• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Infinite! In Search of The Ultimate Truth.

Last edited:
tazanastazio said:
Do you claim that in 2015 I asked Pyrrho to delete any of my future posts in 2019? Because I only asked him ONCE! Can you do the math, master of "Maths!"
Click to expand...

That's right. You had Pyrrho delete your account and all your posts from 2009 to 2015 to hide your idiotic claims about "God is infinite". You then waited a year for your fringe reset and made all the same claims again on the Skeptic Society forum. You then ran away in 2017 after being humiliated again and came here to make all the same claims again on the International Skeptics forum in 2019.

Everyone already knows this as the links are on the first page of this very thread! :D

Did you forget? :p
 
tazanastazio said:
"Why wasting my valuable time, arguing with these people when my point has already been MADE AND PROVEN and they KNOW it,
Click to expand...
Here is your made and proven "theory" linked in the opening post in this very thread. Note the number of times you have edited it and the last edit date.

"Last edited by TazAnastazio on Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:52 pm, edited 108 times in total".
https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28434

You really don't have a clue what your "God is infinity" claim is, do you? :p
 
tazanastazio said:
WE WILL SEE ABOUT THAT!

Visit last reply after following the link below:

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28434&start=680

Now everyone on both sites will know how credible you are. Wonder what Pyrrho the moderator would think if he visits this site and finds out you drug his name through the mud of your lies!
Click to expand...

Well, having read the first three pages of that thread, I know who I'm siding with.
Hint: it isn't you.


That thread is HILARIOUS! How tazanastazio can claim this as an 'ass-whooping' victory over anyone is a triumph of hubris over reality.
Highly recommended reading.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
OK.

Quote:
Matthew has not posted here for a long time, so discussing what he has to say is quite irrelevant to us. Interesting that he is still active elsewhere. Matthew, like me, hates bulldust and is even more vehement than I am in opposing it.

I'm not sure this helps you any. :D
Click to expand...

1) The only reason I linked the two sites, is because Matthew made downright false statements on one site based on the other, and the linking of the two proves it.

2) Just because some people are of the same opinion with Matthew Ellard, does not make them right and me wrong. If you think anyone's support is needed, it is welcome.


3) Matthew claimed on this site that I had not been on that other site for a long time because I was not able to answer his arguments.
 
Last edited:
Knock off the personalizations. The topic is not the other posters (no matter how much they annoy you), the topic is...something else.

Keep it civil.
Keep it on topic.
The topic is not the other posters.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
 
No, seriously if one of the options is I don't know, how can it not be the correct answer if you are weighing probabilities to determine the correct answer?
 
kmortis said:
Knock off the personalizations. The topic is not the other posters (no matter how much they annoy you), the topic is...something else.

Keep it civil.
Keep it on topic.
The topic is not the other posters.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
Click to expand...

Ok kmortis, thank you.
 
tazanastazio said:
1) The only reason I linked the two sites, is because Matthew made downright false statements on one site based on the other, and the linking of the two proves it.
Click to expand...
Nope. I have clearly shown that you simultaneously claim that "we know" your ridiculous "god is infinity" claim is correct while you are actually changing it and have done so 102 times and only two weeks ago. If it was always correct why do you need to keep changing it! :p

You have probably seen that the philosophy forum, that you have also spammed your silly claim upon, has also now linked to the Skeptic Society, so readers can also see your ongoing 102 amendments. :p

The Infinite! In Search of The Ultimate Truth.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6678/the-infinite-in-search-of-the-ultimate-truth

This borders dangerously close to importing arguments from other forums which is forbidden here. Stick to arguing what was posted in this thread. Do no argue the man, but the topic.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Matthew Ellard said:
Here.....this should get you started :p

Applied Calculus Formulas
https://byjus.com/calculus-formulas/

As you claim have already done this you should just load up your mathematical evidence in five minutes....right? :D
Click to expand...


𝑣⃗*.= lim(*𝛥𝑟⃗*./𝛥𝑡.) when 𝛥𝑡→0 ;)

I'll let you figure out the connection / "application" of the above formula to the Infinite, master of "Maths." :idea:

As for who is actually humiliated; it is not I who strive to build a status as the "Master-Debater" of skeptic forums.:D
 
Last edited:
tazanastazio said:
𝑣⃗*.= lim(*𝛥𝑟⃗*./𝛥𝑡.) when 𝛥𝑡→0 ;)

I'll let you figure out the connection / "application" of the above formula to the Infinite, master of "Maths." :idea:

As for who is actually humiliated; it is not I who strive to build a status as the "Master-Debater" of skeptic forums.:D
Click to expand...

Wow. You almost have to admire the chutzpah here. You claim you've applied calculus to prove your "Infinitism" idea- then, when you're asked to prove that claim by showing how you applied it, and given a list of formulas to get you started, you...pluck one from the list and tell your interlocutor that they need to show how you applied it?

With brass like that, you will go far in the world of woo.
 
I don't suppose there's any point in asking tazanastazio what the cardinality of The Infinite is.
 
Myriad said:
I don't suppose there's any point in asking tazanastazio what the cardinality of The Infinite is.
Click to expand...
Nope. Nor would there be point asking tazanastazio what numerical values he assigned to the words EXISTENCE, INTELLIGENCE, ENERGY AND MATTER and how he calculated those numerical values.


I assume everyone also picked up on this. tazanastazio states there is no such thing as time, which means the formula he claimed "proved" his "God is Infinity" religion can't be used. :D

𝑣⃗*.= lim(*𝛥𝑟⃗*./𝛥𝑡.) when 𝛥𝑡→0
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Nope. Nor would there be point asking tazanastazio what numerical values he assigned to the words EXISTENCE, INTELLIGENCE, ENERGY AND MATTER and how he calculated those numerical values.


