Seventh Day Adventists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-02-2016, 12:40 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 12:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Chas in fact is a mathematician. Einstein on the other hand was a theoretical physicist, not a mathematician.

He obviously isn't a good one. I do however acknowledge that Einstein was an incredibly poor mathematician yet he was bright enough to accept David Hilbert's mathematical philosophy of physics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 12:42 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 11:49 AM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 09:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  That is a quirky and incomplete definition of mathematics.


Axioms are neither proved nor disproved. They are assumed - that's what makes them axioms.

Since we are not, in fact, dealing with mathematics, let's look at the philosophical definition:

"An axiom or postulate as defined in classic philosophy, is a statement (in mathematics often shown in symbolic form) that is so evident or well-established, that it is accepted without controversy or question."

Your assumption about the existence of some god does not fit the philosophical definition.

Please leave mathematics to the mathematicians. I was quoting a mathematician.

Good. I have a degree in mathematics. What have you got? Consider

Quote:Mathematics is the greatest science:

"Our experience hitherto justifies us in believing that nature is the realization of the simplest conceivable mathematical ideas. I am convinced that we can discover by means of pure mathematical constructions the concepts and the laws connecting them with each other, which furnish the key to the understanding of natural phenomena. Experience may suggest the appropriate mathematical concepts, but they most certainly cannot be deduced from it. Experience remains, of course, the sole criterion of the physical utility of a mathematical construction. But the creative principle resides in mathematics. In a certain sense, therefore I hold it true that pure thought can grasp reality, as the ancients dreamed." -- A. Einstein, 1954, Ideas and Opinions.

"A great physical theory is not mature until it has been put in a precise mathematical form, and it is often only in such a mature form that it admits clear answers to conceptual problems." -- A. S. Wightman, Hilbert's sixth problem: mathematical treatment of the axioms of physics, in: Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. 28, AMS, 1976, pp. 147-220.

"Scientists are explorers. Philosophers are tourists." — Richard P. Feynman.

"For all practical purposes, a proof is any completely convincing argument." Thanks for confessing that you don't have one.

Mathematics is not reality. It is a tool used to model reality.

Leave mathematics to those of us who actually understand it.

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
[+] 9 users Like Chas's post
03-02-2016, 01:43 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 12:36 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 10:51 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Do you also take the existence of zombies, unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns as axiomatic?

They may be the axioms of many but they're not for me. I'm only interested in precise definitions and constructs that generate new theorems that indisputably reveal exquisite structures.

You just do not care if they map to anything demonstrably real?

By the way, you didn't answer my question about how we can determine which interpretation is correct.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 02:10 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 08:48 AM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  Mathematicians are known to preoccupy themselves with wildly non-intuitive constructs just to see what the implications are. Feel free to respect me as a mathematician in that sense.

Mathematicians are not known for killing each other over the solutions to calculus equations.

When was the last time a suicide bomber yelled the Pythagorean Theorem before blowing himself up?

Mathematicians can also show proof of their work...

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 03:00 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 12:26 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  That's a mighty big if. For those willing to examine the theory, the axiom set of the Confessing Millerite Adventists has profound implications.

Theory in the layman's sense of baseless speculation? So what? There would be no more "profound implications" than somebody claiming that the Klingons were planning to attack Earth.

Theory in the scientific sense would mean that you have evidence to back it up. If so, please elaborate.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
03-02-2016, 03:04 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 12:40 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 12:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Chas in fact is a mathematician. Einstein on the other hand was a theoretical physicist, not a mathematician.

He obviously isn't a good one.

You are not qualified to judge. Drinking Beverage

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
03-02-2016, 11:44 PM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 01:43 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 12:36 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  They may be the axioms of many but they're not for me. I'm only interested in precise definitions and constructs that generate new theorems that indisputably reveal exquisite structures.

You just do not care if they map to anything demonstrably real?

I can accept the primary axiom being coupled with a notorious second—that a demonstrably compelling proof of God won't be seen until judgment day.

(03-02-2016 01:43 PM)unfogged Wrote:  By the way, you didn't answer my question about how we can determine which interpretation is correct.

It was a silly question. I have never asserted that I possess the ultimate interpretation of anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2016, 03:36 AM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(03-02-2016 11:44 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 01:43 PM)unfogged Wrote:  You just do not care if they map to anything demonstrably real?

I can accept the primary axiom being coupled with a notorious second—that a demonstrably compelling proof of God won't be seen until judgment day.

So.........in other words you really don't care that what you accept isn't demonstrable. Or to put it another way, you're quite happy to to accept that you are delusional.

(03-02-2016 11:44 PM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(03-02-2016 01:43 PM)unfogged Wrote:  By the way, you didn't answer my question about how we can determine which interpretation is correct.

It was a silly question. I have never asserted that I possess the ultimate interpretation of anything.

You were never asked what your personal position was. You were asked how we can determine which interpretation of SDA is correct. Why is that a silly question?

So come on. Spill the beans. How can we tell which is correct?

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Silly Deity's post
04-02-2016, 05:11 AM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(04-02-2016 03:36 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  So.........in other words you really don't care that what you accept isn't demonstrable.

I am quite satisfied with my beliefs being logically consistent, extraordinary, and awe-inspiring. And since I am very comfortable with the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorems, such as there being statements in arithmetic that are true and unprovable, then why should I be uncomfortable with God sharing the marvelous status of undecidability with unprovable statements in arithmetic?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2016, 05:24 AM
RE: Seventh Day Adventists?
(04-02-2016 05:11 AM)Zog Has-fallen Wrote:  
(04-02-2016 03:36 AM)Silly Deity Wrote:  So.........in other words you really don't care that what you accept isn't demonstrable.

I am quite satisfied with my beliefs being logically consistent, extraordinary, and awe-inspiring. And since I am very comfortable with the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorems, such as there being statements in arithmetic that are true and unprovable, then why should I be uncomfortable with God sharing the marvelous status of undecidability with unprovable statements in arithmetic?

I'll take that as a "yes" then.

But you've still not answered the question posed some time ago about how we can determine which interpretation of SDA is correct.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike
Excreta Tauri Sapientam Fulgeat (The excrement of the bull causes wisdom to flee)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Silly Deity's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: