It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: MasterKaman
Thank goodness I only had to read the first six lines of your wall of text to be utterly sure that you are talking nonsense.
philosophers have totally failed to explain it so far.
The explanation of Zeno's Paradox is that there is no such thing as a point of zero dimensions. Not since the Big Bang anyway.
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
You guys should just focus on infinity for now.
Is there infinite infinities or just one? That is, is there actual separation?
If something changes, did just "it" change, or did all of reality change?
I think it should be all of reality, and just 1 infinity. i.e. Just 1 set, like set theory, which includes all other sets - one set that is all sets.
originally posted by: Korg Trinity
I think it is far more likely that the universe is Finite but part of an infinite structure that encompasses all possible outcomes.
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
originally posted by: Korg Trinity
I think it is far more likely that the universe is Finite but part of an infinite structure that encompasses all possible outcomes.
You're calling the universe all of physicality? Whether seen or unseen, whether multiverse or just one universe, there is only one matrix which is finite, but within it, there is infinite potential?
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Korg Trinity
finite like unchanging?
and where are all the possibilities coming from and going to? Do they arise from nowhere and into what was nothing?
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Korg Trinity
So what is changing is the witness/observer/awareness?
originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Korg Trinity
You're contradicting yourself. You're saying physicality doesn't change, that is, the spiral isn't moving, yet we are and we are the spiral.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Korg Trinity
My only real issue with predeterminism is uncertainty. While truly "random" cannot happen (as the set its derived from is finite), within a finite set random can occur. An example is the random release of subatomic particles during decay.
ETA: the term i should use is "spontaneous".
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Korg Trinity
In a system that seems to love efficiency, that seems like an incredibly inefficient concept.
What about a "kinetic reality", where the potential for reality is there but unused. It is getting close to holographic theory, I know....
originally posted by: ImaFungi
a reply to: Korg Trinity
Free will exists. Every object that does not possess >0 free will, is absolutely determined. Systems with free will, are more and less determined based on how much free will they have.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: ImaFungi
I have often wondered how far the impact of the observer goes. Does knowing something in an abstract notion create effect on events?
This gets pretty close to the whole "create your own reality" new age mumbo jumbo.
ETA: does knowing that I have 1 heap of sand matter at all, i guess is a different way of putting it. What if i didn't recognize a quanta at all? What it still be quantified as "some" sand?