All about flooble | fun stuff | Get a free chatterbox | Free JavaScript | Avatars    
perplexus dot info
Discussion Forums
Login: Password:Remember me: Sign up! | Forgot password

Forums > Reference
This is a place to ask questions about math terminology, and to post links to other resources out on the web.
jeffrey
2005-11-02 22:26:30
what exists?

ok i thought of this a while ago....

nothing exists everything is just a description or a bundle of charectoristics we classify....

now time is an idea and if god made the world in 7 days WHAT IS 7 days if there was no time before or after life?

what can you prove? if i were to say what we classify as a computer was a "dfjlkh" would i be wrong? well maybe i classify a "computer" as a dfjlkh

so my question is does anytrhing have a value and what is an object that exists? and how do we know anyting is what it is how do we know if we are being decieved the ingorence bothers the hell out of me???

anyone heard of the "mothmen" yeah upper being basically a demigod sort of thing and yeah

brad
2005-11-03 03:45:27
Re: what exists?

Things still would exist outside their names and characteristics. You can classify a computer as a 'dfjlkh' but that would defeat the purpose of language in the first place - to communicate. No one would no what your talking about (let alone pronounce 'dfjlkh').

Technically God made the world in six days - he rested on the seventh.

You said time is an idea. I'm guessing your talking about the measurement of it,
because we of course didn't invent time itself. Time has always been here (God may be outside of it, but that's irrelevant). Anytime change happens (i.e. creation of the universe), time has to be present. Think about that. Without time, NOTHING can change. Without time there's no past, no future - everything is constant. That's why I think God's unchanging (according to the Bible).

As I see it, time started the "second" God started making the universe. But again, I don't take everything in the Bible literally. Who knows what seven days really means. I think it was just written that way (like most things in the Bible) for us to understand it. If God literally and fully explained how he did something, I doubt any of us would get it. It might be just that God doesn't want us to know. Anyway, you should read some books on the nature of time. Interesting stuff.

Federico Kereki
2005-11-03 06:50:29
Time before Time

Though it's hard to accept, the point of view that you cannot speak of time before the Big Bang has some interesting arguments.

And, note that the Big Bang theory IS a scientific theory, which allows for validation and refutation, while the "God just went and did it" explanation works only on faith, and explains nothing.

brianjn
2005-11-03 19:41:24
Re: what exists?

The theologians around may be able to help out here (getting back to Brad's 'seven days'), I have the belief that it was written in the Old Testament, in the book of Isaiah (?) something to the effect of - In the eyes of God, A day is to a thousand years as a thousand years is to a day. Put your own interpretation on that.

Aspiring Novice
2005-11-03 21:22:32
Long days indeed!

Nice try, but you need a day to be more than 2 billion years, so six days will come to the (about) 14 billion years age of the Universe...

brad
2005-11-04 01:15:37
Re: what exists?

That same verse in Isaiah or wherever was what I was thinking of when I wrote my first post. Sorry, I'm not very good with remembering where anything is in the Bible.

Federico: The reason why I didn't use the Big Bang theory (instead of God) is because jeffery didn't. You're right - by saying 'God just went and did it' doesn't explain HOW the universe was created. I find this to be a major characteristic of the Bible in general. It tells its readers - who, when, where, and usually why, but not too often how. (With the huge exception of it telling its readers how to live.) To the intellectual soul this may be unappealing, but keep in mind the purpose of the Bible. The things it DOES say is all we need to know to be 'saved' and how to live a 'righteous life'. It's not a science text book.

Personally, I don't think a belief in God and the Bible contradict the Big Bang theory at all (and vice-versa). Same goes for macroevolution. The Big Bang theory could have been the HOW that is missing from the Bible. To my knowledge the Big Bang theory doesn't explain how it, itself, got started (if it does, please let me know). One of the laws of physics states that an effect can not be part of the cause, right? So what caused the Big Bang?
If you include God (or a god), which has always been here, into the Big Bang theory then it explains practically everything. Or maybe, since there was no time before the Big Bang then you don't need an higher being to start it all. Without time, everything's infinite.

Federico Kereki
2005-11-04 05:39:10
Cause first & Effect later

There are no laws stating this, and AS FAR AS I KNOW, some events at quantic level seem to contradict this... but it certainly makes me dizzy!

As to the Big Bang, compare these options:

* there existed a big cosmic whatever that exploded, creating the Universe

* there existed a big cosmic whatever, and a God which caused it to explode, creating the Universe

Occam's razor tells us to prefer the first option. And, for the second option, why would any god need "tools" to create anything?

brad
2005-11-04 21:37:52
Re: what exists?

The second option should read: there existed a god, which created a big cosmic whatever and caused it to explode, creating the Universe. (Meaning before the 'beginning' there exist only a god, not a god AND a big cosmic whatever.) Or maybe God didn't cause the thing to explode, but just created the cosmic whatever in the first place. It exploded on it's own, but God created it with that purpose in mind.

As for why God would USE any "tools" (i.e. science), I have no idea, but He certainly doesn't NEED them. He doesn't need us but we're here. He doesn't even need the universe at all, but it's here. Who knows how He works. Maybe what we call "science" is really just our interpretation of natural "miracles." Anyway, even if you consider them "tools" it doesn't degrade His methods since He's designed and created the "tools" in the first place. I think creating gravity and energy or whatever to make matter (including life), is pretty impressive. Some might ask why God would create the world in a way so that it can be explained (most of it) by science. Well, who/what created science?

Now I'm dizzy.

Joe
2005-11-06 15:00:28
Everything exists

In my deep and meaningful (not really, let's just pretend) philosophies, everything exists. The second you think up of something, it exists. It may exist in your imagination, in your faith, or in reality, but it exists. The basic point is that reality and existence are two different things.

Federico Kereki
2005-11-07 09:07:42
Who created Science?

The same one who created God: man did!

tanx
2005-11-07 19:18:27
Re: what exists?

<< That's why I think God's unchanging (according to the Bible). >>

yes but is the bible unchanging according to god?

tanx
2005-11-07 19:22:36
Re: what exists?

<< It may exist in your imagination, in your faith, or in reality, but it exists. The basic point is that reality and existence are two different things. >>

nobody can argue something that exists in your imagination or in your faith.

i think that the original poster was asking how to quantify something that exists in reality though.

does everything really only exist in our imaginations/faiths?

P.S. OJ did it!

Mindy Rodriguez
2005-11-14 23:58:25
Re: what exists?

Did the unit of time we call "a day" exist before the sun, the earth, and the rotation of one with respect to the other? On what day was the day created? Is it meaningless to talk about a day before time?

"A day" is to "a thousand years" as "I think, therefore I am" is to "I am".

Percy
2005-11-15 07:03:08
Re: what exists?

Mindy, did you mean "I think, there I am" (This was a bit of wisdom Penny came up with a while back)?

Brad, you can't talk about "the laws of physics before the big bang". I mean ur welcome to talk about it but you should be careful because lots of Cosmologists seam to agree that the laws of physics as we know them breakdown at a singularity (ie. the big bang at time=0) Any talk of before the big bang is meaningless. As far as I can work out all you can say is things like, "If there was time before the big bang we do not know what the laws of physics were in that time".

brianjn
2005-11-15 07:38:16
Re: what exists?

Let's step outside the square, circle, sphere, ..... Universe.

Mmm. In a way I've just created subsets of the universe. I know lots of laws/rules which govern elements of these.

If I am a person of Flatland then I can be expected to understand concepts about circles, squares but nothing about 3D. This does not stop me making conjectures about a 3D environment because I can extrapolate some of my known properties to predict a reasonably likely set of events.

Because I cannot apply a 'scientific' or 'intellectual design'ed test, my thoughts must always be in a state of limbo.
-------------------------------------------
I am a person of Cubeland. Certain laws of the environment have changed, let me suggest 'gravity'. I do not need to revisit this thought.

We have envisioned 4D+ space. We have had been able to suggest some properties as to what such 'worlds' would be like from our perspective.

For the philosophers:
The poor little dot that formed my signature today exists in 'a Flatland' that adjoins my 3D environment; it belongs to a universe whereby I am the creator.

brianjn
2005-11-15 08:14:21
Re: what exists?

Oops! <Enter> too quickly! (Not the key .. something I did)

We understand a Cube.
The Hypercube is something a little different. Some have suggested that this is like mapping a cube (which I consider to be a somewhat fallacious concept) against a lineal timeline. Fallacious? As I extend my cube down the 'hyper' trail, each point, being a solid fragment of the 3D entity, has to be considered as a movement away from some temporal centre.

In a 3D environment, with a square being defined, a single point would form 6 square pyramids set upon infinitum.

No time to explore thie further, but:
1 point explodes into 8 in the first time 'interval'.
Each would replicate 8 fold - ( would not some of these become overlapped? - if so how can two 'entities' occupy the same space) ?

My end thought is: If I can be the creator of a Flatworld, which can be seen by people from my world, "Could the Universe as we know it be a 'Child of the Universe' of that next dimension?

Copyright © 2002 - 2017 by Animus Pactum Consulting. All rights reserved. Privacy Information