existance, it does not follow that it either was created or eternal. We know it exists today. Since it exists today it has always existed. (eternal) OR If it has not always existed it had to be brought into existence . (created) OR You or anyone else may provide an alternative. In the above statement there is no mention or hint of how this may have occured. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 93 by onifre, posted 10-23-2008 12:50 PM | | onifre has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re-Follow
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: Given that time is part of "it", how can "it" be "brought into existence", I was using the definition for create and I probably should have said "come into existence" instead. Brought has the inference of outside help. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 103 by cavediver, posted 10-23-2008 2:23 PM | | cavediver has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re: Axiom = Totality = Useless
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: Exactly - Bertot is trying to prove that either the Universe is eternal or it is not. This is reasonably ok (though in actuality it isn't that simple) No need to run for the hills your statement.
quote:
either the Universe is eternal or it is not. This is reasonably ok
Agrees with my position so I need not address it any more thank you very much. God Bless, ABE I found this Herecavediver writes: Those properties that do exist will have only one of two possible properties, eternal or not.
For this level of discussion, I think this is a fairly safe conclusion. Edited by ICANT, : Add link
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 108 by cavediver, posted 10-23-2008 3:47 PM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re: Subjective Empirical Conclusions
Hi Straggler, I have the answer I was looking for so I will not be discussing the Spock axiom again. Was fun though.
Straggler writes: Reality is as we find it not as we deduce it to be. Reality is what it is. Even if we never find all of it in our lifetime.
Straggler writes: Without empirical testing as the basis no discovery is possible. There has never been a discovery that was not already a reality.
Straggler writes: With empirical experience and testing as the basis no such things as "axioms" are possible. Please explain. As I see every discovery of reality as an axiom of reality. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 109 by Straggler, posted 10-23-2008 3:59 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re-Follow
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: But even "come into existence" implies a time ordering, and without existence, there can be no time ordering. So again we are stuck. cavediver I accept your statement "either the Universe is eternal or it is not.". That is my position. Lets leave it at that and maybe some day we can discuss the other. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 116 by cavediver, posted 10-23-2008 5:35 PM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 132 of 297 (486779)
10-24-2008 2:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 124 by onifre
10-24-2008 11:07 AM
|
|
Re-Axiom
Hi Oni,
Onifre writes: For something to be empirically claimed as an axiom Who is empirically claiming these axiom's? Bertot said: "While axioms invole empericism, it is also different in that it does not need explanation, experimentation and counterfactual conclusions." No empirical evidence needed. From my understanding of an axiom it does not need any empirical evidence to be an axiom. At least that is what Wikipedia says about axioms which we are talking about.
In traditional logic, an axiom or postulate is a proposition that is not proved or demonstrated but considered to be either self-evident, or subject to necessary decision. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths. Axiom =
a proposition unproved or demonstrated,
but considered to be either self-evident
or subject to necessary decision. Axiom
Unlike theorems, axioms (unless redundant) cannot be derived by
principles of deduction,
nor are they demonstrable by mathematical proofs, simply because they
are starting points;
Logical axioms are usually statements that are taken to be universally
true. Therefore its truth is taken for granted. If I understand you in Message 112 you are agreeing that either the universe is eternal or not. Is that the case?
Onifre writes: Whats there? You are talking about a point in reality which is not understood by any standards, You seem to be confusing how something took place rather than concentrating on the axiom that is being discussed. The universe is eternal. That is it has always existed in some form. The universe is not eternal. That it has not always existed in some form. Thus the axiom the universe is eternal or had to be created. In that statement there is no methods provided how it could be eternal or how it could be created. These should not be discussed here as you keep trying to do. Since the universe exists today, it has always existed, or it began to exist. There have been many learned men who held and hold that the universe is eternal. There have been many learned men who held and hold the universe was created. I have not found anyone that has put or puts forth another idea. Do you or anyone know of any? God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 124 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 11:07 AM | | onifre has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 134 of 297 (486782)
10-24-2008 2:43 PM
|
Reply to: Message 127 by Straggler
10-24-2008 12:39 PM
|
|
Re: Subjective Empirical Conclusions
Hi Straggler,
Straggler writes: Each discovery is only as good as the latest evidence. If by "axiom" you mean "to the best of our current knowledge" then yes. Axiom's are reality. It makes no difference what your current knowledge is, or what your future knowledge will be. The "Axiom" will not change. Straggler "reality is, it does not change" regardless of our evidence, thoughts or our musings. We can only discover and prove reality. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 127 by Straggler, posted 10-24-2008 12:39 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re-Follow
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: But even "come into existence" implies a time ordering, and without existence, there can be no time ordering. So again we are stuck. My personal belief is that the universe has always existed in some form. So why would I be stuck? The axiom is "eternal or created". There is no limitations by the axiom on how the universe was or could be created. The only limitations are placed by different posters. The axiom does not care which one is correct. It states a proposition that is self-evident. Eternal or not. Only one can be true and that one is reality. The universe exists and that is reality. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 116 by cavediver, posted 10-23-2008 5:35 PM | | cavediver has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
|
|
Message 144 of 297 (486825)
10-24-2008 7:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 136 by onifre
10-24-2008 3:10 PM
|
|
Re-Axiom
Hi Oni,
Onifre writes: "The universe is eternal"...what does that mean? That it has always existed? Well clearly it hasn't, it is 14Byo, it will exuast its energy, it is not eternal. How do you know it hasn't always existed? Will it cease to exist when it runs out of energy? The present universe is said to be 14BYO, but does that mean the material that compose the universe came into existence 14 BYA or does it mean this universe was born out of those materials 14 BYA?
Onifre writes: "Had to be created"...by who? The axiom does not specify nor does it care.
Onifre writes: What do you mean by created? Come into existence.
Onifre writes: These are not axioms, these are philosophical musings. You did not specify what "these" are. So are you refering to: We know the universe exists today. Since it exists today it has always existed. (eternal) OR If it has not always existed it had to come into existence . (created) I think you addressed that in Message 112 where you said:
Onifre writes: and therefore I would consider the 2 above statements to be axiomatic truth about reality. Have you now changed your mind? God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 136 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 3:10 PM | | onifre has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 148 by onifre, posted 10-24-2008 8:49 PM | | ICANT has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re: Subjective Empirical Conclusions
Straggler writes: (but the non-changing nature of reality is itself potentially subject to being wrong!!) Could you explain how something that is real and non changing can be wrong? You lost me there.
Straggler writes: But our perception of reality is limited to subjective empirical experience. That too is indisputable. Does our precepotion of reality change reality?
Straggler writes: We thought we understood time. Until Einstein changed all the "axioms". Einstein did not change all the "axioms". He discovered reality. The definition of an axiom does not allow it to change. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 139 by Straggler, posted 10-24-2008 5:34 PM | | Straggler has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.7
|
Re: Eternal or Not
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: why not eternal AND created? eternal = 1. Being without beginning or end; existing outside of time.
Definition found Here created = 1. To cause to exist; bring into being. Definition found Here "Why not eternal and created"? Because something that is eternal that exists outside of time has no beginning and therefore can not be created, (brought into being) as it already exists.
cavediver writes: And why does not eternal imply created? Hint - it doesn't... not = In no way; to no degree. Used to express negation, denial, refusal, or prohibition: Definition found Here. We have the definition of eternal above. Puting not and eternal together we have: not eternal = In no way, Being without beginning or end; existing outside of time. If your definition is different please share. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 141 by cavediver, posted 10-24-2008 6:48 PM | | cavediver has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2