Page 5 of 6

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:20 pm
by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
James S Saint wrote:
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:Could be the universe, who knows what the shape of it is.

James S Saint wrote:I do. It has no shape.


So you have travelled to the edges of the universe?

Unlike many, I use my mind for such journeys in time and space. I found that at no time could there ever be a limit to the space.


Did you use the book of Astral Projection? Or was this a home brew remedy?

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:21 pm
by James S Saint
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:Did you use the book of Astral Projection? Or was this a home brew remedy?

It was the book of RM:AO.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:29 pm
by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
James S Saint wrote:
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:Did you use the book of Astral Projection? Or was this a home brew remedy?

It was the book of RM:AO.


And this is better than the Hubble telescope?

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:39 pm
by James S Saint
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
James S Saint wrote:It was the book of RM:AO.


And this is better than the Hubble telescope?

By FAR.

But more "different" than "better". Instruments are for verifying, not determining.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:41 pm
by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
James S Saint wrote:
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
James S Saint wrote:It was the book of RM:AO.


And this is better than the Hubble telescope?

By FAR.

But more "different" than "better". Instruments are for verifying, not determining.


Can you show me your pictures...or drawings, of the edge of the universe, or not-edge of the universe I mean.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:07 pm
by James S Saint
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:Can you show me your pictures...or drawings, of the edge of the universe, or not-edge of the universe I mean.

Can I show you a picture of what isn't there? Hmmm... could be an issue with that. But I can see why you are having trouble understanding. You seem to be trying to picture the absence of something. Logic has the advantage of not requiring pictures, although not excluding them either. It is Logic that informs/reveals that there is no edge. And it seems that Logic is not one of your preferred skills nor confidences.

My confidence is verified Logic. Unfortunately a large part of the verification is merely not being able to find anyone who can rationally disagree. I prefer someone who can also confidently agree. But we live in an age of insecurities and fear governing the lives of far too many people.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:45 am
by surreptitious57
James wrote:
Logic has the advantage of not requiring pictures although not excluding them either. It is Logic that informs / reveals that there is no edge

Can you think of any particular reason why this is not in principle a very good idea even if the hypothesis in question turns out to be true

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:30 am
by James S Saint
surreptitious57 wrote:
James wrote:
Logic has the advantage of not requiring pictures although not excluding them either. It is Logic that informs / reveals that there is no edge

Can you think of any particular reason why this is not in principle a very good idea even if the hypothesis in question turns out to be true

No?

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:25 am
by surreptitious57
Logic can demonstrate mathematical truth but cannot demonstrate empirical truth
You are using it to demonstrate the latter when it is not sufficiently rigorous for this
You need to use science and specifically the scientific method to demonstrate RM AO
For empirical truth cannot simply be demonstrated by using only logic or mathematics

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:52 am
by surreptitious57
A famous example : logic says that if you drop two objects of different mass from the same height at the same time that the heavier one will hit the ground
before the lighter one. But empiricism says that they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is why any assumption about physical reality no matter
how self evident it appears to be has to be tested. Any assumption which cannot be subject to potential falsification cannot be taken to be empirically true

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:51 am
by encode_decode
Mathematical truth can demonstrate anything at the hand of a mathematician - including that which is empirically false. It can also disprove other mathematical truths given enough effort.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:57 pm
by James S Saint
Logic always works in the hands of a skilled logician. It was never a logician who said that a light object and a heavy object would fall at different speeds.

In the hands of the unskilled, as many errors are made using empirical demonstration as are made in using logic. Empiricism without logic is just foolishness and temptation into superstition. Logic without empiricism is hypothesis awaiting demonstration. Logic leads to the impetus to demonstrate. But demonstration leads to the impetus to presume, void of cohesive thought (magic tricks believed to be true demonstrations).

Logic alone can tell you of what the universe is made. It requires no empirical demonstration. Logic alone can tell you of why subatomic particles form. That too requires no demonstration, although the more intricate the logic becomes, the more temptation there is to verify with demonstration. Logic alone can tell you how and why molecules form. Logic alone can tell you how and why gravitation works. Logic alone can tell you why positive and negative migrate toward each other. Logic alone can tell you how and why everything in the universe does what it does. Demonstration alone tempts one into fool-hearty superstitions.

The only purpose for empirical demonstration is to verify that logic errors have not been made.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:57 pm
by Fixed Cross
Unlike many, I use my mind for such journeys in time and space. I found that at no time could there ever be a limit to the space.


Did you use the book of Astral Projection? Or was this a home brew remedy?

Maybe he was just able to figure out that space cant be limited by anything that isnt also space. I.e. maybe he was just thinking accurately.

surreptitious57 wrote:A famous example : logic says that if you drop two objects of different mass from the same height at the same time that the heavier one will hit the ground
before the lighter one. But empiricism says that they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is why any assumption about physical reality no matter
how self evident it appears to be has to be tested. Any assumption which cannot be subject to potential falsification cannot be taken to be empirically true

Logic rather demands that we do not make assumptions. You seem to think it means to faithfully assume random ideas as true because they feel true. Thats actually not logic.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:55 pm
by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
surreptitious57 wrote:A famous example : logic says that if you drop two objects of different mass from the same height at the same time that the heavier one will hit the ground
before the lighter one. But empiricism says that they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is why any assumption about physical reality no matter
how self evident it appears to be has to be tested. Any assumption which cannot be subject to potential falsification cannot be taken to be empirically true


bad example. the heavier one hits first always everytime, especially with air resistance, but even without air resistance.

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:42 am
by encode_decode
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:A famous example : logic says that if you drop two objects of different mass from the same height at the same time that the heavier one will hit the ground
before the lighter one. But empiricism says that they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is why any assumption about physical reality no matter
how self evident it appears to be has to be tested. Any assumption which cannot be subject to potential falsification cannot be taken to be empirically true


bad example. the heavier one hits first always everytime, especially with air resistance, but even without air resistance.

If I am not mistaken, I think surreptitious57 is referring to experiments undertaken at places like the Fallturm Bremen(is also able to simulate weightlessness, with the newly installed catapult). surreptitious57 may also be referring to experiments that take place in space.

Ultimate Philosophy 1001 are you sure about even without air resistance? Purely a matter of curiosity for me.

:-k

Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:14 am
by encode_decode
    surreptitious57

    I see where you are coming from . . . however . . . and I have a headache - so I can only hope this makes sense.

    surreptitious57 wrote:Logic can demonstrate mathematical truth but cannot demonstrate empirical truth
    You are using it to demonstrate the latter when it is not sufficiently rigorous for this

    Is that true though? Consider existing empirical data.

    surreptitious57 wrote:You need to use science and specifically the scientific method to demonstrate RM AO
    For empirical truth cannot simply be demonstrated by using only logic or mathematics

    I would not be too sure about this, especially as time goes on. The scientific method can be applied in computer simulations and emulations to a high degree of accuracy. With the availability of empirical data we have at our disposal these days, we can at the very least, arrive at a high enough degree of accuracy to determine whether an hypothesis is accurate - just by plugging in numbers from empirical data. I am quite happy to elaborate . . . when this headache is gone.

    #-o

    Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

    PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:13 pm
    by Fixed Cross
    encode_decode wrote:
    Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
    surreptitious57 wrote:A famous example : logic says that if you drop two objects of different mass from the same height at the same time that the heavier one will hit the ground
    before the lighter one. But empiricism says that they will both hit the ground at the same time. This is why any assumption about physical reality no matter
    how self evident it appears to be has to be tested. Any assumption which cannot be subject to potential falsification cannot be taken to be empirically true


    bad example. the heavier one hits first always everytime, especially with air resistance, but even without air resistance.

    If I am not mistaken, I think surreptitious57 is referring to experiments undertaken at places like the Fallturm Bremen(is also able to simulate weightlessness, with the newly installed catapult). surreptitious57 may also be referring to experiments that take place in space.

    Ultimate Philosophy 1001 are you sure about even without air resistance? Purely a matter of curiosity for me.

    :-k


    Mass doesnt alter g.
    G on earth is 9.8.

    Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

    PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:18 pm
    by encode_decode
      Fixed Cross

      Fixed Cross wrote:Mass doesnt alter g.
      G on earth is 9.8.

      Yes - I have that in my head . . . I am not sure how correct I was in that post.

      What I was responding to triggered a memory. When I do physics these days - I use a lot of references.

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:23 pm
      by encode_decode
      My idea is this:

      If we have reason to believe that we are here now . . .

      . . . then why do we not have reason to believe that we have been here before ? . .

      . . . and why do we have no reason to believe that we will be here again?

      Given the number of possible outcomes using the same stuff contained in our universe now - then it is possible that all of the stars and planets and other bodies could just as easily have taken a different configuration - which means that each time of return could be different also.

      I have my reservations on a cyclical time however - eternal return is not necessarily dependent on time either - this may be basing the idea around people but a leap in imagination could make a universe reconfigure without people.

      So I am saying eternal reconfiguration - which also allows room for eternal rebirth et cetera.

      Just an idea!

      :-k

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:26 pm
      by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
      encode_decode wrote:If I am not mistaken, I think surreptitious57 is referring to experiments undertaken at places like the Fallturm Bremen(is also able to simulate weightlessness, with the newly installed catapult). surreptitious57 may also be referring to experiments that take place in space.

      Ultimate Philosophy 1001 are you sure about even without air resistance? Purely a matter of curiosity for me.

      :-k


      yes you can test this with planets, planets have more gravity around other planets.
      and the gravity equation accounts mass as a variable

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:30 pm
      by encode_decode
      Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
      encode_decode wrote:If I am not mistaken, I think surreptitious57 is referring to experiments undertaken at places like the Fallturm Bremen(is also able to simulate weightlessness, with the newly installed catapult). surreptitious57 may also be referring to experiments that take place in space.

      Ultimate Philosophy 1001 are you sure about even without air resistance? Purely a matter of curiosity for me.

      :-k


      yes you can test this with planets, planets have more gravity around other planets.
      and the gravity equation accounts mass as a variable

      Thank you for answering - it might have seemed like a peculiar question, my apologies for that if so.

      :D

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:32 pm
      by Ultimate Philosophy 1001
      encode_decode wrote:
      Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:
      encode_decode wrote:If I am not mistaken, I think surreptitious57 is referring to experiments undertaken at places like the Fallturm Bremen(is also able to simulate weightlessness, with the newly installed catapult). surreptitious57 may also be referring to experiments that take place in space.

      Ultimate Philosophy 1001 are you sure about even without air resistance? Purely a matter of curiosity for me.

      :-k


      yes you can test this with planets, planets have more gravity around other planets.
      and the gravity equation accounts mass as a variable

      Thank you for answering - it might have seemed like a peculiar question, my apologies for that if so.

      :D

      no worries

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:48 pm
      by James S Saint
      encode_decode wrote:My idea is this:

      If we have reason to believe that we are here now . . .

      . . . then why do we not have reason to believe that we have been here before ? . .

      . . . and why do we have no reason to believe that we will be here again?

      Given the number of possible outcomes using the same stuff contained in our universe now - then it is possible that all of the stars and planets and other bodies could just as easily have taken a different configuration - which means that each time of return could be different also.

      I have my reservations on a cyclical time however - eternal return is not necessarily dependent on time either - this may be basing the idea around people but a leap in imagination could make a universe reconfigure without people.

      So I am saying eternal reconfiguration - which also allows room for eternal rebirth et cetera.

      Just an idea!

      :-k

      The mathematics works out to be that even if given an infinity of time, the universe could never be in the exact same state as it ever had been before. It is a fact that every instant in time is new, throughout eternity.

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:24 pm
      by encode_decode
      James S Saint wrote:The mathematics works out to be that even if given an infinity of time, the universe could never be in the exact same state as it ever had been before. It is a fact that every instant in time is new, throughout eternity.

      So I am saying but maybe not expressing it properly that we can forget the same state, and it is possible for rebirth but in a different configuration - so rather than eternal return, oh and Cyclical Time, is it possible that we could be reborn? As a different physical person?

      Re: Eternal Return. Cyclical Time Theory.

      PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:45 pm
      by James S Saint
      encode_decode wrote:
      James S Saint wrote:The mathematics works out to be that even if given an infinity of time, the universe could never be in the exact same state as it ever had been before. It is a fact that every instant in time is new, throughout eternity.

      So I am saying but maybe not expressing it properly that we can forget the same state, and it is possible for rebirth but in a different configuration - so rather than eternal return, oh and Cyclical Time, is it possible that we could be reborn? As a different physical person?

      There is an infinity of you present at all times. Exact duplicates of you down below the subatomic level exist throughout the universe. Each one diverges from being identical to you as time passes. But also as time passes, another exact duplicate forms from something that wasn't quite exact yet. You will always be present in the universe, as will I and every other creature ever born. There is no escape from that conclusion once you know the mathematics of it (which isn't all that hard).

      So yes, you are "reborn". And even more, you are being reborn every instant into different locations throughout the universe. Your "soul" and also, separately, your "spirit", is truly eternal and ever present. And then of course, you are never exactly identical to how you were, thus you are constantly being "reborn" into a new "configuration", but only through a gradual, cohesive type of process. There are no instantaneous, discontinuitous, or uncaused events. All physical reality flows.