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.
Phage
reply to post by lostbook
Sounds like circular reasoning to me: If you accept that the only properties are mathematical properties then that means everything is mathematical.
Well, yeah. If you accept that God made everything then that means God made everything.
What if you don't accept that opening premise? What if you accept the idea that math represents those properties rather than actually being those properties? Math works very well in describing and modelling things, that doesn't mean those things are math.edit on 2/2/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Light had to be separated from the darkness in order to create the motion we observe.
intrptr
reply to post by lostbook
Math describes properties of matter. Matter was there first, though.
Otherwise, how would you describe it?
intrptr
reply to post by lostbook
Math describes properties of matter. Matter was there first, though.
Otherwise, how would you describe it?
Phage
reply to post by lostbook
Light had to be separated from the darkness in order to create the motion we observe.
Darkness is not something. There is no speed of dark.
lostbook
intrptr
reply to post by lostbook
Math describes properties of matter. Matter was there first, though.
Otherwise, how would you describe it?
Let me be clear that the concept of the Universe being MATH is the scientists reasoning; not mine. I'm saying in my posts that there is much more to it than the Universe being math.
I told you that this would sound crazy, but this is how I see it.
lostbook
"If you accept the idea that both space itself, and all the stuff in space, have no properties at all except mathematical properties," then the idea that everything is mathematical "starts to sound a little bit less insane," Tegmark said in a talk given Jan. 15 here at The Bell House. The talk was based on his book "Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality" (Knopf, 2014).
Basically, this scientist contends that since all particles in the universe have mathematical properties like charge and spin then the universe must obey such Mathematical properties as well; thus, the universe is made of math.
I think that there's more to it than that. I think the Universe is all about motion. Everything needs motion in order to exist, even energy.
I also think that the Universe is a kind of a conversation; the word. It's where "U" and "I" verse
rom12345
Logically, the universe must have arisen from a non material, purely conceptual realm.
So I conceded this type of theory could be true, not in the scribbling of equations, but in the truths they represent.edit on 2-2-2014 by rom12345 because: (no reason given)
Let me be clear that the concept of the Universe being MATH is the scientists reasoning; not mine. I'm saying in my posts that there is much more to it than the Universe being math.
Darkness just "IS" and you need processes to "extrude/ create from it. Light reveals what we are meant to see.
Matter is a theory not a reality.
intrptr
reply to post by Visitor2012
Matter is a theory not a reality.
Thats your theory…
If it were true then your statement can't be real either.
Like saying there is no absolute truth.
Oh? Is that the absolute truth?