₦airaland Forum

triplechoice:
You dont have any pears to give,and name calling amd insults wont win you an argument. It reveals your frustration that you're losing the debate.

But you have demonstrated clearly that you cannot comprehend that Realities that are NOT Tangible exist, it is meaningless explanation to you.

FRANCISTOWN:
Obviously. The person behind the moniker TenQ doesn't understand elementary physics and computer science.

You are the professor of Physics abi!
And who told you that I was making definitions for physics students. Lets see how your ignorance play out

MY QUESTION:

TenQ:
Again my Challenge to Atheists:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does it prove it doesn't exist?

YOUR RESPONSE:

FRANCISTOWN:
First of all. The fundamental law of the universe with respect to physics doesn't say
whatever cannot be measured in terms of mass, Dimension, Energy and time doesn't exist.
This is what the tangibility of existence means according to the fundamental law of the universe with respect to physics.

The fundamental law of universe with respect to physics is that. The substances that made up the universe are either observable or touchable or being felt or interactive (with or without laboratory equipments.)

For instance, energy and force can't be seen(often than not). But when you hit your head on the ground or you get electrocuted. You'd cease to be an unbeliever. They are highly interactive.

2nd law: As we all know, the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference. That is,
the truly fundamental laws are the same everywhere for all observers.

Therefore,
Can spirits be seen by anyone with or without laboratory aids? No.
Can they be touched by anyone? No.
Can they be felt by anyone? No
Can they be interacted with by anyone? No.
Are they observable? NO.

Therefore, spirits don't satisfy any criterion of the fundamental law of existence of the universe. Therefore, according to physics. Spirits don't exist.

Just look at your response arrogant emptiness. This is how you fail your exams with copy-paste of things you do not understand.
1. can you show me ANYWHERE where i said that whatever cannot be measured in terms of mass, Dimension, Energy and time doesn't exist as you have claimed. Simple comprehension of English Language has deluded you
2. While TRYING to explain what TANGIBILITY of existence means according to the fundamental law of the universe with respect to physics, You spoke of SUBSTANCES THAT MAKE UP THE UNIVERSE and you mentioned energy and force
Please tell me, Energy and Forces are SUBSTANCES!? Please explain because I only read my physic to 100 Levels.
3. Suddenly, to feign knowledge, you copied and pasted a 2nd law: and I was wondering if you were about he Second law of Motion or the second law of thermodynamics: as you know, my physics is elementary.
4. You now went completely off tangent to the question: was the question remotely about spirits?
I don't get it o. Mr Expert.

If you had read my post at all, you wouldn't come up with this lame duck response to my question

Let me Help you out a little with the reason behind the Question
[i]My Question was simply in another words that: If an observable is NOT tangible, does it mean that it doesn't exist?

MY QUESTION:

TenQ:
Again my Challenge to Atheists:
2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?

YOUR RESPONSE:

FRANCISTOWN:
This is a poor comparison. Because softwares satisfy the criterion for existence under the fundamental laws of existence.

•Softwares can be observed(visually and auditory), when you look into your screen, use speakers and microphones.
•Softwares are highly interactive even more than the hardwares .

Therefore, softwares are very poor measuring yards for spirits.

Your Response shows that you know NOTHING about how data is stored in a computer either in the ROM or HDD or the REGISTERS or even the FlashDrive. Your ignorance is so deep that I am disappointed in you. I thought you knew a little about Softwares or Digital Electronics.

1. You said: "Softwares can be observed :Visually and Auditory"
May I please ask you for the colour of the Softwares you have seen and the frequency and waveform of the sound it produces: I am waiting o!
2. You said: Softwares are highly interactive even more than the hardwares.
May I please ask you to tell me the mechanism by which a software is highly interactive?

Have you ever programmed one line of "Hello World" before?
3. Then you went off tangent again: Read the question and tell me if the two questions were about spirits?

MY QUESTION:

TenQ:
Again my Challenge to Atheists:[i]
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?

YOUR RESPONSE:

FRANCISTOWN:
They are highly interactive and observable. Therefore, they exist.

I don't know if this is a problem of comprehension of simple English Language: the question says:
[i]Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?

The answer should be either Yes it is Wisdom or No it is not wisdom, but your royal professor of Physics did NOT understand the Question one bit.

Don't you know that Questions are not statements of position?
You fall my hand o!

MY QUESTION:

TenQ:
Again my Challenge to Atheists:
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

YOUR RESPONSE:
[quote author=FRANCISTOWN post=129598386]This shows your poor understanding of how the computer works.
Softwares don't stay on the C.P.U. Any set of instructions written directly on a hardware is called a *firmware*.

You Said: "Any set of instructions written directly on a hardware is called a *firmware*. "
The ROM is a Computer Hardware
The HDD is a Computer Hardware
The RAM is a Computer hardware
The CD is a Computer hardware etc
Is it TRUE that any instruction written directly on these are firmwares?

I wrote a Pacman Game Program on my HDD, is it a firmware?

Mr Man,
Firmware is programming that's written to a hardware device's non-volatile memory
This is why cramming or copy-pasting without comprehension is not good for you. It produces have baked "Experts in Computer Science"
Let me help you out:
The Computer BIOS is and example of firmware which is used to provide runtime services for operating systems and programs and to perform hardware initialization during the booting process (power-on startup).

FRANCISTOWN:
Softwares are set of written instructions, they are either, compiled, translated or interpreted into machine codes. These machine codes stay on the main drive first, and if requested moves to the RAM, as a series of jobs to be passed into the processor for execution, then as cache and finally to the processor and back to the cache and back to the RAM the cycle continues.

Therefore any software that cannot be found on the memory of any computer device doesn't exist. It is that simple.

@the emboldened doesn't even make any sense and it shows you don't know what you are talking about.

I don't remember asking you about how the computer processes instructions from the interpreted or compiled software. You should have just used the energy to answer my simple questions.

FRANCISTOWN:
You are actually the one who doesn't know anything here and you are not just a noice maker but a town crier.

Disappointment is an understatement with respect to you. So much noise but extremely shallow.

Let me help you with some things , perhaps you will learn to slow down to comprehend issues before jumping in.

TenQ:
The Atheists Costly Error: Assumption that Everything REAL Must be TANGIBLE

First Some Definitions:
1. Real:
Things that EXIST are REAL : things that do NOT Exist are Imaginary or Virtual!
e.g. Your image in the mirror is virtual!
2. Tangible:
Anything that has either Mass or Dimensions (Length, Area or Volume) or Energy which can interact with time either by change in position or change in state.

Anything that is tangible can be described in terms of either its mass or Dimensions or Energy?

Photons and Gluons are mass-less objects and they do not even have spatial dimensions but they have measurable Energies: thus they are Tangible objects

Note:
All REAL things that are not tangible can only be known by the Effect they produce on other things that exist.

Examples of Real things that are NOT Tangible include
1. Life
2. Mathematics
3. Software Code within a machine
4. Information
5. Logic
6. Magnetic Fields,
7. Electric Fields,
8. Gravitational Fields

Finally,
There is a Huge Difference between Real objects that are NOT Tangible and the Medium by which their Existence can be monitored.
Every Non-Tangible REALITY can only be detected INDIRECTLY by the Effect they have on suitable mediums.


If you don't have problem of comprehending knowledge,
Answers to Questions from my Challenge to Atheists:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does this prove it doesn't exist?
Answer: NO!
Examples abound Like Life, Logic, Software, Magnetic Field, Mathematics, Knowledge, Information etc

2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
Answer: Softwares within a machine are very real REAL

3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" DIRECTLY by any physical means?
Answer: NO! There is no physical means by which a software can be measured or quantified. Detection or Quantification can only be done Indirectly with Another Software.

4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
Answer: It is actually IGNORANCE that will make a person INSIST on physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist.

5. Tell me, how can one DIRECTLY prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?
Answer: It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to prove directly the existence of a software within the CPU or HDD or RAM of a computer without the use of another software.


Questions :
1. Do you as Atheists now concur that REALITIES Exist that are NOT TANGIBLE?
2. Do you as Atheists now concur that demanding for direct physical proof of Non-Tangible Realities is borne out of Ignorance?
3. Do you as Atheists now concur that visible Effects of Non-Tangible Realities on other real objects is a fair (indirect) proof of its existence?
i.e. Like the effects of Microsoft OS or Application program on a Computer is sufficient reason to believe that a software is operating within the Computer!
4. Do you concur that a Working Interconnection of several Systems is a reasonable proof of an Intelligent mind behind the controlling program of the systems where the controlling program is Non-Tangible?

triplechoice:
Your lying and not using my logic correctly. I said grief can be described as tangible without mentioning how yet.

You should have asked me how grief is tangible before jumping the gun.

No Sir,

One of your Illustrations you used was according to the Websters dictionary to prove that Grief is Tangible (even though I explained taya that it was a figure of speech to no avail)

/Her Grief was tangible

Please respond:
Just as Grief and Life is Tangible according to you,
What if I tell you that the Soul is tangible, what will you say?

triplechoice:
Please stop quoting me with your waywardness. Discuss the op,then I will answer you. I said I'm not an atheist and I have repeated that at different times here. Are you deaf or something?

Answer these below if you know what's spirit . Just focus on the op.

1. What's spirit?

2. What's the nature of spirit.?

3. How do you know it exist despite your believe it cannot be seen or measured physically ?

4. What's the relation or connection between spirit and the material world and yourself?

5. Clearly explain how spirit compares with a computer software.

Answer the above or ask your friend TenQ who claims to be an authority on spirits to answer it for you, and let's proceed on mature and sensible discussion,not this childishness from you.

The questions asked by TenQ are completely asinine as it as nothing to do with spirit or God described in the Bible. He should take his computer talk to the right section since he doesn't want to be honest. Your friend is lying about the true intention behind his questions and you're here defending and covering for him instead of condemning him of using deception to discuss God or spirits



Nobody has ever demanded for a direct physical quantification of a computer software before they buy it or install it in their machine,and that's because, even though
it can't be seen or touched, we know it exist as something that produces visible effects which anyone can see whether you believe in it or not

So it won't make sense to demand for physical quantification. But for spirit, the public doesn't know much about it . So it's wisdom to ask for some form of physical quantification to be certain it exist as real. Your friend is misapplying knowledge to fool people like you who refuses to think or question anything.

I already answered his questions ,and ask him some questions in return while doing so, but he has refused to respond in kind.

So why should continue ? Don't bother me if you can't get him to answer the questions I and others have been asking him . A teacher who's afraid to take questions from students doesn't know the subject very well.

Too bad!
Pearls are not given to pigs.

If you cannot comprehend that Realities that are NOT Tangible exist, it is meaningless explanation to you.

Sorry, when you grow up in understanding

jaephoenix:
Another bare faced lie from Nairaland's chief resident lie-nus.
The Big Bang was estimated to have happened about 13.8 b years ago. But what happens before it is still unknown to scientists. The Big Bang does NOT describe how the universe came by. One of the common misconceptions about the Big Bang model is that it fully explains the origin of the universe. However, the Big Bang model does not describe how energy, time, and space were caused, but rather it describes the emergence of the present universe from an ultra-dense and high-temperature initial state.
So no, Big Bang isnt the very beginning

Read my lips: I said

Scientists all agree that this physical universe had a beginning at about 13.8billion years ago. Even the James Web telescope new findings did not dispute this

Tell me:
Was there matter in this physical universe before the big bang?

Aemmyjah:
Francistown
Since you're the wisest atheist in Africa
Kindly come and show your mastery and prove OP wrong

I think that the Intelligent Atheists would rather keep off as their answers to the questions will betray the foundation of their argument against the unseen (God, Soul or Spirits)

triplechoice:
So when something makes sense as a figure of speech you can't make sense of it to know what's being referred to ?

A computer software is not tangible, but it makes perfect sense to describe it as that when you consider the visible effects it produces. That's how we know it exist without measuring it directly. This is simple science that a person who claim to be an expert is struggling to understand. SMH

Your problem is that you want a word to mean only what you want to mean despite evidence to the contrary, and that's because of the personal agenda you're pursuing on this thread.



What visible effects does spirit produces for you to compare it to a software. That's all
If you're not able to mention that ,then please take your display to the right section and ask your questions there. You're derailing the thread. Maybe it's about time the mods are invited to intervene since you don't want to be honest.

This is religion section and the subject under discussion is spirit. Discuss that if you know it and stop hiding behind something to prove another thing that's not related to it in any way It won't work here .

Your friends have by their comments shown you're indirectly explaining spirit or God,but you continue to deny it, and you're a Christian?

Modified. You want to measure physically another person's grief before you know they're grieving.? Nonsense.

Just as Grief and Life is Tangible according to you,
What if I tell you that the Soul is tangible, what will you say?

Note: the effects of the soul on the body are
With our soul we feel emotions,
With our soul we have volition
With our soul we have intellect


I am using your logic now o!

jaephoenix:
And instead of doing what I asked, u decide to do drop insults. Awesome

I am actually learning from you: at least I have learnt that
1. Grief is Tangible
2. Life is Tangible

Can you describe the two for me in terms of their physical attributes?

jaephoenix:
Yes

Tell me please, Can ANY of these three have a Belief in ANY Deity?
1. A Baby
2. An Animal
3. An Imbe.cile

Why or Why not?

jaephoenix:
Retard, I did what you asked
See, u r just clowning around and exposing your ignorance, and your fellow retarded theists are clapping for you, while we atheists look on in amusement. Tehehehe

Life is Tangible?

So, when a person dies, can you explain where his Life goes?
Where is the location of Life in a human being?

triplechoice:
So when something makes sense as a figure of speech you can't make sense of it to know what's being referred to ?

A computer software is not tangible, but it makes perfect sense to describe it as that when you consider the visible effects it produces. That's how we know it exist without measuring it directly. This is simple science that a person who claim to be an expert is struggling to understand. SMH

Your problem is that you want a word to mean only what you want to mean despite evidence to the contrary, and that's because of the personal agenda you're pursuing on this thread.



What visible effects does spirit produces for you to compare it to a software. That's all
If you're not able to mention that ,then please take your display to the right section and ask your questions there. You're derailing the thread. Maybe it's about time the mods are invited to intervene since you don't want to be honest.

This is religion section and the subject under discussion is spirit. Discuss that if you know it and stop hiding behind something to prove another thing that's not related to it in any way It won't work here .

Your friends have by their comments shown you're indirectly explaining spirit or God,but you continue to deny it, and you're a Christian?

Modified. You want to measure physically another person's grief before you know they're grieving.? Nonsense.

This was simply the reason I gave you other examples like
Examples of Real things that are NOT Tangible include
1. Life
2. Mathematics
3. Software Code within a machine
4. Information
5. Logic
6. Magnetic Fields,
7. Electric Fields,
8. Gravitational Fields

They exist, they are real but are not tangible. We only know of them because of the effect they produce on other real things but we neither can see them nor touch them.

If you still can't comprehend this, ask yourself is you have ever seen Gravity or an electric field. What do they look like: their colour, hardness, viscosity, maleability, etc.

jaephoenix:
Who created this creator?
By the way, one of your retarded croonies said all scientists believe the universe was created or had a beginning. Lol. Which scientists? U christians pull out data and definitions from ur ass and make it look like facts

You infinite regress of Cause and Effect is LOGICALLY impossible!

jaephoenix:
1. You lie when you say every scientist agree the universe is created. Most scientists maintain agnosia of universe creation, and a few believe it may be eternal.
2.Vilenkin believes the universe originated from nothing. And its his theory, though he can't back it up. Now this negates your view that the universe was created
3. Okay, lets assume the universe was created, for the sake of this argument. Why would I assume its Yahweh and not Osiris etc? Remember these gods existed before Yahweh was coined

Scientists all agree that this physical universe had a beginning at about 13.8billion years ago. Even the James Web telescope new findings did not dispute this

Aemmyjah:
Thank you very much TenQ
At a point, as I would admit, I became confused as to what tangible and real means but your explanations with the use of software, life, information was amazing though we don't always agree on everything. LordReed showed the most integrity but won't still admit the truth cos it is the foundation of him seeing the whole truth of God's existence. Budaatum was just acting like a boxer that has received a heavy blow to the head but still wants to keep fighting, embarrassing himself before his opponent and friends. Jaephoenix always talk nonsense, wisdom is not for everyone and cos he is a doctor as he claims, he knows the profession well but he's not reasonable... Triplechoice and Knownunknown are just confused confusionists who can't make up their mind but I think I'll add something the same atheists were pushing you to explain- The existence of God as a Spirit... I'll drop what someone said as quoted

It seems you know "your people" very well.
Three categories
1. Those who know the truth but will rather avoid it
2. Those who think they know the truth and splash all about with non-sensities
3. Those who are just plain dumb but will argue anyways

Aemmyjah:
"If I were still an atheist, this one line of evidence would convince me that God exists. Virtually every scientist believes that the universe began at some point in the past.It is not eternal or always existed. Alexander Vilenkin, the head of cosmology, institute at Tufts University said, 'The Proof is now in place that the universe had a beginning'
That makes a strong argument for God because whatever begins to exist has a Cause. We now know the universe began to exist. Therefore, there must be a Cause behind the universe.. Well, then let me ask you a question
"What kind of a Cause would bring the universe into existence?"
1. It must be transcendent, because it existed apart from the creation
2. It must be timeless or eternal because it existed before physical time came into being.
3. It must be immaterial or Spirit because it existed before the physical world was created
4. Must be powerful, given the immensity of the creation event
5. Must be smart given the precision of the creation event
6. Must be caring because he created such a wonderful habitat for us to exist in
7. Must be personal because he has to make the decision to create
8. And then the scientific principle of Occam's Razor tells us that there would be just one Creator

... Transcendent, Spirit, Eternal, Powerful, Smart, loving, unique... That's the description of the God of the Bible

I personally, anyway would come to the conclusion that there's a divine creator"


As logical as that seems, it would be hard hard for some people to accept just as they cannot make us their mind regarding things like information, software, life, grief with regards to their reality and tangibility

You are perfectly correct about the Nature of the Creator: as an Infinite regress of Cause and Effect is impossible. God is the Uncaused FIrst-Coause of Everything that Exists.

Of course reason ALONE should lead us to the Door of the Creator of the Universe!
The only problem is that are we willing to Reason with Logic and Facts or just sheepishly follow the conclusion of some other people without following through with our own assessment for their conclusion.
Why did God Create the Universe?
What does He want?
Does God care if I hate others and commit selfish and despicable acts like Rape, Murder, Torture, Blackmail on them?

The issue now is: after coming to a knowledge of the Creator, the question that we must all still answer is WHICH is the TRUE Creator! It is only one who Truly searches that will find this answer amongst the several answers available in the world.

StillDtruth:
Have you not now seen and proven that atheists are liars and deluded people living in denials?

They know they are lying when they speak their lies and delusions like matter comes out of nothing and order is random.

They know they are Lying and that they are Liars. That is what our threads prove.

I agree with you: they wish their position might somehow turn out to be true. Their self importance deludes them from reality!
And of course, submission to Gods authority is what they abhor with all their soul

budaatum:
It is dishonest of you, TenQ, to drag this from where everyone said what they said so everyone can read the tangible evidence themselves instead of your intangible point of view.

You didn't even provide a link! So this is going to be my last response to you! Good day.

This is immature of you Buda

Check my first page:
The Atheists Costly Error: Assumption That Everything REAL Must Be TANGIBLE



by Veecruz: 10:44am On Apr 14
Atheist Says Spirit Is Nothing Because It Is Non Physical & Invisible


This was what I wrote:

TenQ:
The Atheists Costly Error: Assumption that Everything REAL Must be TANGIBLE

First Some Definitions:
1. Real:
Things that EXIST are REAL : things that do NOT Exist are Imaginary or Virtual!
e.g. Your image in the mirror is virtual!
2. Tangible:
Anything that has either Mass or Dimensions (Length, Area or Volume) or Energy which can interact with time either by change in position or change in state.

Anything that is tangible can be described in terms of either its mass or Dimensions or Energy?

Photons and Gluons are mass-less objects and they do not even have spatial dimensions but they have measurable Energies: thus they are Tangible objects

Note:
All REAL things that are not tangible can only be known by the Effect they produce on other things that exist.

Examples of Real things that are NOT Tangible include
1. Life
2. Mathematics
3. Software Code within a machine
4. Information
5. Logic
6. Magnetic Fields,
7. Electric Fields,
8. Gravitational Fields

Finally,
There is a Huge Difference between Real objects that are NOT Tangible and the Medium by which their Existence can be monitored.
Every Non-Tangible REALITY can only be detected INDIRECTLY by the Effect they have on suitable mediums.


If you don't have problem of comprehending knowledge,
Answers to Questions from my Challenge to Atheists:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does this prove it doesn't exist?
Answer: NO!
Examples abound Like Life, Logic, Software, Magnetic Field, Mathematics, Knowledge, Information etc

2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
Answer: Softwares within a machine are very real REAL

3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" DIRECTLY by any physical means?
Answer: NO! There is no physical means by which a software can be measured or quantified. Detection or Quantification can only be done Indirectly with Another Software.

4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
Answer: It is actually IGNORANCE that will make a person INSIST on physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist.

5. Tell me, how can one DIRECTLY prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?
Answer: It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to prove directly the existence of a software within the CPU or HDD or RAM of a computer without the use of another software.


Questions :
1. Do you as Atheists now concur that REALITIES Exist that are NOT TANGIBLE?
2. Do you as Atheists now concur that demanding for direct physical proof of Non-Tangible Realities is borne out of Ignorance?
3. Do you as Atheists now concur that visible Effects of Non-Tangible Realities on other real objects is a fair (indirect) proof of its existence?
i.e. Like the effects of Microsoft OS or Application program on a Computer is sufficient reason to believe that a software is operating within the Computer!
4. Do you concur that a Working Interconnection of several Systems is a reasonable proof of an Intelligent mind behind the controlling program of the systems where the controlling program is Non-Tangible?





LordReed, Budaatum, triplechoice, KnownUnknown, Jaephoenix, HopefulLandlord, Everyday247, Seun,

It started with a THESIS
And concluded with QUESTIONS



And the Questions were different from the ONEs I asked you in the other Thread:


Buda: you are making yourself a lowlife just because my questions betray your lack of comprehension of simple things

jaephoenix:
For the last time, direct your queries to the right channel, in this case, at the Merriam-Webster dictionary
Thank you

I can see the kind of breed of school-leavers we breed: those whose ability to reason is questionable

jaephoenix:
It is tangible because we can see its effects on cells. We can appraise it by its effects on cells. We don't really need to touch life. So its tangible

No wonder, comprehension is far from you.


Why don't you ask ChatGPT to help you before you finally reduce yourself to beyond irredeemable.
Better still,
Google is your friend

jaephoenix:
The definition of atheism has never changed. Its either u didn't know it before or u r just plain ignorant.

Do your concur that you Lack a belief in a Diety?

budaatum:
This, in fact, better describes some of your questions!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_question

My Questions were obviously not even leading Questions!

budaatum:
This is narrowness TenQ, born of one point of view.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-ended_question

Were you born in March?
is different from
Which month of the year were you born?

My questions require just plain YES orNO!

budaatum:
I did answer your questions, TenQ. And making out I didn't is not what anyone who reads the very tangible evidence that is available in this thread would conclude.

You just did not like my answers because they were from numerous points of view, be honest!


Are you suggesting that I don't understand the questions you asked me and that I answered extensively?

Or is it that you don't understand my answers.

You answered your own questions not my questions anmd worse of all, you were attributing your answers to my questions.

Most of the answers to my question is YES or NO; I doubt if there was once where you clearly stated such answers.




I think my question was very specific and demands that the answers be with respect to the point of view of the Machine

Check My Questions again: everything was with respect to what happens WITHIN the Computer


1. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
2. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?


Except for Question 5, all the questions has answers that were YES or NO !

1. Do you understand the writeup above?
2. Do you dissagree with it or not?
Can you thus attempt the questions given?


The Efficldence of Non-Tangible existence is only known by its effect.

Questions :
1. Do you as Atheists now concur that REALITIES Exist that are NOT TANGIBLE?
2. Do you as Atheists now concur that demanding for direct physical proof of Non-Tangible Realities is borne out of Ignorance?
3. Do you as Atheists now concur that visible Effects of Non-Tangible Realities on other real objects is a fair (indirect) proof of its existence?
i.e. Like the effects of Microsoft OS or Application program on a Computer is sufficient reason to believe that a software is operating within the Computer!
4. Do you concur that a Working Interconnection of several Systems is a reasonable proof of an Intelligent mind behind the controlling program of the systems where the controlling program is Non-Tangible?

budaatum:
We are telling you that the answer you ascribe to your own question is from only your one point of view, and that there are other points of view, and that you can't just close your eyes and claim only your point of view is the only point of view, and that telling us to only consider a thing from your point of view is like asking us to look with your own eyes which might not even work as good as ones own eyes.

Or do you live on a planet where the blind see for those with eyes?

What is difficult with answering my questions?

Can you not ask your own question too?
Why must you answer a question I never asked you and attribute it to be the answer to my Questions : doesn't this make sense to you?

budaatum:
I've felt all along that this is the rub, and I am finally glad you confess.

Eve asked, will I die if I eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that Adam had told her they should not eat for on the day that she ate she would surely die, by opening her eyes to see that it was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, so she took some and ate it and gave some to her dumb believing husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Yes, TenQ. The logical consequence of using one's heart and soul and mind to ask and knock and seek is to question the gods, the sources of all Wisdom, from all points of views imaginable.

I wish death was just physical: but You will NOT die became a LIE.
Adam and Eve not only died Spiritually, they also eventually died Physically!
A classic case of 419 that wiped out everything given to Adam and Eve!

Emusan:
No attempt on these questions especially this number 4 since!

They know that all their Noise-making has been STUPIDITY borne out of IGNORANCE in light of question 4

KnownUnknown:
No need to go into any back and forth with you. The snippet above shows your ignorance and arrant stupidity.

You are not even intelligent or knowledgeable enough for your delusions to be called Dunning Kruger effect.

https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740

Like I told your partner, you are too stupid for me to be even bother with. Sayonara you stupid SOB. Lmao

The demons in you have started manifesting again.

According to you
Photons and Gluons are NOT TANGIBLE Existences
AND
Magnetic Fields, Electric Fields, Gravitational Fields are TANGIBLE Existences



I can see how wise you have made yourself to be!

budaatum:
But who are you? Our teacher? Our examiner? Are we to receive marks from you if we give you the specific answer that fall in your line?

And what if we have a better answer, a more nuanced and considered answer, must we abandon it and dumb down?



Go back through the thread TenQ, and you will see many instances where we posed our own question how we formatted it but you refused to see it not to talk of answer any one of them, so it cannot obviously be as simple as you say it is now, can it?

TenQ set his question!
If you don't know the answer, don't ascribe the answers to the question I gvae you with your answers to your own question.

budaatum:
Yes! See the nothing

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


Yes. See the beginning of the ordering of the randomness below.

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.


Like buda. Yes!

Thanks for showing that the Primary mover of these impossibilities is a Primary mover (God)
Unfortunately,
To the Atheists: these things spontaneously happens without a Primary Mover (God)

Atoms can spontaneously form themselves
Entropy can be reversed without external Energy
Life can just come out from atoms and molecules

StillDtruth:
I dont think so.

Atheism is just the final point when a man real eyeses that God has cut him off and rejected him and is never gonna have anything to with him again. So they are just publicly rejecting and making noise about it in their lamentations and pains.

It is spiritual because Logic never makes sense to them.

Can Matter come out of Nothing?
Can Order come out of Randomness?

To the Atheists, YES!

budaatum:
With this, you frustrate me.

We agreed, software for pc will not work in Android and Mac!

We agreed, Sign language is gibberish to computer!

And now you start your response with, "you should understand" as if I don't!

Please, TenQ, try to see the point of view of others instead of your own alone.


Ergo, software lacks mass.


That is what the software is to you, and from your point of view.

A person who sat down and coded every single line of the software might choose to look from a different point of view.



What you do not seem to understand is that you do not have the authority to demand what point of view I choose to respect, and that just really amuses me.

Why would I be an atheist, precisely defined as a person who refuses to only accept the point of view of the gods, now choose to worship the point of view of TenQ, to put it bluntly it I may?

Tell me. Is the person coding the software not writing the software, and is their final written code not the software too or must they too only see the machine's point of view?

I asked questions that were specific: Answers should fall in line with my Question !

This is a simple issue.
After answering my Question, you may pose your own Question and we will answer it according to how you have formatted it.

Ohyoudidnt:
Ubai Ibn Ka'b indeed had his own collection of
Quranic material. Early Islamic sources indicate that there were slight variations in the readings and arrangements of the Quranic text among some of the companions, reflecting a diversity of transmission during
the early period of Islam before the standardization process.

Ubai Ibn Ka'b was known for his deep knowledge of the Qur'an and was one of the few individuals whom the Prophet pbuh specifically mentioned as being excellent in Quranic recitation. His compilation
included a few additional phrases and different wordings, which are considered part of the early textual history of the Quranic text.

Zaid Ibn Thabit was chosen by Caliph Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) to lead a committee to compile an official, standardized mushaf (written copy of the Quran) to preserve the integrity of the Quran and ensure
its uniformity across the rapidly expanding Muslim world. This standardized mushaf omitted the variants and personalized annotations from individual companions codices, focusing on the Quranic text that was agreed upon by consensus to be recited by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

These early codices did not represent different Qurans but rather different methods of transmission and teaching within the scope of what was allowed in Quranic recitation and memorization practice. The Uthmanic codex reflects the community consensus and is the basis for the Quran used throughout the Islamic world today.

Why didn't everyone just use the Quran of Muhammad?

Was it a conspiracy between Aisha and Abubakar to destroy it?