Do you think the earth is flat or round?

This topic contains 91 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by Luckydestiny Luckydestiny 6 years ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 92 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1609716
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    PS – And maybe we make contact with the Vulcan scientists near the edge of the universe and by exchanging info we both make quantum leaps … like the printing press and internet gave knowledge a turbo charge.

    #1609727
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe.

    #1609731
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    Uhura’s tits?

    Seven of Nines tits? (she gets nine out nine from me)

    Bones beaming down to Old Trafford and getting Jones out of the treatment room?

    #1609747
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Wonderfuel Gas
    Participant
    • :

    All those moments will be lost in time Mac. Like tears in rain.

    Time to die.

    #1609753
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Was a decent analogy imo mac and I get it and agree with your post, that is how the progress of science has accelerated to this point. However no matter how many human brains work on a problem if its beyond the comprehension of the human brain then it will not be understood.

    This is what I am referring to, the limits of brains that have evolved to understand things in the conditions it evolved. It is very probable that there are features of this universe we could never possibly understand, further more many features we could never perceive to exist let alone understand.

    In theory I think all of the universe is rational and intelligable to a supreme intelligence that can perceive everything within universe, but that is fuelled more by my intuition that there is intelligence behind the universe than the science humans already understand.

    #1609754
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Lol mac I love sci fi and have always loved the idea of beings from different worlds collaborating for mutual progress, as below so above, it would indeed bear fruit as it did on this planet.

    Cant tell you how sad I was when I started to realise the true dimensions of the universe, I am almost certain (statistically speaking) that the universe has intelligent life in every corner, but contact is seemingly immpossible.

    Always humble enough to admit that mankind has acheived many things my little mind would have deemed immpossible though, I think we have to aim for the stars as the greatest men have always done.

    #1609765
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    Based on our knowledge so far, is it not reasonable to assume that everything physical in the universe has a structure, a pattern, a logic, a mathematic. And more often than not, these laws, codes tend to be simple rather than complex. Most of physics boils down to simple equations schoolboys learn.

    It would be reasonable to assume the unknown follows a similar pattern to the known. Now let’s add the supercomputers to do the number crunching, then add some artificial intelligence to the computers to do the thinking, to learn, to discover ……… and we make a quantum leap, as with every discovery, the computers have more experience, more datapoints to fuel greater discoveries. And perhaps it even reaches a critical mass in learning where progress becomes exponential and faster than the universe expands.

    I’d rather avoid the God debate, but on the basis of what is said about God, he seems logical, consistent, there is structure and reason in “his laws”. The computers can profile him. And then … man becomes a god creating our own new universes.

    #1609769
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Mac, you are correct imo, the universe has laws and these seem to be allow for the development from the simple to complex, concept of god arises here, as there are laws what set them? chance or a intelligent lawmaker? Existence of god can never be debated imo because by definition it would be beyond space and time, debating existence of god is folly imo, discussing it is enjoyable for me though as it has been for many.

    Regards the laws and logic extending to entirety of existence though, from a naturalistic view it doesnt seem right, why should they? one thing seems constant, change. Why is the logic and underlyng mathematics fundementally fixed or to be assumed ever present? A lot of pure mathematicians have believed in the possibility of a designing intelligence because the mathematics seems to be universal and constant. Although it is also reasonable to consider that many apparent laws could be just habits or temporary patterns randomly coming in and out of existence as the universe develops, and change too, based purely on naturalistic thinking. I believe like you the laws are ever present, and that draws me to the concept of intelligence behind the universe or at root of it.

    Also mac I think you are wrong to claim that most physics is simple enough for school kids to understand, hookes law and newtons equations are simple, but the universe surely has much more complex mathematical laws, I can only believe quantum theory is just the tip of the ice berg and so can not accept that point.

    Not sure I think humans could keep up with the machines unless we go the transhuman route and humans become history, can perceive it but could not possibly be attracted to the concept.

    Your last point is similar to the luciferian philosophy to believe we can become like gods, its fantastical and religous thinking imo, but that is not a criticism, I love indulging in it myself.

    #1609781
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    Shit this is an essay BUT don’t blame me. YOU as much as invited it…….. here goes.
    ===========
    My man becoming gods comment was intended for sci-fi fans but had a grain of truth. Science has enabled us to clone beings and the day may not be far off where we can create life. For the animals in our world we must appear as gods, they do not understand our reason, we have power over life death, light, temperature etc. I said men become gods, I meant men become as if gods. And should that happen the obvious question is, what is a god.

    You are speculating the laws of universe were created by a being. I see nothing to support this. IF man learned how to create worlds and life, he would do so under the laws. He would not be creating the laws. Similarly, everything religous people say about god points to him being constrained. He has been profiled. God is good not random. God therefore is constrained, he cannot choose to be evil. This points to God being a personification of the laws of the universe. The laws created God not the other way round.

    I read an interesting theory during our God debate. Man (creatures) have instinct for survival. This makes sense, because were it not so life would self destruct. When early man heard the bushes rustling in the breeze, his instinct told him to assume the cause was a predator. He blamed the wind on a being. That natural instinct refined over time to attribute natural events like thunders, eclipse to god.

    There is chance that scientific study of man and animals, can lead us to the god gene. That what makes man believe in superior beings. As I said in other discussion, as science advances god is pushed back. As science explains nature, the religous walk back their position eg god makes universe, god makes big bang. As we build more datapoints with each discovery, a pattern will emerge that reduces the probability of god. Its like catching out a liar. The first few times he can cover his lie with another lie but after time it becomes more and more probable that whatever his latest statement, its a lie. But in the end god cannot be disproven for the simple reason it is a belief. A belief is by definition something that cannot be proved.

    I suspect there will be a small number (lets say 12 hahah) of simple root laws of the universe. From these other complex laws are derived. Its like a cook with 12 basic ingredients. He can make countless recipes based on mixing those ingredients to produce wide ranging meals and flavors.

    As for man not understanding the supercomputer. Firstly man will possess the knowledge in his hard drive. And can then work through it at will. You have chinese language in your computer, you dont understand chinese. You could learn, its something you have. You could use a translation device to present the language in terms you can understand.

    As it is, your lifespan is not long enough to master all languages in the world. But you can master one, and I master another. Mankind knows them all, but one man doesn’t. Language is expanding, new words added all the time. But if I focus on the language of Kent, I reckon I can stay abreast of the change. Likewise I specialise on the new planet forming in Alpha Delta sector of the universe.

    I look at star trek, they manage to work out reasonable quickly every new thing because they know the basics, the components, the laws. Its like you discovering a new wonderful meal at the restaurant. You could get close to the ingredients and recipe and with a little time and experimentation know the secret. You know the basics and have the skillsets needed to reverse engineer the quiche !!!

    #1609783
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    PS – Just thought of a couple of sci-fi concepts for you …..

    ICEBREAKER – The icebreaker goes ahead of the container ship clearing the path. There may be no contact between the ships but the container knows its plain sailing ahead so long as it doesn’t come across the wreck of the icebreaker. It doesn’t need to know what the icebreaker knows. He knows he’ll find out in due time.

    Our space probes go out and clear the path, acquire the data and knowledge, leaving it behind for us to use whenever and wherever we go.

    ANTS – The ant cannot go out and find the sugar lump and bring it all back to the nest alone. The ants go off scurrying around the table, their universe, until one finds the lump. Then he meets another ant, does his little dance, and before you know it there is a stream of ants mining that sugar lumps.

    Apply that concept to our universe and our probes, robots and computing motherships can know all we need to know.

