More Hologram Theory ...

Iacchus said:
And, if God exists outside of time and space? ...
Click to expand...
If god exists outside of time and space statements about god should be devoid of references to time and space. Time and space are irrelevant and inapplicable to descriptions of god, as are words which describe duration, temporal relativity, location and extension. If God exists outside of time and space then descriptions, analyses, characterizations, musings, theories, truths and even lies are by your own definition incorrect and inaccurate if they violate that exclusion.
 
Iacchus said:
If something were Eternal, much the same as any other infinite subset, how would we define it within the parameters of time and space?
Click to expand...

Go directly to Jail. Do not collect $200.

The relation of subset to set is not that of component to assembly or part to whole. It is not. It is not. It is not. IT JUST REALLY REALLY, IS NOT! That's not what a set is. It never was. It never will be.

Everything in a set (and that includes subsets) must be whatever the set is a set of.

Make this your mantra whenever the word "set" appears to you in whatever passes in your brain for consciousness, and then pick another word.
 
Iacchus said:
And, if God exists outside of time and space? ...
Click to expand...

You're making it up as you go, aren't you ?

Iacchus said:
If something were Eternal, much the same as any other infinite subset, how would we define it within the parameters of time and space?
Click to expand...

Eternal ? You've just said that time... bab... azi.... karuz... vag... BAH!!!

Iacchus said:
Oh, but we do know that infinity exists, at least theoretically.
Click to expand...

We do ?
 
Iacchus said:
And, as I have said, consciousness exists as the outer parameter to time and space. In fact, we would not know of time and space without it.
Click to expand...

Iacchus said:
What is the Big Bang expanding into, if not that which is infinite, at least theoretically?
Click to expand...

Iacchus said:
And if we understood that consciousness was the fifth dimension, in answer to a question posted by someone earlier, we may begin to understand where to look for God.
Click to expand...

That's it, he's a bot. No human could possibly have this bad a memory.
 
Mercutio said:
And if we understand that you know nothing about consciousness, and that the "fifth dimension" has nothing to do with consciousness, we may begin to understand more about the world.

Get help, Iacchus.
Click to expand...
The fifth dimension is the means by which we die and give birth to ourselves. In fact I even had a dream about it. ;)
 
bruto said:
Go directly to Jail. Do not collect $200.

The relation of subset to set is not that of component to assembly or part to whole. It is not. It is not. It is not. IT JUST REALLY REALLY, IS NOT! That's not what a set is. It never was. It never will be.

Everything in a set (and that includes subsets) must be whatever the set is a set of.

Make this your mantra whenever the word "set" appears to you in whatever passes in your brain for consciousness, and then pick another word.
Click to expand...
So, when you speak of the "set" mammals, you are not speaking of the "grouping" of mammals as a whole?
 
Belz... said:
That's it, he's a bot. No human could possibly have this bad a memory.
Click to expand...
I suspect that some researchers decided that conventional approaches to artificial intelligence were going nowhere, and started exploring alternatives.

Now they are using us to test out their work. :boggled:
 
Iacchus said:
The fifth dimension is the means by which we die and give birth to ourselves. In fact I even had a dream about it. ;)
Click to expand...
Wow. In the space of two sentences, we find you know nothing about dimensions, nor about reproduction, nor about evidence, nor about facts.

As for your "book", I have one word: Proofread. Ok, another word: Edit.
 
Iacchus said:
The fifth dimension is the means by which we die and give birth to ourselves. In fact I even had a dream about it. ;)
Click to expand...
wait? having a dream about someting means it is true??????

Funny, i didn't think it was possible for a human to have sex with a mosquito(and yes, i've had that dream).
 
Iacchus said:
So, when you speak of the "set" mammals, you are not speaking of the "grouping" of mammals as a whole?
Click to expand...

Yes, every member of the set of mammals is a mammal, and the set of mammals contains all mammals. If that was the intention of your reference earlier to subsets I apologize for the misreading. It was not clear just what the "something eternal" was an infinite subset of. I think I missed an earlier post that clarified it somewhat. It is true, for what it is worth, that "infinite time" is a subset of the set "infinite things." But please remember that sets are a logical, not an ontological, construct, and that sets are by definition unordered, which means that qualification as an element in a set implies no relationship between the elements. Defining a set of "infinite things" implies absolutely nothing about the actual relationship between these infinite things, as to their reality, their location, their extent, their ontological status, or their interaction. You can make a set of anything.

And do remember that any idea you have of some ontological something-or-other that actually contains or encompasses all those infinite things is, if containing them is a necessary part of its definition, NOT a superset of which those infinite things are a subset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom