OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 12:57:15 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Poll
Question: Should I continue to debate Jackal?
Definitely, it's educational - 3 (7.9%)
Sure, at least it is providing a little insight. - 7 (18.4%)
Probably not, it's a waste of time. - 12 (31.6%)
Definitely not. We are all losing brains cells because of the discussion. - 16 (42.1%)
Total Voters: 38

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Should, I continue my debate with Jackal?  (Read 11720 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #90 on: February 20, 2011, 06:10:00 PM »

You cannot be God because you do not have all the information.

Logic fail.. Please define the term "Omniscient". For it to be Omniscient " infinitely Know everything" would make me, you, and the sum total that all exists as GOD...

You know there is only 1 fundamental difference between my argument and yours. .. I call energy =/= information as the substance of existence.. You call it god Wink
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:13:55 PM by TheJackel » Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #91 on: February 20, 2011, 06:17:07 PM »

Omniscience is to know everything infinitely. And we do NOT know everything infinitely. You're turning into a dataswammi.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #92 on: February 20, 2011, 06:23:23 PM »

Omniscience is to know everything infinitely. And we do NOT know everything infinitely. You're turning into a dataswammi.

You completely failed to grasp what I said above! Hence my conscious window is just apart of GODS consciousness in your argument.. You are attempting to argue GOD is a case of pure solipsism and that you are just a figment of it's imagination. Or you can say that under Omniscience, your god has a multiple personality disorder. Thus I am GOD arguing with myself on whether or not I exist.

To infinitely Know everything, it would have to literally be infinitely everything in every infinite literal way possible. Thus thanks for calling me GOD. Undecided
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:29:10 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #93 on: February 20, 2011, 06:28:49 PM »

Well that's interesting.  I've heard a famous atheistic cosmologist say that you need nothing to start something.  But to you everything outside of something is nothing.  So who's right?

And if nothing isn't nothing anymore, but randomly firing negative and positive particles from the future, well, first off, isn't that a bit circular about creation, that things continually and constantly created and destroyed in neutral terms?  Does not humanity look for the final circular logical answer in that?

I disagree. They are referring to ground state (ground zero) on the orders of magnitude on the energy scale. And any atheist that does might not be aware of this.  If you really read into the science you would know that they don't ever talk about literal nothing or needing literal nothing. Even if our entire universe vanished there would still remain infinite capacity, or spatial capacity. And you miss interpret particle physics because borrowing from the future deals with borrowing energy from it's nearest neighbor. Same concept already proven in quantum computing. In an infinite volume you can have a zero-point energy interfere with another zero-point energy because energy can interfere with itself.AKA the Quantum Foam. Energy self-oscillates and only requires itself to cause particle and anti-particle collisions. All that is required is the base properties of positive, negative, and neutral.Their research into the higgs field or GOD particle is to find out exactly how matter arises from ground state. You can't get any less than ground state. It does bug me though that scientists or cosmologists don't really explain things well in laymen terms. I posted the orders of magnitude more than once here, did any of you bother to review it?

However, even if you wanted to try and make the argument that information was "non-material" the GOD concept would still be slave to require the rules I have stated in accordance to information theory. Those 3 rules are the base cause of all causation.. The ground state of all that can and does exist. To put that into context:

Power, divinity, complexity ect can not exist without the lowest possible level of either of those. Powers that are greater are powerless without first the existence of the lowest level of power. 5 apples can not exist without there first being 4 other apples to which includes itself. The cause of causation begins at ground state! It doesn't matter how you want to argue it because that is how you properly apply and solve infinite regress.. It can only be solved by a literal impossible point to where infinite regress can no longer literally regress. Things with consciousness can not ever solve this because consciousness requires far more cause to exist than things that are not conscious. A rock requires less complexity to be a rock than I do to be a conscious entity.

It's really irrelevant if our consciousness can transcend the biological container, or if we could immortally exist consciously. My only argument is that it will have to follow the rules of information theory. Rules that can not be written or created. Usually GOD's are seen as being more complex and powerful than humans.. not less to the point of being nothing but an implausible fallacy. All theists have to do is dump the fallacies in their belief systems and they are GOLDEN. All that my arguments state is that anything made of something with informational value could plausibly exist, and anything more complex than ground state has cause. 

Why does everything fall under ground zero?  Are all things risen from ground state?  Can there not be a possibility that all things may have risen from above or below ground state?  Why the assumption that all things must cancel each other out?

And why must there be infinite spatial capacity?  Do we have any tools that may help us prove we are in an infinite spatial capacity?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #94 on: February 20, 2011, 06:33:29 PM »

Quote
Why does everything fall under ground zero?  Are all things risen from ground state?  Can there not be a possibility that all things may have risen from above or below ground state?  Why the assumption that all things must cancel each other out?

That's how complexity works.. did you expect complexity to sustain itself without it's ground state? Wink You let me know when you sustain a 100 story building without it's 99 other floors to which includes the 100th floor. Not going to happen.. Complexity is not sustainable without ground state.
Quote
And why must there be infinite spatial capacity?

In formation can not be contain in a place that has no capacity to contain anything. Zero capacity is impossible and that is why capacity itself is made of the substance of existence itself.. energy =/= information = capacity = infinite volume.  

Example:

If you took a sphere and tried to infinitely collapse it, it would reach a point of conversion (ground state). A point to where if you tried to continue to contract, it would converge every degree of it's circumference to polar opposites and then appear to expand again into a sphere. Hence, it can not contract into a negative dimensional object. The principle is very basic.. No object can exist in a negative capacity, or have absolute zero dimensional value.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:46:23 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #95 on: February 20, 2011, 06:38:05 PM »

Well, we don't just start from the zeroeth floor.  We need foundations.  And the higher the floor, the stronger the foundations need to be.  So, technically, wouldn't that be starting from negative state rather than ground state?

But why infinite capacity?  Why not a finite capacity?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:45:30 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #96 on: February 20, 2011, 06:42:31 PM »

Quote
Well, we don't just start from the zeroeth floor.  We need foundations. 

Same thing. Ground state is considered the foundation.
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #97 on: February 20, 2011, 06:46:07 PM »

Quote
Well, we don't just start from the zeroeth floor.  We need foundations. 

Same thing. Ground state is considered the foundation.

But then the foundation should be negative state, not ground state, according to your analogy.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:46:26 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #98 on: February 20, 2011, 06:48:35 PM »

Quote
Well, we don't just start from the zeroeth floor.  We need foundations.  

Same thing. Ground state is considered the foundation.

But then the foundation should be negative state, not ground state, according to your analogy.

Wrong.. Negative states don't exist (in terms of objects, substance, and capacity). zero state by definition is without state. And going into negatives just gets worse.. Ground state is the very bottom of the barrel to where regression is no longer possible.

« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:51:25 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #99 on: February 20, 2011, 06:49:43 PM »

Quote
Well, we don't just start from the zeroeth floor.  We need foundations. 

Same thing. Ground state is considered the foundation.

But then the foundation should be negative state, not ground state, according to your analogy.

Wrong.. Negative states don't exist. zero state by definition is without state. And going into negatives just gets worse.. Ground state is the very bottom of the barrel to where regression is no longer possible.

So ground state is not zero, but positive?  Gee, that doesn't make sense.  You don't start building a building from above the ground floor.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 06:50:21 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #100 on: February 20, 2011, 06:58:35 PM »

Quote
So ground state is not zero, but positive?  Gee, that doesn't make sense.  You don't start building a building from above the ground floor.

Yes, it will always be 1 over literal zero because literal zero is not possible in terms of existence, capacity, information ect.. It makes total sense. Zero is thus represented as the starting point in science, it's not referenced as literal zero.. Zero is just a place holder for lowest state of a system.

Quote
The ground state of a quantum mechanical system is its lowest-energy state; the energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. An excited state is any state with energy greater than the ground state. The ground state of a quantum field theory is usually called the vacuum state or the vacuum.


In science energy can never reach a literal zero state, and thus can capacity never exist in a state of zero capacity. This thus makes spatial capacity and infinite volume where there is only on average energy at ground state, as noted in quantum foam theory.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:03:01 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #101 on: February 20, 2011, 07:01:01 PM »

Quote
So ground state is not zero, but positive?  Gee, that doesn't make sense.  You don't start building a building from above the ground floor.

Yes, it will always be 1 over literal zero because literal zero is not possible in terms of existence, capacity, information ect.. It makes total sense. Zero is thus represented as the starting point in science, it's not referenced as literal zero.. Zero is just a place holder for lowest state of a system.

Quote
The ground state of a quantum mechanical system is its lowest-energy state; the energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. An excited state is any state with energy greater than the ground state. The ground state of a quantum field theory is usually called the vacuum state or the vacuum.

So when scientists say "zero" it doesn't really mean zero, it means one?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:01:51 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #102 on: February 20, 2011, 07:05:07 PM »

Quote
So ground state is not zero, but positive?  Gee, that doesn't make sense.  You don't start building a building from above the ground floor.

Yes, it will always be 1 over literal zero because literal zero is not possible in terms of existence, capacity, information ect.. It makes total sense. Zero is thus represented as the starting point in science, it's not referenced as literal zero.. Zero is just a place holder for lowest state of a system.

Quote
The ground state of a quantum mechanical system is its lowest-energy state; the energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. An excited state is any state with energy greater than the ground state. The ground state of a quantum field theory is usually called the vacuum state or the vacuum.

So when scientists say "zero" it doesn't really mean zero, it means one?

When you are dealing with magnitudes of energy it can never be literal 0.0 or (0,0).. Same reasons why in thermodynamics literal zero temperature is impossible. so I will post this again for like the 10th time:


1) Scale:
http://primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/

2) You, me, and everything else on the orders of magnitude on the energy scale..as also demonstrated above under (scale):

http://talklikeaphysicist.com/2009/energy-scale-of-over-100-orders-of-magnitude/
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:06:38 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #103 on: February 20, 2011, 07:10:08 PM »

Quote
So ground state is not zero, but positive?  Gee, that doesn't make sense.  You don't start building a building from above the ground floor.

Yes, it will always be 1 over literal zero because literal zero is not possible in terms of existence, capacity, information ect.. It makes total sense. Zero is thus represented as the starting point in science, it's not referenced as literal zero.. Zero is just a place holder for lowest state of a system.

Quote
The ground state of a quantum mechanical system is its lowest-energy state; the energy of the ground state is known as the zero-point energy of the system. An excited state is any state with energy greater than the ground state. The ground state of a quantum field theory is usually called the vacuum state or the vacuum.

So when scientists say "zero" it doesn't really mean zero, it means one?

When you are dealing with magnitudes of energy it can never be literal 0.0 or (0,0).. Same reasons why in thermodynamics literal zero temperature is impossible. so I will post this again for like the 10th time:


1) Scale:
http://primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/

2) You, me, and everything else on the orders of magnitude on the energy scale..as also demonstrated above under (scale):

http://talklikeaphysicist.com/2009/energy-scale-of-over-100-orders-of-magnitude/

Oh ya, I remember that.  TTC posted it once before.

So ground state is 10^(-35) m?

And why is there an infinite capacity?  Why not finite?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:11:39 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #104 on: February 20, 2011, 07:13:51 PM »


Quote
So ground state is 10^(-35)?

You might want to reference where the comparison point is being made Wink.. It's not saying it goes into literal negatives. Hence how big is an atom vs how big I am.. Never does it state literal  0.0  Wink

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:15:46 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #105 on: February 20, 2011, 07:17:06 PM »



Quote
So ground state is 10^(-35)?

You might want to reference where the comparison point is being made Wink.. It's not saying it goes into literal negatives. Hence how big is an atom vs how big I am.. Never does it state literal  0.0  Wink

Where did I write I'm going into literal negatives.  The website shows that anything smaller than 10^(-35) m (which if I recall basic arithmetic is a positive number, albeit very small) makes "no physical sense."  So I'm wondering if that's what the ground state really is.  You said everything starts from ground state, and it's not literally "zero."  Unless there's another reason you're posting that website.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #106 on: February 20, 2011, 07:18:09 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 07:18:33 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #107 on: February 20, 2011, 07:22:56 PM »

Omniscience is to know everything infinitely. And we do NOT know everything infinitely. You're turning into a dataswammi.

You completely failed to grasp what I said above! Hence my conscious window is just apart of GODS consciousness in your argument.. You are attempting to argue GOD is a case of pure solipsism and that you are just a figment of it's imagination. Or you can say that under Omniscience, your god has a multiple personality disorder. Thus I am GOD arguing with myself on whether or not I exist.
How can my mind by a figment of God's imagination when solipsism states that only my mind exists. You and God would just be a figment of my imagination.

Furthermore if God is omnscient, that still does not restrict us by God's foreknowledge.

Quote
To infinitely Know everything, it would have to literally be infinitely everything in every infinite literal way possible. Thus thanks for calling me GOD. Undecided


Ok but you ARE NOT infinitely in EVERYTHING nor in every infinite literal way possible.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #108 on: February 20, 2011, 08:06:55 PM »

Omniscience is to know everything infinitely. And we do NOT know everything infinitely. You're turning into a dataswammi.

You completely failed to grasp what I said above! Hence my conscious window is just apart of GODS consciousness in your argument.. You are attempting to argue GOD is a case of pure solipsism and that you are just a figment of it's imagination. Or you can say that under Omniscience, your god has a multiple personality disorder. Thus I am GOD arguing with myself on whether or not I exist.
How can my mind by a figment of God's imagination when solipsism states that only my mind exists. You and God would just be a figment of my imagination.

Furthermore if God is omnscient, that still does not restrict us by God's foreknowledge.

Quote
To infinitely Know everything, it would have to literally be infinitely everything in every infinite literal way possible. Thus thanks for calling me GOD. Undecided


Ok but you ARE NOT infinitely in EVERYTHING nor in every infinite literal way possible.

WOW. lol... Your idea of GOD would be! HELLO! that would in fact make you GOD! (a finite part of him) but none-the-less GOD!
Logged
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #109 on: February 20, 2011, 08:10:14 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite except that it's expanding.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 08:12:41 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #110 on: February 20, 2011, 08:11:29 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite.

Okay...why is that infinite?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #111 on: February 20, 2011, 08:22:59 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite.

Okay...why is that infinite?

Refer back to the collapse of the sphere example. negative capacity or no capacity do not exist. It's that simple. Thus any point in space is relative and can not be stated as a beginning or an end to capacity because they are apart of the capacity (infinite volume).. So literal 0D doesn't exist or any relative point in space. It will always be an infinite volume for this very reason.



 
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 08:28:25 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #112 on: February 20, 2011, 08:28:36 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite.

Okay...why is that infinite?

Refer back to the collapse of the sphere example. negative capacity or no capacity do not exist. It's that simple. Thus any point in space is relative and can not be stated as a beginning or an end to capacity because they are apart of the capacity (infinite volume).. So literal 0D doesn't exist or any relative point in space. It will always be an infinite volume for this very reason.

I didn't ask why the capacity is a negative or zero capacity.  I asked why it's not a finitely large capacity where we are unable to fathom its beginning or end?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #113 on: February 20, 2011, 08:31:15 PM »

Also, just to reiterate and be clear.  Are you saying there's no such thing as zero or negative energy?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #114 on: February 20, 2011, 08:31:50 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite.

Okay...why is that infinite?

Refer back to the collapse of the sphere example. negative capacity or no capacity do not exist. It's that simple. Thus any point in space is relative and can not be stated as a beginning or an end to capacity because they are apart of the capacity (infinite volume).. So literal 0D doesn't exist or any relative point in space. It will always be an infinite volume for this very reason.

I didn't ask why the capacity is a negative or zero capacity.  I asked why it's not a finitely large capacity where we are unable to fathom its beginning or end?

The answer I gave you tells you why that is. The reason why you can't fathom a beginning or and end is because they don't exist. They are impossible to exist just because there is no beginning. If there is no beginning there is no end either. We only needed to solve one side of that argument to figure it out Wink
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #115 on: February 20, 2011, 08:33:10 PM »

A box laying on my floor has a finite capacity.. However the box is not the limit of capacity, and the box itself is apart of the capacity. The universe is like the box.

But then that means there's a finite capacity albeit very large capacity, not an infinite capacity.

wrong.. It would only make the universe a finite capacity, not that which it's expanding into lol. Space time is not the expansion of space son.. I think many people don't grasp this very fact. Our Universe is like our Milkyway Galaxy.. A flat disk floating in a much larger volume to which is infinite.

Okay...why is that infinite?

Refer back to the collapse of the sphere example. negative capacity or no capacity do not exist. It's that simple. Thus any point in space is relative and can not be stated as a beginning or an end to capacity because they are apart of the capacity (infinite volume).. So literal 0D doesn't exist or any relative point in space. It will always be an infinite volume for this very reason.

I didn't ask why the capacity is a negative or zero capacity.  I asked why it's not a finitely large capacity where we are unable to fathom its beginning or end?

The answer I gave you tells you why that is. The reason why you can't fathom a beginning or and end is because they don't exist. They are impossible to exist just because there is no beginning. If there is no beginning there is no end either. We only needed to solve one side of that argument to figure it out Wink

How do know there's no beginning or end?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #116 on: February 20, 2011, 08:38:05 PM »

Also, just to reiterate and be clear.  Are you saying there's no such thing as zero or negative energy?

No literal - energy would be correct.. Gravity is considered negative energy only in that it's an opposite force to expansion. Gravity is considered negative why expansion is considered positive. Thus the net energy is zero-point energy.. The energy of ground state.

Example:

A car traveling reverse is not traveling at a negative velocity, it's only traveling at a velocity opposite to forward velocity. The car still exists at rest to which represents it's point-zero energy (velocity). Thus the expansion of the universe is seen as the expansion of positive energy that exceeded the controlling force to contract (negative energy).. Push became more powerful than pull. Thus gave birth to the Universe and space time. You can google zero-energy calculator.

« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 08:45:13 PM by TheJackel » Logged
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #117 on: February 20, 2011, 08:40:05 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #118 on: February 20, 2011, 08:41:40 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink

I don't follow.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #119 on: February 20, 2011, 08:54:17 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink

I don't follow.

It's easy.. see contracting sphere example above..

Quote
Example:

If you took a sphere and tried to infinitely collapse it, it would reach a point of conversion (ground state). A point to where if you tried to continue to contract, it would converge every degree of it's circumference to polar opposites and then appear to expand again into a sphere. Hence, it can not contract into a negative dimensional object. The principle is very basic.. No object can exist in a negative capacity, or have absolute zero dimensional value.

The absence of no length or scale means there is no limit to size of scale. Scale is thus infinite in terms of volume size.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 09:00:39 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #120 on: February 20, 2011, 09:00:11 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink

I don't follow.

It's easy.. see contracting sphere example above..

Your contracting sphere example doesn't prove an infinite capacity.  It only proves there's a capacity that's causing negative pressure, but whether that capacity is finitely large or infinite is not so clear in your example.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #121 on: February 20, 2011, 09:01:49 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink

I don't follow.

It's easy.. see contracting sphere example above..

Your contracting sphere example doesn't prove an infinite capacity.  It only proves there's a capacity that's causing negative pressure, but whether that capacity is finitely large or infinite is not so clear in your example.

Actually it does. The sphere can not become a negative or literal 0 dimensional sphere lol. It's not difficult to comprehend at all "/
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 09:05:01 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #122 on: February 20, 2011, 09:04:18 PM »

Quote

How do know there's no beginning or end?

Energy scale. Point of convergence has already been well understood.. No lengths do not exist. It's that simple Wink

I don't follow.

It's easy.. see contracting sphere example above..

Your contracting sphere example doesn't prove an infinite capacity.  It only proves there's a capacity that's causing negative pressure, but whether that capacity is finitely large or infinite is not so clear in your example.

Actually it does. The sphere can not become a negative dimensional sphere lol. It's not difficult to comprehend at all "/

Yes, it's a positive dimensional sphere because of something expanding it (which has to be negative pressure).  The capacity of this negative pressure is finite.  It's not a hard concept to understand.  It sounds like what I do with my lungs.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #123 on: February 20, 2011, 09:12:03 PM »

Quote

Yes, it's a positive dimensional sphere because of something expanding it (which has to be negative pressure).  The capacity of this negative pressure is finite.  It's not a hard concept to understand.  It sounds like what I do with my lungs.

Wha? Something expanding and contracting a sphere is not the point of the discussion lol. Pressure is not what's being discussed here. It's spatial capacity (dimensional value). You are asking why spatial capacity is infinite, not what is causing a sphere to expand or contract in this example lol. It's being used for demonstration purposes to explain to you why there is no "beginning or end" to spatial capacity. It's simply solved by the fact that literal zero dimensional or negative dimensional lengths, objects, and things do not exist!  You can't have a sphere in negative dimensional values lol. there simply is no such thing as a negative capacity, volume, length, or thing. Thus there is no beginning or end to capacity.. And that is because the end of capacity could only result in no-capacity..And we already established why no-capacity doesn't exist. It's been established in science for a very long time now. :/

The exact physics of the Big Bang or the expansion of space time only deal with how did positive energy force exceed negative energy force to expand.. Thus giving birth to expansion of inertia (time) (space-time)..

We can look at it like this overly simplified analogy:
The quantum foam can be considered fragmented space time similar to popping bubbles in beer foam. So how did popping bubbles collect together to form a very large expanding bubble of time to which gave rise to matter? Well, there is a lot of physics behind it and we don't know for sure exactly how it happened from ground state and up. That's why they are investigating the Higgs field or the GOD particle... The problem is that we run the risk of destroying our selves in the process according to Steven Hawking.  Embarrassed   Though I doubt we could cause a Big Bang ourselves.. But you never know Wink
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 09:30:32 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #124 on: February 20, 2011, 09:41:03 PM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 09:42:38 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #125 on: February 20, 2011, 09:49:53 PM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley
« Last Edit: February 20, 2011, 09:51:12 PM by TheJackel » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #126 on: February 20, 2011, 09:51:33 PM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley

So then that means there's a positive finite capacity.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #127 on: February 21, 2011, 12:14:10 AM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley

So then that means there's a positive finite capacity.

No.. that means there is infinite positive capacity Wink..

---

However, we can look at your argument about us being finite as humans.. There is a fundamental error in trying to claim your GOD to be infinite and boundless. You are bounding it and individualizing it as separate from yourself. Thus is by nature finite itself. And then you contradict that by saying it's Omniscient. What boundaries are you attempting to draw here? And you wonder why I see you jockeying for Solipsism. :/
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 12:19:54 AM by TheJackel » Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Posts: 7,132


"My god is greater."


« Reply #128 on: February 21, 2011, 08:57:06 AM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley

So then that means there's a positive finite capacity.

No.. that means there is infinite positive capacity Wink..

---

However, we can look at your argument about us being finite as humans.. There is a fundamental error in trying to claim your GOD to be infinite and boundless. You are bounding it and individualizing it as separate from yourself. Thus is by nature finite itself. And then you contradict that by saying it's Omniscient. What boundaries are you attempting to draw here? And you wonder why I see you jockeying for Solipsism. :/

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNCORRECT
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,969


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #129 on: February 21, 2011, 10:03:22 AM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley

So then that means there's a positive finite capacity.

No.. that means there is infinite positive capacity Wink..

---

However, we can look at your argument about us being finite as humans.. There is a fundamental error in trying to claim your GOD to be infinite and boundless. You are bounding it and individualizing it as separate from yourself. Thus is by nature finite itself. And then you contradict that by saying it's Omniscient. What boundaries are you attempting to draw here? And you wonder why I see you jockeying for Solipsism. :/

I'm not talking about God.  I'm talking about spatial capacity.  You say that since there's no such thing as negative capacity, it has to be infinite.  That makes no sense to me.  There are negative large numbers and positive large numbers.

And your argument against God makes no sense either.  I'm arguing a boundless God, therefore He has to be finite.  That's like saying infinity is finite.

Well, if anything, I find it funny you're indirectly admitting that all nature is finite.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 10:06:33 AM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
theo philosopher
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Self-Ruled Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 315



« Reply #130 on: February 21, 2011, 12:11:05 PM »

I think people are beginning to see the futility in debating someone who thinks he knows more than he really knows. Considering that TheJackal's arguments are purely based on "begging the question" type arguments and circular reasoning, what's the point?

For instance:

1) He defines omniscience a certain way and then has the audacity to claim he's omniscient without offerring any logical reason as to why we should accept his definition or accept the application of his definition. Instead, he uses teenage internet lingo to combat the most serious objections.

2) His argument about an infinite capacity is laughable at best, but only shows he should be pitied. He states, as though it's a matter of fact, that our universe is like another galaxy floating in a sea of infinite space and time. He states it as a fact, but this is actually a theory of a few fringe scientists, a theory that is so far on the fringe that many have stayed away from it. Why? Because (1) there's no proof for it and (2) there's no reason to think it's true.

Why is that? Because let's assume that energy (and therefore matter) are infinite and the universe functions just as he described. Under such a scenario, there's no reason to believe our universe would ever come about. If we have x and y and need to combine the two in order to get S, if they are an infinite distance from each other then they cannot come together. Why? By a simple thought experiment - imagine I tell you that around 9:00am this morning I finally reached 0 after counting down from infinity. You'd laugh because it's impossible to accomplish such a thing. Likewise, getting x and y to interact in an infinite spacial relationship is no different than counting down from infinity to 0. So if we did exist in an infinite spacial relationship to other supposed universes, then we wouldn't exist because there's no possible way something could have interacted with our universe's "pre-big Bang" state.

A second problem is that he uses "energy" as his god. But this puts him in a double-bind because there are three observable things about energy:

1) It is immaterial, which then begs the question of its origin and how it caused matter (not influenced it)

2) It is often the result of material, not the other way around (two asteroids colliding causes energy to appear)

3) When it is a cause on material movement, it is generally because there was material movement that influenced the energy to react a certain way that then caused it to act on new matter in a different way, etc. In other words, it's a question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? matter or energy? Energy is a scientific mystery because we can't just say it's been swarming around for trillions of years - we only see energy when there is a movement of matter. Sans matter, there is no energy; the two seem tied up together.

A third problem is that matter is finite, so at some point matter had to be created[/b], thus he still falls under the problem of an infinite regress. Even if we buy that we exist in an infinite spacial relationship to everything else, matter must be created at some point, otherwise even in an infinite capacity he falls under an infinite regress. Now he'll try to escape this saying, "No, in an infinite capacity there is no infinite regress," but then he'll fail to explain this. He'll use examples that actually prove him wrong, but you'll never be able to show this to him.

A fourth problem is that energy can't exist without matter (or some other manifestation, whether it be a light proton or something else) because it's an immaterial force. Energy is a force, not a material substance, thus it is by definition the result of something and not the final cause (it can be the efficient cause, but not the final, which is a problem). In fact, energy is probably best summarized as, "the word we apply to effects we can't explain," or an abstract description. Energy is at the base of cause and effect, but if you read Jackal's arguments you'd be led to believe that energy is an actual substance, when it's not and no quantum physicist worth his weight would ever say it's a substance.

A fifth problem is, as alluded to previously, energy cannot be the final cause, but an accidental occurrence. Thus, he still has to deal with the teleological arguments.

A sixth problem is that he has to prove we exist within an infinite capacity. Considering that such an argument is logically absurd (as shown above) and that there's literally zero evidence for it (as almost any physicist will tell you that the Big Bang was the expansion of time and space; this isn't a misunderstanding, this is actually the mathematical teaching and confirmed by physics), we have no reason for believing we exist in an infinite capacity.

A seventh problem, tied to the sixth, is that he cannot prove we exist in an infinite capacity. If there are other universes beyond our universe and we exist in an infinite capacity, then by definition there is an infinite distance between us and the other universes. If this is the case, then we would never see or be able to observe even the effects of another universe.

An eighth problem is that, to my knowledge, no major physicist or scientist has proposed the theory the Jackal is proposing. Even Stephen Hawkings has gone to a great length to show how even though space and time expanded in Big Bang (he says this), this isn't proof of a finite beginning to our universe. We must ask ourselves why no scientist has even attempted to offer up the explanation the Jackal is offering up; does he hold some viewpoint that is too precious or too good for peer-reviewed article?

In all, the argument he puts forth - aside from lacking logical probability or any evidence - is an example of question begging. He can't disavow the Big Bang, so he redefines what it means (and does so incorrectly) and then says that we're just one universe existing in a multitude of others in an infinite space. But there's no evidence for this. So why make such an argument? Because if he doesn't, he must believe in God. If he is wrong, he has to look at the "God option," which is obviously something he's not willing to do.

Now, I've avoided making all these arguments for one simple reason; I see them as a waste of time. The Jackal is going to respond in some sophomoric fashion, using the terms "fail," "LOL," or do something equally absurd. He's going to repeat all the arguments he made and at the end of the day, if I try to respond it will be a complete waste of my time because I'll simply be repeating myself as well. He's not willing to be wrong on the idea that God exists, so what's the point? My pride (and no one else's) should be tied up in what some 18 or 19 year old thinks of their arguments concerning the existence of God, and he's stuck in his belief, unwilling to change it, so why waste time? Even this post was made to help those who may have doubts after reading his arguments, not really as a reply to him, because (not to beat a dead horse), I don't want to waste my time. 
Logged

“Wherefore, then, death approaches, gulps down the bait of the body, and is pierced by the hook of the divinity. Then, having tasted of the sinless and life-giving body, it is destroyed and gives up all those whom it had swallowed down of old." - St. John of Damascus
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #131 on: February 21, 2011, 01:23:53 PM »

Sorry theo but you are incorrect. Wink jk

That was the problem I had with his infinite capacity argument, I have yet to find one credible physicist support it, let alone even find support. It's about the most desperate attempt to say God does not exist.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 01:24:21 PM by Aposphet » Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #132 on: February 21, 2011, 01:26:02 PM »

So you proved positive capacity, but not an infinite positive capacity.

And what's causing the expansion if not the capacity itself?  Your sphere analogy makes it sounds so similar to a lungs analogy within intrapleural pressure.

Uhh.. if there is no negative capacity there can only ever be positive capacity.. An end to positive capacity under your argument could only occur if there could exist a negative capacity.. Well, the riddle was simply solved in that negative capacity can not have the capacity to exist. That horse had been beaten to death in science already. Smiley

So then that means there's a positive finite capacity.

No.. that means there is infinite positive capacity Wink..

---

However, we can look at your argument about us being finite as humans.. There is a fundamental error in trying to claim your GOD to be infinite and boundless. You are bounding it and individualizing it as separate from yourself. Thus is by nature finite itself. And then you contradict that by saying it's Omniscient. What boundaries are you attempting to draw here? And you wonder why I see you jockeying for Solipsism. :/

I'm not talking about God.  I'm talking about spatial capacity.  You say that since there's no such thing as negative capacity, it has to be infinite.  That makes no sense to me.  There are negative large numbers and positive large numbers.

And your argument against God makes no sense either.  I'm arguing a boundless God, therefore He has to be finite.  That's like saying infinity is finite.

Well, if anything, I find it funny you're indirectly admitting that all nature is finite.

If you hadn't noticed, I split the two arguments Wink

Quote
You say that since there's no such thing as negative capacity, it has to be infinite.  That makes no sense to me.  There are negative large numbers and positive large numbers.

Since when is spatial capacity bound to negative and positive number systems? Do you even comprehend mathematics, or that you can create fallacies with mathematics when not used in proper context? Math is like a language, a description and explanation of what it is your are trying to describe. just because you can put a minus sign in front of a number doesn't means Capacity will magically exist as a negative capacity! o.O

Your argument is like saying you don't understand because large numbers can be used in an equation.. So under your argument a human being could eat an entire Blue Whale (real living whale) in -0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 seconds without even having to take a moment to breath. Try again please.

Quote
That makes no sense to me.

How hard is it for you to understand basic English? The non-existence of no capacity, or no negative Capacity means no spatial boundaries that could possibly define a beginning or an end to positive capacity! It's not very difficult to understand.

Quote
I have yet to find one credible physicist support it

Try opening a Physics book Wink.. And your plea for credibility seems like you would auto dismiss any physicist to whom supports it. Guess what, they have a symbol for infinity for a reason. You might want to work on your failed argument.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 01:28:51 PM by TheJackel » Logged
TheJackel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Materialist
Posts: 240


« Reply #133 on: February 21, 2011, 03:39:43 PM »

Quote
1) He defines omniscience a certain way and then has the audacity to claim he's omniscient without offerring any logical reason as to why we should accept his definition or accept the application of his definition. Instead, he uses teenage internet lingo to combat the most serious objections.

I didn't define it, It's definition is stated as follows:

"Omniscience (pronounced /ɒmˈnɪsiəns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely, or at least everything that can be known about a character including thoughts, feelings, life and the universe, etc."

Quote
Instead, he uses teenage internet lingo to combat the most serious objections.

Pleading with social dogma for credibility points based on a moral game isn't going to make that magically go away.


Quote
2) His argument about an infinite capacity is laughable at best, but only shows he should be pitied. He states, as though it's a matter of fact, that our universe is like another galaxy floating in a sea of infinite space and time. He states it as a fact, but this is actually a theory of a few fringe scientists, a theory that is so far on the fringe that many have stayed away from it. Why? Because (1) there's no proof for it and (2) there's no reason to think it's true.


It's not.. Your intentional inability to understand basic concepts such as capacity is not my problem, it is your problem.  I state it as fact because the fact has already been proven. And my argument bares far more supporting evidence than yours does for a magical imaginary friend in the sky made of nothing.. And your attempt to apply the same social dogma to scientists shows how weak your argument really is.

Quote
Why? Because (1) there's no proof for it and (2) there's no reason to think it's true.

Your use of fallacies is all the proof one needs to show your GOD doesn't exist.. Worse yet, you are an Atheist yourself when it comes to believing in any other GOD but your own. You might want to work on your arguments because they are indeed pleading.

Quote
Why is that? Because let's assume that energy (and therefore matter) are infinite and the universe functions just as he described. Under such a scenario, there's no reason to believe our universe would ever come about.

Positive, negative, and neutral.. The fact that energy can interfere with itself is all the proof required. Google the double slit experiment, or watch how your computer turns on. If science was wrong, your Computer wouldn't function. These same properties is what governs all information sir, you might want to get over it and deal with reality.

Quote
If we have x and y and need to combine the two in order to get S, if they are an infinite distance from each other then they cannot come together.

Who said two objects infinitely distant could magically come together? And why would you "need" to combine the two? You are making up your own baseless nonsense as an argument which shows why you are pleading for ignorance.

Quote
Why? By a simple thought experiment - imagine I tell you that around 9:00am this morning I finally reached 0 after counting down from infinity. You'd laugh because it's impossible to accomplish such a thing. Likewise, getting x and y to interact in an infinite spacial relationship is no different than counting down from infinity to 0. So if we did exist in an infinite spacial relationship to other supposed universes, then we wouldn't exist because there's no possible way something could have interacted with our universe's "pre-big Bang" state.

Your own little self-invented scenario doesn't make it at all relevant.. And it tells me that you have no idea what time is. However you can have objects interact over great distances.. And there is also this:

“Multiparticle interferometery and the superposition principle,” Phys. Today 46(Cool pp. 22-29 (1993).
N. D. Mermin, “Bringing home the atomic world: Quantum mysteries for anybody,” Am. J. Phys. 49(10) 940- 943 (1981).

Quote
So if we did exist in an infinite spacial relationship to other supposed universes, then we wouldn't exist because there's no possible way something could have interacted with our universe's "pre-big Bang" state.

This tells me you know nothing about physics.. Spatial capacity isn't made of nothing either. It's an infinite volume of energy greater than zero because it can't ever be literal zero Wink

 

Quote
A second problem is that he uses "energy" as his god. But this puts him in a double-bind because there are three observable things about energy:

1) It is immaterial, which then begs the question of its origin and how it caused matter (not influenced it)

2) It is often the result of material, not the other way around (two asteroids colliding causes energy to appear)

3) When it is a cause on material movement, it is generally because there was material movement that influenced the energy to react a certain way that then caused it to act on new matter in a different way, etc. In other words, it's a question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? matter or energy? Energy is a scientific mystery because we can't just say it's been swarming around for trillions of years - we only see energy when there is a movement of matter. Sans matter, there is no energy; the two seem tied up together.

1) it's not immaterial
2) You have no idea what you are talking about. And yes, kenetic energy of two colliding asteroids can produce heat.
3) positive, negative, neutral energy properties. There is a reason why your computer turns on. The chicken or the Egg can not exist without being made of energy, and is irrelevant.

Scientists say the Chicken came first
Origin of Life Chicken-and-Egg Problem Solved

Quote
we only see energy when there is a movement of matter.

Good thing we understand what Planck scale, Thermodynamics, ground state, zero-point energy, ect are/

Quote
A third problem is that matter is finite, so at some point matter had to be created


Formed though the laws of physics. and the basic principles that govern everything (positive, negative, and neutral). No deity required.


Quote
thus he still falls under the problem of an infinite regress.

Hardly.. Your entire argument did a very poor job of trying to apply infinite regress. Especially when you so blatantly have no idea what you are even talking about.

Quote
Even if we buy that we exist in an infinite spacial relationship to everything else, matter must be created at some point, otherwise even in an infinite capacity he falls under an infinite regress.

The fact that energy can interfere with itself from ground state to reach more excited states that lead to matter doesn't mean matter "had to be created". Nor did you properly address infinite regress. And you clearly continue to ignore why consciousness requires more cause to exist than things that are not conscious Wink Please try again.  

Quote
Now he'll try to escape this saying, "No, in an infinite capacity there is no infinite regress,"

Infinite regress depends on the subject you are referring to.. And it's only a process to find ground state of anything to which you are talking about in order to find the base cause. It can only be solved by literal impossibles.. Capacity can not regress into a negative capacity.. especially when zero capacity has no capacity  to exist what-so-ever. So no! A -3D sphere can not exist, nor can any object exist in -dimensional values! It's the same reason why even in string theory the string can only ever be a 1 dimensional object at it's lowest possible dimensional value.. it could never reach a literal 0-dimensional or less value!


Quote
but then he'll fail to explain this. He'll use examples that actually prove him wrong, but you'll never be able to show this to him.

I explained it rather well, your comprehension skills need work, and you need to turn the ignore button to "off".
Quote
A fourth problem is that energy can't exist without matter (or some other manifestation, whether it be a light proton or something else) because it's an immaterial force.

TOTAL UTTER FACE PALM!. Open up a science book before you make such statements.

Quote
Energy is a force, not a material substance,

It's both.. All matter is energy in different states! The reside on the orders of magnitude on the energy scale! Again, please open up a science book before you make these statements that are just showing your ignorance of the subject.


A fifth problem is, as alluded to previously, energy cannot be the final cause, but an accidental occurrence. Thus, he still has to deal with the teleological arguments.


Really, show me a cause that doesn't require the fundamental properties (positive, negative, and neutral) to be actionable, functionality, processable, existent, or have informational value, or even be a "force".. Ahh yes, you think Nothing Done it!.  Roll Eyes

Quote
A sixth problem is that he has to prove we exist within an infinite capacity.


already did..

Quote
Considering that such an argument is logically absurd (as shown above) and that there's literally zero evidence for it (as almost any physicist will tell you that the Big Bang was the expansion of time and space; this isn't a misunderstanding, this is actually the mathematical teaching and confirmed by physics), we have no reason for believing we exist in an infinite capacity.

I have plenty evidence for it, you simply ignore the evidence, or you don't have the mental capacity to understand it. And no, the Big bang is the the expansion of "Space-time".. In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. The expansion of space-time is the expansion between negative (gravity) and positive energy (expansion) where the net energy is zero-point energy.

Quote
Space is 3D absent of time.. Space time is Space + time (collective inertia into a space time fabric). Dimensions are independent components of a coordinate grid needed to locate a point in a certain defined "space". In spacetime, a coordinate grid that spans the 3+1 dimensions locates events (rather than just points in space)i.e. time is added as another dimension to the coordinate grid. This way the coordinates specify where and when events occur. However, the unified nature of spacetime and the freedom of coordinate choice it allows imply that to express the temporal coordinate in one coordinate system requires both temporal and spatial coordinates in another coordinate system.Unlike in normal spatial coordinates, there are still restrictions for how measurements can be made spatially and temporally (see Spacetime intervals). These restrictions correspond roughly to a particular mathematical model which differs from Euclidean space in its manifest symmetry.Until the beginning of the 20th century, time was believed to be independent of motion, progressing at a fixed rate in all reference frames; however, later experiments revealed that time slowed down at higher speeds (with such slowing called "time dilation" explained in the theory of "special relativity" ).

Time has a lot to do with time particle dilation in relation to inertia and velocity. And a consciousness can not exist outside of time, because that would mean it would have no-time to exist, be a process, have function, or have to ability to actively process information. It would be like trying to argue consciousness is absolute suspended animation lol.

Quote
A seventh problem, tied to the sixth, is that he cannot prove we exist in an infinite capacity.

Science already did.. No capacity doesn't exist because it's simply impossible..Even a 4th grader can comprehend this.
Quote
If there are other universes beyond our universe and we exist in an infinite capacity, then by definition there is an infinite distance between us and the other universes. If this is the case, then we would never see or be able to observe even the effects of another universe.

If there is a universe an infinite distance from us, then I would think that would be an obvious DUH!.  Roll Eyes This has no relevance to that argument, nor is it a problem.

Quote
An eighth problem is that, to my knowledge, no major physicist or scientist has proposed the theory the Jackal is proposing.


Really?

You mean the same ones that say "Nothing isn't Nothing anymore" or the one's that measured our universe to be flat? And what scientist do you describe as major? One's that only conform to creationism? Or ones that actually figured out that the Universe can begin from ground state?.


Quote
Even Stephen Hawkings has gone to a great length to show how even though space and time expanded in Big Bang (he says this), this isn't proof of a finite beginning to our universe. We must ask ourselves why no scientist has even attempted to offer up the explanation the Jackal is offering up; does he hold some viewpoint that is too precious or too good for peer-reviewed article?

Einstein talked about me? It is Einstein that said "everything is vibration"

Quote
In quantum field theory, it can be shown that a wave of a particular wavelength acts mathematically like a quantum mechanical harmonic oscillator of the associated frequency - LaTeX Code: \\nu = \\frac{c}{\\lambda} . The energy of a quantum mechanical harmonic oscillator is given by LaTeX Code: E = h \\nu \\left (n + \\frac{1}{2} \\right ) , where h is Planck's constant (~6.6261e-34 Js) and n is the number of excitations of the oscillator. In the case of the Maxwell field, n is taken to be the number of photons of that particular wavelength. In the case where LaTeX Code: n = 0 , we see that there is still some amount of energy, LaTeX Code: E_0 = \\frac{h \\nu}{2} , in this particular mode of the field. All of this together leads to the conclusion that, there is an infinite ground state energy.

Sorry the equations don't here. This analysis applies to any wavelength we can consider. But, wavelength is a continuously varying quantity. This means that, even if we thought that there was a smallest possible wavelength and a largest possible wavelength, there would be an infinite number of wavelengths between those, each of which would contribute energy. Hence, -dimensional objects, negative capacity, no-capacity, ect do not exist because they can not exist!

Quote
In all, the argument he puts forth - aside from lacking logical probability or any evidence - is an example of question begging. He can't disavow the Big Bang, so he redefines what it means (and does so incorrectly) and then says that we're just one universe existing in a multitude of others in an infinite space. But there's no evidence for this. So why make such an argument? Because if he doesn't, he must believe in God. If he is wrong, he has to look at the "God option," which is obviously something he's not willing to do.

Fail. please take the time to open up a physics book or at least visit a physics community site.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2011, 04:13:42 PM by TheJackel » Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #134 on: February 21, 2011, 03:50:50 PM »

So go ahead and continue saying your god isn't made of anything.. It just makes it all the more apparent that your GOD isn't anything other than just a fantasized idea. (an imaginary friend) 

Your tone and approach are encouraging me to change my vote.  If you want to convince us that we're deluded, fine - I'll continue to disagree with you, and you with me.  However, your desire to do so rudely doesn't exactly encourage anyone to listen to you.  Go on with your blasphemy if you wish, but don't think anyone here will see your childish rants like this as being anything more than an infantile tantrum.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.191 seconds with 74 queries.