    #1610609

    Laughing Lenny
    Participant
    • :

    Excellent thought provoking posts Mac, and a pleasure to read.
    Here are some other issues that you may (or may not) like to comment on…

    1. Your carpet analogy was interesting, but what if you turned one end of the carpet 180° and joined it to the other end? Would Allah worshipers still insist upon kneeling down and pointing their arses up at the west?

    2. Regarding your questions raised about holy validity and sanctity of religious belief. Where do you stand with Pat Condell on this?

    3. Scientists tell us that “Dark matter” is in abundance out in space and it’s at least seventy-five percent of everything that exists. They say that they know what is it is and try to convince us they know that it’s everywhere, but if you ask them if we can we get some down here? They always answer: “Of course not”. So why should we believe them?

    4. A fair number of eminent scientists have reasoned that if you could travel in a perfectly straight line faster than the speed of light you could theoretically look behind and see yourself arriving. However, some say to do this you would have to travel to another solar system in order to give yourself the necessary time to turn around to see yourself coming. The flaw with this theory of course is that the perception of time in another solar system could very likely be different. I don’t have a clue whether this is right or wrong but I do believe that if it was possible travel fast enough to turn around and see yourself coming then Kelly’s tits would most certainly arrive first.

    All the best,
    Lenny.

    #1610627
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    @Laughing Lenny – The biggest unsolved mystery in the world is the whether you are ever serious, but out of courtesy I respond to yor points ……

    1. Here in Thailand the muslim arses point to the east not west. Its all a matter of perspective. You could argue that in Bangkok its all arse about face, and there would be some truth to that 🙂

    2. Had to Google who is he, seems like a resurrection of Dave Allen. He proves my point. Some believe he’s funny, some don’t. His humour cannot be scientifically proved because its a matter of belief.

    3. You would no doubt tell us there is “grey matter” inside your head but it we asked you to show us I doubt you could. The presumption its actually there, is based on extrapolating from the known in other cases to “know” with reasonable certainty the unknown,

    4. That it is Monday for me and still Sunday for you seems like something out of a sci-fi movie. I am not a Time Lord, its a matter of perspective.

    If I told somebody that in some places, you shout and 2 seconds later hear yourself, people could think that crazy … but an echo is not that unbelievable once we know the science.

    Kelly’s tits don’t arrive first if she’s walking backwards. Its all about perspective, like the raging debate over what’s her best feature … arse or tit ?

    And as for the claim man cannot know everything, I am the living proof he can 🙂

    #1611118

    Laughing Lenny
    Participant
    • :

    Mac. Thanks for even bothering to respond. Of course Muslim arses in Thailand are pointing eastwards and I suspect that their perspective over there is indeed arse about face and probably aimed at those infidels down under.
    Unfortunately Pat Condell is more or less an ex-comedian these days and has a price on his head. I do find a lot of truth in what he says though. He does not mince words and tells it like it is in quite a refreshing entertaining style. Whether his monologues can be scientifically proven or not isn’t the main issue here. He just makes an awful lot of sense most of the time to me.
    Certainly much more than “dark matter”. I’m still completely in the dark about that theory simply because the scientists admit that they don’t know what it is, they don’t know where it is, and admit we can’t get any! But it’s there. Why should anyone believe them? I’ll take Pat Condell any day over all that “dark matter” bullshit.
    Science for me is not what it once was. It’s all too woolly and theoretical these days for my liking. Give me Galileo or Isaac Newton any day. When Galileo dropped his balls off of the top of the leaning tower of Pisa that boy knew precisely what he was doing and the same applies to Newton when that apple dropped. Isaac didn’t fuck about and he wasn’t in the least interested whether it was a Bramley or a Cox’s Orange Pippin either. He just cut to the chase and defined gravity!
    I take your point about Kelly arriving backwards though, and I agree that it would still be just as good, but it got me thinking. If Serena Williams arrived backwards perhaps it could help the scientists make a little more graphical sense of all that “black hole” bollocks.
    And as Dave used to say; ‘may your God go with you’.
    Lenny.

    #1611119
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Mac, thanks for the response, will always give your posts a read and never disappointed.
    Think to a certain degree we are talking passed each other though.

    Like I said the god debate is not worth having, but its worth pointing out that the type of god you believe man could become is not the God hypothesised as almost a philisophical necessity to prevent encountering an infinite regress when considering first cause. While I dont necessarily believe everything has a purpose, there seems to be cause, this chain of action reaction could not go on forever so the buck must stop with a hypothetical cause that is causeless and outside of space and time, we cant become that but we can become some sort of creator of worlds as you describe.

    Dont get your language analogy, of course humans can learn another human language, doesnt mean we can create computers that can understand the entire universe and translate it into language or context human brain can understand though.

    #1611132
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Short p.s mac, yes god as defined and created my man is constrained, he also has a white beard, I dont care to listen to those who claim to know god, they can have their beliefs but I cant share them.

    I believe intelligence is behind the universe based on exactly the remarkable logic it seems to be founded upon that you described, but when I say believe its intuition or feeling thats all.

    #1611140
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Soz mac posted that in a rush and see silly typo making me even more unintelligible than usual, for clarity, my man is now unconstrained, but the god created by man is constrained, I cant even agree clearly ffs

    #1611144
    tom182
    tom182
    Participant
    • :

    LuckyDestiny…what are your views on the Grandfather Paradox?

    #1611149
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Hi tom, just the usual thoughts really.

    Travelling forward in time is done by everyone, one of its symptoms is ageing, I think to truly travel back in time would mean to get younger and finish the journey at your conception.

    I think its not possible to travel back in your own timeline as you are part of it, but may be you can visit the past and meet your grandfather in a different time line. Killing him would prevent the future you from that time line but not you. That is the standard way out of the paradox.

    Another one is that there are 2 parallel realities, grandfather lives and has grandkid who goes back in time and kills grandfather._.._so grandkid never is and doesnt go back to kill granfather…_ so grandfather lives and has grand kid who goes back in time to kill grand father.._so grandkid never is and doesnt go back to kill grandfather.._ so grandfather lives and has grand kid ._.._.._

    The terminator films f**ked my head up as a kid trying to rationalise the dynamics of time travel, its beyond me really.

    #1611179
    MacGuffin
    MacGuffin
    Participant
    • :

    @luckydestiny – I’m smart enough to spot obvious typos, not pedantic enough to point them out AND most certainly too much the gentleman to go into lengthy discussions about Your Man. But the wannabe psychologist in me does make me wonder what sites you had visited before you came to TT.

    Re: Language Analagy – It was said the universe is so big and ever expanding such that there would be physical limits on mans ability to know all. I countered, there are many languages all growing, so it would be impossible for one man to learn them all. BUT not computers and not mankind if one man focused on one dialect and the other another dialect. Get the analagy?

    Re: God – The God theory assigns the intelligence to a being. I don’t accept that. Laws can behave as if intelligence. Man has history of personifying nature (eg Thor). There is too much shit and random events for it all to be planned by a benign god.

    I attempted to explain that from the eyes of beings we control (or could create) we would seem no different than god does to us. What do the pet dog think we are? Benign all knowing gods who provide all.

    #1611251
    Luckydestiny
    Luckydestiny
    Participant
    • :

    Just have to agree to disagree on that mac, I agree in theory computers could analyse and model the universe I am just arguing that the human brain has limits and its likely that a lot of the nature of the universe will never be understood, whether we have our friend alexa to help us or not. I think it is more reasonable to assume that than to believe we have all the basics and principles understood already and its just a matter of filling in the blanks, I think that is dogmatic thinking.

    re nature of “god”, what point is there in creating a universe in which everything is certain? what if “god” gave man free will and this realm is chaotic, not pre determined. Randomness in nature only counts against argument of god if you have a fixed interpretation of god as you described.

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 92 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.