Intelligent first cause: why it must exist

Originally posted by HarryTZ

Originally posted by NorEaster
Frankly, I don't care which of those two are why you didn't even notice the whole "debunking Infinity" part of the video.

If 'debunking' to you is repeating the same thing over and over and claiming how another man's research confirms your theory, without any actual substance or evidence beyond that, than yes, you successfully debunked infinity.

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't. I simply realized that their establishment of the quantum (and the resulting field of quantum physics) proved that infinite delineation doesn't exist. The rest of it - that infinity itself can't only half-exist - was pretty easy, and (let's face it) really obvious.

The delivery vehicle is called musical interpretation and done as a tongue-in-cheek ball-bust, and I had fun writing it, creating the music and performing it, and then fitting the clips to it.

Christ, what the hell is wrong with you people? It must really suck to be so psychologically hamstrung, and I'm just glad that I'm not similarly afflicted.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't. I simply realized that their establishment of the quantum (and the resulting field of quantum physics) proved that infinite delineation doesn't exist. The rest of it - that infinity itself can't only half-exist - was pretty easy, and (let's face it) really obvious.

Of course infinity can half-exist. Half of infinity is still infinity.

The delivery vehicle is called musical interpretation and done as a tongue-in-cheek ball-bust, and I had fun writing it, creating the music and performing it, and then fitting the clips to it.

That's great that you had fun making it and I'm glad for you. However if you expected it to serve any purpose beyond that than I am sad to say you failed.

Christ, what the hell is wrong with you people? It must really suck to be so psychologically hamstrung, and I'm just glad that I'm not similarly afflicted.

First you claimed it was evidence disproving infinity and now you're saying you made it for fun! What kind of reaction were you expecting my friend?!

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NorEaster

 

Wait? You have a video depicting man evolving into a pig and you are telling me I'm not too bright? oh ok so a guy is holding a string, ok so that represents the string theory. So what you have is a video that has pics that you feel describe scientific theory. So that's all very nice. I have yet to see scientific theory proving man can evolve from an ape to a man to a pig.

That was just one of perhaps over 100 images, lasted less that 2 seconds, and wasn't even relative to the subject of the video. Are you on drugs? Schizophrenic? WTF?

Dude, if you're not being a complete *sshole with this, then you've got intense mental issues, and I haven't got the expertise to properly deal with whatever it is that you're trying to make your way through.

Originally posted by HarryTZ

Originally posted by NorEaster

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't. I simply realized that their establishment of the quantum (and the resulting field of quantum physics) proved that infinite delineation doesn't exist. The rest of it - that infinity itself can't only half-exist - was pretty easy, and (let's face it) really obvious.

Of course infinity can half-exist. Half of infinity is still infinity.

Now you're just being inane. Infinity can't be only half infinite. That's stupid on the face of it.

The delivery vehicle is called musical interpretation and done as a tongue-in-cheek ball-bust, and I had fun writing it, creating the music and performing it, and then fitting the clips to it.

That's great that you had fun making it and I'm glad for you. However if you expected it to serve any purpose beyond that than I am sad to say you failed.

I succeeded. I landed a publishing deal. duh

70% of landing a deal is proving that you can do your own marketing online.

Christ, what the hell is wrong with you people? It must really suck to be so psychologically hamstrung, and I'm just glad that I'm not similarly afflicted.

First you claimed it was evidence disproving infinity and now you're saying you made it for fun! What kind of reaction were you expecting my friend?!

I didn't make it for fun, I had fun making it. I made it to prove that I can do more than just write a book. The reaction I expected - the executive decision to offer me a publishing contract - occurred. Project and process successfully completed. So, how's your big effort to transform the existence debate coming along?

Originally posted by NorEaster

Now you're just being inane. Infinity can't be only half infinite. That's stupid on the face of it.

Half of infinity is still infinity. You can call me whatever you want, and label the claim as stupid, but that does not change the fact.

I succeeded. I landed a publishing deal. duh

70% of landing a deal is proving that you can do your own marketing online.

Succeeded in creating a well-rounded and high-quality media presentation? Sure. Succeeded in debunking infinity? Absolutely not.

I didn't make it for fun, I had fun making it. I made it to prove that I can do more than just write a book. The reaction I expected - the executive decision to offer me a publishing contract - occurred. Project and process successfully completed.

Than I must agree that you succeeded. To whom, I am curious, were you trying to prove it to?

So, how's your big effort to transform the existence debate coming along?

It would be going much more smoothly if people would actually contribute, but of course, the focus is always on belittling and beheading.

reply to post by HarryTZ


That is not logical deduction whatsoever. Moreover, logical reasoning does not occur in the absence of fact itself.

The most basic rules of log are: an argument should take te form of a series of premises followed by a conclusion, a sound argument is preferable to an unsound argument (an argument is sound only if the conclusion follows from the premises), a valid argument is preferable to an invalid argument (an argument is valid only if the argument is sound and the premises are true).

You however are employing faulty logic in the form of cum hoc ergo propter hoc (correlation and causation). Your argument amounts to nothing more than insisting that a correlation between two variables means that one has caused the other. The coincidence of two or more types of phenomenon does not necessarily mean that one is causing the other.

Your logic is more than flawed, it is just generally messed up. Suggesting that rape is within everyone's control if they actively try and prevent rape. That's stupid and go tell that to a rape victim.

reply to post by SpeachM1litant


Fair enough, however I will not stop using causation as a logical argument for God's existence until science proves the God doesn't exist (which is impossible). Good day to you.

Originally posted by HarryTZ

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
Please do yourself a favor and start here.

en.wikipedia.org...

However, remember, Wikipedia should only be your first stop, not your destination.

I am a bit familiar with superstring theory, however I have no desire to look too deeply into a thing that cannot truly be comprehended.

Yet you speak of "God?"

You have no desire to look too deeply into something that cannot be truly comprehended, but you attribute your argument of design to an intelligence first cause/creator which in itself cannot be truly comprehended by its very nature.

That's funny.

God (as an intelligent creator) cannot be fully and truly comprehended by man, because "God" is beyond the understanding of men, who are bound by temporal existence and flesh, which "God" isn't.

**

Oh, those pesky things that don't fit into our arguments, let's just ignore them. Problem Solved.

reply to post by Liquesence


I am not trying to understand god, I am simply pointing to god's existence. There is a difference.

reply to post by NorEaster

That was just one of perhaps over 100 images, lasted less that 2 seconds, and wasn't even relative to the subject of the video. Are you on drugs? Schizophrenic? WTF?

Oh please! Now you are a doctor of psychiatry? Lol that is just hilarious.

ok I get it now, you are a rapper and you want to reach people using music. As a critique, rap doesn't reach me, but it might reach the younger crowd. In any case, I'm still not convinced by the vid that the Universe is not infinite.

reply to post by SpeachM1litant

Suggesting that rape is within everyone's control if they actively try and prevent rape.

I must have missed something here. Anyway, no one is saying that and it's not the premise of the OP.
However, I will say that I had a Kung Fu instructor who did teach the girls a few things, hopefully having such knowledge can help prevent rapes. But people's behavior and laws of physics may not operate in quite the same fashion in terms of predictability. Although Pavlov did certainly show that if you put meat in front of a dog, the dog's salivary glands usually start working.

Thank you for the interesting post OP

Mathematics discovered fractals. Infinite patterns that can be used to map real coastlines, I don't know about others but when I found out about fractals I found it kind of... Godly?

Why do you say science continues to push God of the universe?
If God is an energy soup which creates big bangs (a theory we still have not proved) then does that not mean God still exists?

Why is it that these so called "scientists", or humans in general, get so full of themselves when they haven't figured out the backyard of our galaxy yet?

Until the beginning of the universe is proved, no one can really say who is right or wrong, many posters above seem to think they have the answer.

Originally posted by peashooter
Until the beginning of the universe is proved, no one can really say who is right or wrong, many posters above seem to think they have the answer.

The beginning and the end is now. It is all there is, all there ever was and all there ever will be. Presence. Presence appears to exist always presently.

Originally posted by HarryTZ
I am a bit familiar with superstring theory, however I have no desire to look too deeply into a thing that cannot truly be comprehended.

Says the guy who is arguing for the existence of "God".

Sorry buddy I have no desire to look any further into this post than page one simply from this one claim alone. You have no desire to educate yourself because you admit you cannot fully comprehend the subject, yet here you are trying to prove the existence of "God". If God did exist (I am atheist btw) then you would not be able to comprehend him because he is such a "perfect" being.

You just shot yourself in the foot.
Actually you shot yourself in the foot, fell down then shot your other foot.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't.

"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."

Max Planck - The Nature of Matter speech 1944

Originally posted by squiz

Originally posted by NorEaster

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't.

"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."

Max Planck - The Nature of Matter speech 1944

Very nice.

Originally posted by HarryTZ

I didn't make it for fun, I had fun making it. I made it to prove that I can do more than just write a book. The reaction I expected - the executive decision to offer me a publishing contract - occurred. Project and process successfully completed.

Than I must agree that you succeeded. To whom, I am curious, were you trying to prove it to?

At some point I hope that it will become widely obvious - as in a major product release and promotion - but until then, I'd rather not jinx things.

So, how's your big effort to transform the existence debate coming along?

It would be going much more smoothly if people would actually contribute, but of course, the focus is always on belittling and beheading.

Now, this I can agree with you on. I've been belittled and repeatedly beheaded on this board and others - many others - but it all serves to force you to become extremely efficient with your explanations, arguments, and choices concerning what is an important fight to take on. My own challenge has been that I can only offer small bits of my own full thesis for debate and exchange, since it literally requires tens of thousands of words, laid out in extremely strict and legalistic phrases, to come anywhere near presenting the basic overview. Public forums aren't designed for such an effort, and as you've noted, most people don't actually read before replying. It doesn't take long before whatever I've offered for examination has been thoroughly misrepresented and I'm fighting to just correct the record concerning what I've already posted.

Good luck with your efforts, but I hope you do realize that no one is actually looking for illuminating truth, when it comes to this basic topic. What they are looking for is a spotlight to shine on what they have already decided to be true. It's really odd that this, most famously important question is one that literally no one is actually interested in. The ones who focus on it have already answered it for themselves and are only seeking validation, while the rest simply have no interest in reality as a question to be answered. This leaves no one who's actually looking for answers concerning who we are, what we are, and what is the nature of our existence.

And yet, it's probably the #1 ranking universal question selected if offered among other universal questions on a survey. And if you can find your own version of peace with that frustrating contradiction, then you'll be fine with what you've taken on here.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by squiz

Originally posted by NorEaster

Quantum physics isn't just some other guy's research. Seriously. Max Planck and Albert Einstein debunked infinity. I didn't.

"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter."

Max Planck - The Nature of Matter speech 1944

Very nice.

And yet, Max was a man of his times. What he offered - the quantum - he originally believed to be a mathematical gimmick that fixed the UV Catastrophe problem. It was Einstein and others who proved that Max's quantum actually exists. I never said that Max fully understood what he'd initiated.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by NorEaster

 

That was just one of perhaps over 100 images, lasted less that 2 seconds, and wasn't even relative to the subject of the video. Are you on drugs? Schizophrenic? WTF?

Oh please! Now you are a doctor of psychiatry? Lol that is just hilarious.

ok I get it now, you are a rapper and you want to reach people using music. As a critique, rap doesn't reach me, but it might reach the younger crowd. In any case, I'm still not convinced by the vid that the Universe is not infinite.

edit on 26-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

I'm just reacting to your bizarre fixation on one single JPEG that I actually thought was hilarious when I found it online, so I stuck it in the video. You're the one who fixated on that JPEG. I didn't.

As far as being a rapper, 1/2 of the video is based on a Baptist Preacher style, and I have two other videos that feature bop-jazz scat and a more fluid, prose-based seminar style respectively. I just liked the delta swamp groove that I created for that 2nd half of that 1st video and was working with a friend on his own Motown-Universal underground rap release as I was putting that piece together, so I guess the influence seeped into my own project. That kind of thing happens.

As far as "reaching people", I reached who I needed to reach with it.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by HarryTZ

 

Argument from ignorance....Argument from complexity.... blah blah blah blah...

You should do a bit of research on why you shouldn't use such poor arguments. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Everything you said here Wert, is at best 100% reciprocal.
In fact the extraordinary claim is that God does not exist.