Question for atheists...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-03-2016, 05:48 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 05:33 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Yes, it may have more to do with your lack of understanding my points than my lack of coherence.

There you go again blaming others for not understanding you.

Perhaps the problem does not lie with them....

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 05:49 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2016 05:57 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 05:48 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 05:33 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Yes, it may have more to do with your lack of understanding my points than my lack of coherence.

There you go again blaming others for not understanding you.

Perhaps the problem does not lie with them....
When will you ever learn to tell the difference between "may" & "does"?
Was I not "coherent" enough? Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 05:50 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 08:18 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(28-03-2016 04:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  You claimed Hilbert's Paradox shows infinity to be absurd. You are wrong; it shows infinity to be non-intuitive. You do not understand Hilbert or infinity.

I said it, meant it, and stand by it. I understand you are aching to prove your lil "point", but I won't give you the satisfaction. You got owned in the prior discussion, and now you are on the verge of getting owned on this one.

Like I said, go back and address the points I made on the other one. I won't allow you to just bypass your original spanking as if it never happened and now you want to act as if you are "back, better than ever" to engage with this one.

Bullshit. Adress those points, then holla at me. Until then, the cats are awaiting.

Since you don't understand the mathematics of infinity, I doubt there is anything of substance to address.

But I'll humor you. What do you believe remains unaddressed?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 05:56 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 05:49 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When will you ever learn to tell the difference between "may" & "does"?

There you go again.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
29-03-2016, 05:57 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 05:56 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 05:49 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  When will you ever learn to tell the difference between "may" & "does"?

There you go again.

There you go again.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 06:04 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2016 06:12 PM by Chas.)
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 02:56 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Infinite fractions cannot be achieved in physical reality.

They are produced constantly. Every circle has a diameter of 2πr. That is an irrational quantity as is its area of πr².

Quote:We cannot divide past the Planck length. At least not as far as we currently know of.

It is hypothesized that we cannot. This quantity is not known to be rational.

Quote:There exists no object known to man that has an infinite amount of Planck lengths which can make up it's components.

So?

Quote:If you continue examining components at the planck length level you will eventually reach a limit.

The Planck length does not have any proven physical significance.
If this limit exists, it is not known to be related to the Planck length nor is it known to be rational.

Quote:All numbers when used to count something is just a simplified average of all the components that make up the thing unless you are counting planck lengths.
Numbers become accurate totals only if you are counting Planck lengths and they do not go to infinity.

The precise value of the Planck length is unknown.

Quote:The exists no such number as half Planck length, etc as far as physical reality is concerned.

There is a number that is half of the value of the Planck length. Did you mean something else?

Quote:Of course this only applies to physical reality and not non physical realities. Anything goes as far as the imagination is concerned.

It also does not apply to time as far as we know.

Irrational numbers and infinitely repeating decimals occur all around us.
If a pie weighs 1 kg, how much does 1/9 of it weigh?
If that pie has a diameter of 11", what is its area?
What is the area of half of the pie?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 06:08 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 04:27 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 02:46 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I think Chas is right, Hilbert didn't say infinity was absurd.

Then both of you are wrong. And "two wrongs don't make a right" Big Grin. When you subtract something, you are always supposed to have LESS than what you started with.

In the Hilbert's Hotel paradox, you have an infinite amount of rooms. Now lets say you placed a natural number on every single room door (in numerical order, ad infinium ).

Actually, each numbered room would be equivilent to the same number of guests (if at least one guest occupied each room).

So, each room has a number. Now lets say all of the odd numbered guests were to check out...well, you would STILL have the same amount of even numbered guests/rooms, DESPITE the original total amount being decreased by infinity!!

That is clearly absurd. You've subtracted equal amount, yet you don't have any less than what you started with. If you don't see the absurdity with that...mannnn I don't know what to tell you.

Your ignorant incredulity is not a compelling argument. The mathematics of infinity seem absurd to you, but only non-intuitive to those of us who understand it.

Quote:
(29-03-2016 02:46 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What does "subject to belief" mean though?

I don't know, ask the joker who originally said it. An actual infinity is just a concept. It cannot/does not reflect reality. Hilbert's Hotel could never exist in reality. Reality cannot reflect something like Hilbert's Hotel.

It could, in fact, be the way an infinite number of universes is structured.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 06:11 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 06:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 02:56 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Infinite fractions cannot be achieved in physical reality.

They are produced constantly. Every circle has a diameter of 2πr. That is an irrational quantity as is its area of πr².

Quote:We cannot divide past the Planck length. At least not as far as we currently know of.

It is hypothesized that we cannot. This quantity is not known to be rational.

Quote:There exists no object known to man that has an infinite amount of Planck lengths which can make up it's components.

So?

Quote:If you continue examining components at the planck length level you will eventually reach a limit.

The Planck length does not have any proven physical significance.
If this limit exists, it is not known to be related to the Planck length nor is it known to be rational.

Quote:All numbers when used to count something is just a simplified average of all the components that make up the thing unless you are counting planck lengths.
Numbers become accurate totals only if you are counting Planck lengths and they do not go to infinity.

The precise value of the Planck length is unknown.

Quote:The exists no such number as half Planck length, etc as far as physical reality is concerned.

OK, so says quantum theory.

Quote:Of course this only applies to physical reality and not non physical realities. Anything goes as far as the imagination is concerned.

It also does not apply to time as far as we know.

Irrational numbers and infinitely repeating decimals occur all around us.
If a pie weighs i kg, how much does 1/9 of it weigh?
Isnt time a man made concept?
The precise value of the Planck length might be unspecified but not necessarily unknowable.

Your question might be better phrased:
If a pie weighs (unspecified) kg, how much does 1/9 of it weigh?
The answer will be unspecified & not infinite I think.

Infinity may have it's uses in philosophy but I don't see any examples in physical reality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 06:11 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 05:57 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 05:56 PM)Banjo Wrote:  There you go again.

There you go again.

Your inability to make your ideas clear is your own. You think you are being clear. You are not. You think you are being clever. You are not.

Take some responsibility for your own actions.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-03-2016, 06:12 PM (This post was last modified: 29-03-2016 06:16 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Question for atheists...
(29-03-2016 06:11 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(29-03-2016 05:57 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  There you go again.

Your inability to make your ideas clear is your own. You think you are being clear. You are not. You think you are being clever. You are not.

Take some responsibility for your own actions.
Isn't clear a subjective word?
It's possible everything you have just said and probably will ever say is subjective.
I denounced the word "know" in place of "likely assumptions" ages ago.

It may be possible that this difference in our beliefs is acting like a communication barrier between us.
Our misunderstandings may be inevitable until something changes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: