Moderator: Flannel Jesus
Meno_ wrote:I actually believe in it.
obsrvr524 wrote:So wishful suspicion built upon rumors?
obsrvr524 wrote:The intention was to relay that you seem to propose no science or reputable source for your priori assertions used to justify your "faith". I am not claiming that you should do otherwise. I am just noting what appears to be the case, whether good or bad.
obsrvr524 wrote:I'm sure that all of what you said is well beyond me. And what they said seems to be based on a quibit of nonsense (physical matter forms from information about physical matter).
When things get too complicated for me, I try to explore from a different angle. In this case the paradox issues begin my lack of faith in time travel.
The first objection is the grandfather paradox (if you go back and kill your grandfather then you would not be born in order to go back and kill him). That alone is enough for me to say "time travel has to be nonsense".
But also there is the whole non existence of the past and future. If there was some device that caused you to shoot into the past, an entire new universe would have to be instantly created. From what I have read that requires not only an infinity of energy but also breaking a few speed records.
And if you go with the whole M-theory "every possibility already exists" idea, you have to accept some ridiculously infinite numbers of infinite numbers of infinite numbers, ad infinititum. And all of that repeated infinitely upon infinitely upon infinitely ad infinititum. And staggeringly all of that wouldn't even begin the quantity of "already existent timelines". The big bang theory would definitely be shot to hell but so would any preexisting infinite time line theory. And all based up someone imagining, without evidence, "what if".
It all just seems far too silly for me. And that leads me to be far more in favor of James' much more plausible theory that these quantum guys are just playing mind games or they really are just nuts.
Meno_ wrote:Again plausible, all too plausible.
Infinity is just as difficult to conceive as the idea of a curve, a perfect circle , as well as the idea of progressive spaced out diminishing rates of , or , increasing rates of change, of awareness.
Meno_ wrote:Relativity, is an idea, but so far, a proven idea,
Meno_ wrote: related to the linear slowly, very slowly become awareness, that the perfectly appearing line, is really PART of an extremely straight appearing arc, which has an ever slight curvature, based on being part of a huge circle, or bubble.(whose measurements always ebb or increase)
Meno_ wrote:The bubble is part of a foam of many spheres which pop up & burst. at the limit periodically.
Meno_ wrote:If the idea of the absolute straight line is conceived, then there must be a universe which has no dimension other than pure extension.
obsrvr524 wrote:I tried this kind of thing with Silhouette for a while just to see where it would lead. I could discern most of what he was trying to say and could detect errors in his reasoning. I could not get him to see those errors and eventually realized that it is like trying to get a dog to see color. Some people simply cannot follow clear logic and never will (hence religion).
With you, now and then I can understand a sentence, but its rare. I can't tell if you are making any kind of reasoning error because I can't discern what you are trying to say. Most of your sentences come across as just a bunch of unassociated words. Perhaps mine seem the same to you.
I tried to get Sil to go slow, one issue or statement at a time, but to no avail. He insisted on continuing with wallpaper posts where the number of errors just exponentially compounded. I realized the cause of the problem and had to give up.
I'll make a brief effort to try to understand what you are trying to say but I have to let you know that I am not very good at unscrambling words so as to discern intent. And after a short while I am likely to just drop the effort if I don't see any progress. And I will not tolerate wallpaper posts when I am trying to work through someone's cryptic wording and possibly flawed reasoning. So if you want to continue, I am game for a short while.
Even though you posted much more, I cannot and will not continue to attempt to make sense of the rest because, as with Sil, the rest might well be dependent upon these ideas that I already am uncertain of. I can't follow along and verify an argument if I can't make sense of the premises.
obsrvr524 wrote:I just begin to try to take a "babystep" to understand meno and I come back to find that the topic has changed already.
I have enough trouble trying to communicate with either one of you. Both of you together is clearly a hopeless encounter.
Sil, do you too believe in time travel? A yes or no would be fine but feel free to express your reasons. I will avoid rebuttal. Apparently James had reasons for these encounters but it's not for me.
obsrvr524 wrote:I just begin to try to take a "babystep" to understand meno and I come back to find that the topic has changed already.
I have enough trouble trying to communicate with either one of you. Both of you together is clearly a hopeless encounter.
Sil, do you too believe in time travel? A yes or no would be fine but feel free to express your reasons. I will avoid rebuttal. Apparently James had reasons for these encounters but it's not for me.
Meno, you mentioned that you are a grandfather. I don't want to out anyone, but is there some reason behind your language being so different than others here?
Meno_ wrote:I believe in time travel, but time doesent travel I travel through time
obsrvr524 wrote:Meno_ wrote:I believe in time travel, but time doesent travel I travel through time
Those mean the same thing to me.
And I guess that you believe in it because of what the quantum guys (what James called the "Quantum Magi") have espoused?
Meno_ wrote:I am still waiting for an answer to a question posed to the Oracle of Delphi
Return to Science, Technology, and Math
Users browsing this forum: No registered users