I assume everyone also picked up on this. tazanastazio states there is no such thing as time, which means the formula he claimed "proved" his "God is Infinity" religion can't be used. :D

𝑣⃗.*= lim (*𝛥𝑟⃗*./𝛥𝑡.) when 𝛥𝑡.→0.→0
Click to expand...


The formula is a good example of the description of the actually unapproachable, uncalculble to exactness, therefore an infinite as far as we humans will ever be able to measure; namely instantaneous velocity.

You asked me to come up with a formula that proves the "infinite Infinities" concept, in 5 minutes; it took me less than 5 seconds.


You cannot have a number, a mathematical symbol, an equation or a graph which describe units, segments, shapes and quantities if those are not part of infinite such units, segments, shapes and quantities.

You cannot have anything finite if you don't have the Infinite; and all the infinite finite concepts together are part of this Infinite.

You cannot have a particle if it is not part of the Infinite; that particle too is comprised of particles, and all particles comprise all objects and all forms of existence within the Infinite.


Now here is the difficult part.

Intelligence and Energy cannot be the exception to the rule, because such an exception would nullify the concept of the Infinite altogether.


Which brings to the two questions:

1) Could we get all the aforementioned units, segments, shapes and quantities; and the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems, that describe them, out of a "0"? Wouldn't then those mathematical concepts describe also a "0", since they describe quantities that had come out of it?

2) Can we based on question 1) say "we don't know" but those units, segments, shapes and quantities; and the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems that describe them; could have come out of the "0" and therefore the aforementioned mathematical concepts that describe the quantities, would therefore also describe the "0", the quantities had come out of?

The two questions listed above, lead to the 3rd question:

3) Isn't it more reasonable to think that while we could never know the finality of those units, segments, shapes, and quantities; and of the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems that describe them; while we could never comprehend how, while everything has an origin and a finality, the Infinite does not; based on questions 1 and 2, shouldn't we conclude it could not possibly be otherwise?

The above consideration, is also mathematical concept, and even an equation/a cognitive weighing of data; as is for example the conclusion that if A=B and B=C, then A=C.
 
Last edited:
Correction:

tazanastazio said:
The formula ( 𝑣⃗*.= lim (*𝛥𝑟⃗*./𝛥𝑡.) when 𝛥𝑡→0 ) is a good example of the description of the actually unapproachable, uncalculble to exactness, therefore an infinite as far as we humans will ever be able to measure; namely instantaneous velocity.

You asked me to come up with a formula that proves the "infinite Infinities" concept, in 5 minutes; it took me less than 5 seconds.


You cannot have a number, a mathematical symbol, an equation or a graph which describe units, segments, shapes and quantities if those are not part of infinite such units, segments, shapes and quantities.

You cannot have anything finite if you don't have the Infinite; and all the infinite finite concepts together are part of this Infinite.

You cannot have a particle if it is not part of the Infinite; that particle too is comprised of particles, and all particles comprise all objects and all forms of existence within the Infinite.


Now here is the difficult part.

Intelligence and Energy cannot be the exception to the rule, because such an exception would nullify the concept of the Infinite altogether.


Which brings to the two questions:

1) Could we get all the aforementioned units, segments, shapes and quantities out of a "0"; wouldn't then the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems, that describe them also describe a "0", since they describe units, segments, shapes and quantities that had come out of such a "0?"

2) Can we based on question 1) say "we don't know" but those units, segments, shapes and quantities could have come out of a "0"; yet the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems that describe them; wouldn't describe a "0" even though they describe units, segments, shapes and quantities that had come out of the "0?"

The two questions listed above, lead to the 3rd question:

3) Isn't it more reasonable to think that while we could never know the finality of those units, segments, shapes, and quantities; and of the finality of the numbers, other mathematical symbols, graphs, axioms and theorems that describe them; while we could never comprehend how, while everything has an origin and a finality, the Infinite does not; based on questions 1 and 2, we should conclude, it could not possibly be otherwise?

The above consideration, is also mathematical concept, and even an equation/a cognitive weighing of data; as is for example the conclusion that if A=B and B=C, then A=C.
Click to expand...
 
tazanastazio said:
The formula is a good example of the description of the actually unapproachable
Click to expand...
The formula does not do anything you claimed it does. :p

Additionally as you don't believe in time you cant even use it as it requires time as an input. :p

Thirdly, you obviously never integrated words like EXISTENCE, INTELLIGENCE, ENERGY AND MATTER and thus never proved your religion at all. :p

tazanastazio said:
You asked me to come up with a formula that proves the "infinite Infinities" concept, in 5 minutes; it took me less than 5 seconds.
Click to expand...
Show us how you used this formula to prove "God is infinite". You can't can you? :p

Why did you lie and pretend you used calculus to prove your religion? :D
 
tazanastazio said:
Correction:
Click to expand...

Have you just realised that the formula does not prove instantaneous velocity? :p

Have you just realised that the formula only shows an approximation of an objects velocity at one particular instant using calculus. :p

Have you just realised that the formula has nothing to do with infinity? :confused:

Show us how the forumula proves your "infinity of infinities" religion. :D
 
There is no longer a need to fake in the science anymore. None at all.


Declare your diety all powerful and beyond anything we mortals could ever understand and there you go..everything we have no understanding of is his and we were never meant to fully understand.

It's an ancient formula. Human ignorance + fears = need of all powerful diety.
Powerful diety + incessant fearful prayers makes for a safe protected life.

Unless one overcomes fear and worry to just enjoy a mundane life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom