₦airaland Forum

plaetton: ^^^
This is what drives all motion in the universe, flux, change, and what we call evolution.

Look at at map of the globe. Look at the oceans, the continental divisions, the mountains, valleys, deserts, rivers and lakes. No matter how beautiful, elegant and purposeful they seem, All these evolved to their present forms over great periods of time through an infinite series of chance events.

^^^Then you must hold that there was never equilibrium to start with, and there never will be.

Your proposition is simply logically flawed.

Not to speak, of course, of the fact that said proposition is conveniently silent on where the initial factors which began to interact in "chance events" appeared from!

Repeat Post.

plaetton: Let me rephrase that so that you can understand me better.
A system is an flux, trying desperately to regain equilibrium.

I repeat: true equilibrium can never be lost in the first place!

NOTHING can make that happen.

In the flux, trillion billion chance collisions are occurring every micro-second. When a particle collides and accidentally hooks up with another particle, it stays that way if the hinges or hooks are tight. The two particles get a tiny measure of stability in their new format, and the collisions continue. Over a period of time, stable complex chains are formed which may perform a specific functions within the system. And this process continues indefinitely.
Over millions of years, we may see form integrated with function, and then we try to infer purposeful design in what we see.

While this is good as playful thinking a la, lego, it would never account for consciousness, much as no amount of lego pieces put together would ever become conscious.

And yes, chaos came out from a prior state of equilibrium. I did admit the it is yet to be determined, exactly upset the original equilibrium.
That search continues.

You use the word 'equilibrium most carelessly and without thought.

True equilibrium, especially when you refer to the "prior state" which was presumably all that existed from all eternity, could only, my dear, permanently remain in equilibrium.

Unless acted upon by an external factor.

Which of course, immediately shows that it was not all that existed.

plaetton: Evolution is an infinite series of chance events, with one chance event creating the necessary stability suitable for the occurrence of next chance event, and so on.
Its all about equilibrium.

I believe that prior to the big b.ang, undifferentiated electromagnetic energy existed in a state of dynamic equilibrium.

You really need to start all over again. With every respect, you have articulated a most contradictory hypothesis which just makes no sense whatsoever.

For you propose a series of chance events borne from a NEED for equilibrium - which started from a point where there was ALREADY equilibrium.

This knocks off absolutely everything you have written and renders it entirely contradictory and wrong.

Therefore, to me, equilibrium is the driving force for evolution. We have been told by scientists that at some point in the future, the universe will simply collapse and revert back to its original state of equilibrium: undifferentiated energy.

If it started from equilibrium and will revert to equilibrium, you really need to account for the x factor that caused such disequilibrium, speed, power and life suddenly and meaninglessly.

True equilibrium will eternally remain in a state of equilibrium.

I laugh at people who point to the human eye or human brain as being far too complex to have evolved by a series of chance events.
I say to them , WHY NOT?

You laugh in vain.

In fact, you laugh in nothing but the greatest delusion and fantasy. So great, that it appears to the thinking mind as terrible as some Harry Potter contrivance.

It would also seem that you have no knowledge of these organs whatsoever, to make such a comment.

I see that you are struggling to contextualize your reality. Please that is normal. Do not let it lead you to exceedingly f.oolish conclusions such as this laughter at people who reject chance on the matter of the brain and eye, no offence, big bro.

Repeat Post

Repeat Post

musKeeto: Or better.. TIME HAS TO EXIST, for two separate events to exist...

Bingo!

Just correct!

Logicboy03: lol....and where do days, hours and minutes come from if not the calendar calculations of the movement of the earth by man?

Days, hours and minutes are not time, but earthly measurements of time.

In the same way as 8 inches is a measurement of space, and not space.

Mr anony: Well, I don't quite agree with Nick either but the point is that you can't jump from fantasy like "the world could have been created by other men" straight into factual statements like "the world was created by other men". That my dear needs a little bit more explanation and evidence.

I doubt you have averted your mind to, and dwelt upon the implications of the brevity of recorded human history.

Uyi Iredia: This topic is coming along nicely. DeepSight, I suggest you consider the fact that time has no objective existence outside the humans who define the concept. What does exist are the physical objects used to measure it. Keep in mind that the duration you mentioned refers to time.

That would mean that you could not have come to exist.

Mr anony: I have showed you the same over and over but it seems you are not getting it. It makes no sense showing you something you don't even understand. I'll ask again what do you understand is meant by necessary?

That word 'necessary' as used in these discussions, is a word that MrHomer will NEVER understand during this earth life.

NEVER.

Mr Troll: hear hear!!! The wise one has spoken and it is the law!

Lolz. If you like, collect. If you like, leave am. U go surprise say na stray dogs go find am, lick am.

Logicboy03: Is it really wrong to mock religion?

However, it was not a mockery of religion, rather a good criticism of a belief in God. Say no to Anonyism

If you ever have the time or interest (you will have neither) to go through my old posts, you will see that I have been a HUGE mocker of religion, particularly christianity, in the past.

I have realized two things however -

1. It is very thoughtless and futile

2. The religions in fact contain fundamental and sacred truths about the nature of this strange reality in which we find ourselves, but have dumbed them down to a form acceptable to mankind for the purposes of sanity.

There is a lot to think on there. Man has tried to contextualize his existence for eons. Religion represents the coagulation of that effort through the ages. It is not right in every detail, but it contains certain core and fundamental recognitions.

Start with the Garden of Eden.

Read it with a philosopher's or thinkers eye. You will be shocked at the profound things you will see in there.

These things exceed the mind. And are therefore troubling. And that's exactly why they were dumbed down into the religious form. Pretty much like telling a child his departed parent has gone to heaven. A small sweet story that the child can swallow. Not necessarily spiritually false.

Think carefully bro.

Logicboy03: Articifial intelligence bro......


Could exist

Artificial intelligence is not self consciousness as a being.

Mr anony: I've read it. Now let me answer you. Here's the short answer


Yes


Both

No.

Now that's all well and good but none of them lead us to a statement of fact such as this:



Now for the Long answer.

I don't know if you are familiar with the philosopher called Nick Bostrom but he has proposed an argument called the simulation hpothesis. He has argued something like this:

1. Given enough time and with improvements in computer technology, humans will be able to simulate total virtual universes with characters just like us programmed such that they have freewill and make their own decisions.

2. Of course there will be no way for our virtual characters to know that their world is indeed a simulation.

3. As our computer devices become better and more efficient, more people will be able to afford computers with enough computing power to create virtual universes

4. The virtual people can also develop in technology such that they too can create other virtual worlds.

5. If the above are possible, then there would be more simulated worlds than there are actual worlds.

6. The question now becomes: How do we know that the world we live in is the actual world and not one of the many simulations?

Now the above is a good line of thinking to play with but it still doesn't lead us to a factual statement like "This world was created by men elsewhere".

Get my drift?

Its wrong because no virtual creation will ever have independent thought or freewill or self consciousness.

No robot either.

That's like suggesting that you can have a self conscious software or car. The engineered matter can and will only respond as per what is programmed into it and not have independent free thought of its own.

Thus Nick Bostrom was just being an idle and shallow fantasist.

Logicboy03: Another problem with time; past present and future;

Failure of past and present;
- do we really live in the present? No. There is no different between the past and immediate present.
-Everything you do presently is an update at a millisecond. The present doesnt exist. An update is the latest version of a recorded event.
-Assume that you are typing something- every word you type is in the past as soon as you type the word;, it is a past action. Before you can describe your present action, it is already recorded by you as a past event.


Failure of the future;
-the future doesnt exist. There is no certainty. You can say that you will be alive in the next second but an asteroid could scatter the whole earth in the next second.
-the future doesnt exist just as tommorrow never comes. The moment you enter the future you are in the present which is actually then a recorded past event.

eg- I am going to school tommorow Sunday. When sunday comes, I cant say that I am in the future because I will have to say that I am presently in school. But even that present tense is false- I would have to have arrived in school to claim that I am present in school....the past but acually described as the present

As such you do not exist: you are a mirage.

Let me tell you a secret. The future exists. It is a place in time you as a conscious entity are yet to walk into. You are existing towards and tending towards it. It is a magnet and will draw you into it. There are people who can see it. They can tell you what rests in it. And because of the power of the magnet of the future, which is a component of God, you cannot avoid the future, and what rests in it, and what you have placed in it as you draw unto it.

You can, however, affect its composition as you go along, with your own magnetic actions.

Ol boy, this one na expo. I dont care to argue it. Just keep it in your left pocket and remember it.

I no fit shout.

Logicboy03: That space comprises of air and particles. Air exists- the space exists

False. Space is not air or particles either. There is no air in most of outer space, and yet there is space there.

=========================================

Event A happens before event B.

The time gap between A and B is 5 minutes.

Does 5 minutes exist? A and B as events existed.

5 minutes is only a concept made from the hours that it approximately takes the earth to rotate around the sun.
Should we be on a different planet's rotation (eg mars) would that 5 minutes be a sensible measure?

If the duration does not exist, the events cannot happen in it.

Now listen carefully:

Space is the void into which things are interpolated.

Time is the continuum into which events are interpolated.

Both exist.

Both are self existent; necessary: and could not but exist. They are the intangible reality, the intersection of which forms the core of God.

Both are components of God.

Mr anony: Exactly! What he doesn't understand is that a being needs neither events nor spatial points in order to exist.

Time is a component of God though.

Did you think on the planetary engineering questions I asked.

Particularly the third (and fourth) questions.

Deep Sight: 3. Given the age of the universe, if and when such happens, would you think that its the first time it has occurred?

Deep Sight: I should add to that a last question: factor in the brevity of human recorded history on earth.

Strange, aint it?

DAZ ALL!

Mazaje I ask you yet again if you can see yourself and if anyone else can see you.

I was dissapointed at your last answer because the strangeness of the question ought to have provoked deeper thought.

Please attempt the question again.

Logicboy03: I didnt say that time doesnt exist but it is an argument that can go both ways. So, I am now playing the devils advocate to argue that time doesnt exist. Surely, you must have come accross this topic in philosophy


-Past, present and future have no tangiblity
-do animals percieve time?
-past describes an event that happened previously. The event existed but does the "past" exist in itself?

It is like saying "length" exists. It doesnt, it is a concept used to measure the distance between two points. The space exists, the points exists but length is only a concept- the length has no tangible existence

Time is the measure of the event space (gap) between two or more occurences. The occurences exist but does that gap between the two occurences have a tangible existence?

Time is only a measure

The space between the two points, as per length, exists.

The duration between two events, as per time, also exists.

Please stop making me think for you. This is tiring.

Logicboy03: We are all talking about time. Time results into a funny paradox if we stretch its foundations.


So all of us will be guilty of some counter-intuitive notions.


I see beyond your reasoning

You are refusing to think.

That is not my problem.

Deep Sight: Nah, nah, nah, you'll just call me bonkers.

But, if you will, you may start here -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_engineering

Now, when you read that, please just ask yourself three questions only -

1. Do you think that given sufficient time, humanity will successfully undertake such?

2. If they do, what do you think will be their approach - migration or setting up a zoo, or both?

3. Given the age of the universe, if and when such happens, would you think that its the first time it has occurred?

Daz all I can say o, no more on that on this topic!

I should add to that a last question: factor in the brevity of human recorded history on earth.

Strange, aint it?

DAZ ALL!

Mr anony: I wasn't asking you to explain so that I can accept it. I was asking that you explain so that I understand it. So my oga no vex, please kindly explain. Educate me

Nah, nah, nah, you'll just call me bonkers.

But, if you will, you may start here -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_engineering

Now, when you read that, please just ask yourself three questions only -

1. Do you think that given sufficient time, humanity will successfully undertake such?

2. If they do, what do you think will be their approach - migration or setting up a zoo, or both?

3. Given the age of the universe, if and when such happens, would you think that its the first time it has occurred?

Daz all I can say o, no more on that on this topic!

Logicboy03: 100% agree with your first sentence

Your second sentence is backwards. God is subject to time if he exists.

Please go and have breakfast and then read the second line afterwards. Read it 40 times.

Then compare it to your statement about time outside the universe not necessarily having a beginning.

Mr anony: Interesting. Please explain

You will never accept it, so forget it. However it is happening again. We, humans, will create another world in time. Yep, right here in this universe.

They will have myths, they will have legends. They will have scripture. And we will be watching them from our computers. And occassionally guiding them.

God, will remain, IS BE; AND IS IS.

Logicboy03: Aww, our manly man, Deepsight is so lonely as a deist that he has to conjure up sophistry to make a deist out of an atheist.


Time is a concept. It is a concept with both material and immaterial aspects. It can be argued that time doesnt exist.

Just like numbers, time is a concept. And just like numbers, time results in infinity. Past, present and future have no tangiblity or tangible existence.

To say that because there is an eternity of time, there is also an eternal being is fallacious.

Your god would have no tangible existence if you want to hang his existence on the eternity of time.

If time doesnt exist, you dont exist. You have no past and no present.

Stop talking gibberish.

Logicboy03: Timeless- no time
Eternal- infinite in time


Cyclical universes would each have a beginning. Think of it as oscillating

There's no such thing as no time.

Time is self existent and a component of God.

Logicboy03:
Sophistry.

What the hell does this have to do with God being an alien life form?

You said so, not I.

Anyway, this world was created by men elsewhere, but of course you may not know this.

The origin of all things remains God.

Logicboy03: Please, help me think. How did I collapse my worldview?

Okay, lets take a gentle walk through this.

You say -

"The time (spacetime) of our universe might have a beginning but that doesnt mean that time outside our universe has a beginning."

1. This statement recognizes the existence of time outside our universe.

2. It further recognizes the eternity of that time.

3. Eternity by definition has no beginning.

4. It thus recognizes the existence of something outside our universe which is self-existent.

5. A necessary, self existent thing.

If you would pause, you would realize that this effectively means that in your heart of hearts, unrealized, you are a Deist.

Logicboy03:


What is the difference between leprechauns and alien life forms?


That should make you think clearly about trying to make the idea of god being an alien life form plausible

Don't be silly, of course it is clear that this world is a contrivance of another world.

Mr anony: You have just admitted to the existence of an eternal realm

I can not say one thing and my oga at the top comes and says a different thing.

If he is a thinking person, he will recognize that in that statement alone, his entire worldview collapses.

Logicboy, you are yet to think.

[size=20pt]
ENYA IS GOD![/size]