My argument against materialism

[PixyMisa]

So math and logic don't exist, how do they manifest in the known universe and a notional universe as you said?

Because they're abstract.

 

[Belz...]

Please explain, I don't understand? Is this measured? Sorry I am ignorant on that. The charge has a finite value, but the repulsive force?

I don't know.

Quite simply, there are no recorded infinite values. Some values get very high or very low, and mathematically, at a certain point they approach infinity. But they can never _reach_ infinity unless distance, in your example, is zero, which is impossible unless two objects can occupy the same physical space.

 

[Belz...]

Unfortunately I don't have evidence, only theory.

It's not a theory. It isn't even speculation. It's fantasy.

 

[Belz...]

Well I see no difference between a space-time bubble(the known universe) and any other finite form, say a banana.

Both are finite.

They are both finite, if finite, presumably they have a beginning and an end, both spatially and temporally(I am viewing the space time bubble from outside the bubble(subjectively)).

Perhaps.

Or do they not have a beginning or end?

Perhaps as well.

How did that banana arise?

From previous stuff. The only question that remains is: by what mechanism did the universe come into being. And the answer to that is: we don't quite know, yet.

Could it have popped out of a state of total non existence of anything?

Perhaps.

Or does it have no beginning or end?

Perhaps. But evidence seems to indicate that time is a property of the universe. So far, no infinite.

This is the paradox I see, I can see no solution without a physical infinity forming part of the equation.

Then your problem is one of lack of imagination. You can't understand how the universe exists; you can't fathom not understanding something, therefore it's a paradox. I assure you, the cosmos needs not make sense to you.

 

[Belz...]

So math and logic don't exist, how do they manifest in the known universe and a notional universe as you said?

I have evidence for their presence

Or are they illusory?

The opposite is true: mathematics represent extant things.

 

[laca]

If its gibberish I suggest you ignore it.

If it's gibberish, I suggest you rethink your words.

 

[The Norseman]

No not thought universes, It is probably not worth fishing those out in this thread, we'll see.

I was fishing in Pixy's mind.

There are no fish in there! I checked!

Schrodinger's Catfish?

 

[Dancing David]

Unfortunately I don't have evidence, only theory.

I don't have time to explain my theory right now, rest assured I will post it at sometime soon in this thread, feel free to remind me if I fail to.

Lack of evidence, reveals nothing regarding the truth of the matter.

So it could be an Undetectable Pink Unicorn?

 

[Dancing David]

In order for the "repulsive force" to reach infinity, the distance would have to be 0, which would require infinite energy, so it's impossible. IANAP...

Can God make a Burrito so Hot he won't eat it?

 

[Dancing David]

So math and logic don't exist, how do they manifest in the known universe and a notional universe as you said?

I have evidence for their presence

Or are they illusory?

They only exist as human constructs.

 

[Dancing David]

Quite simply, there are no recorded infinite values. Some values get very high or very low, and mathematically, at a certain point they approach infinity. But they can never _reach_ infinity unless distance, in your example, is zero, which is impossible unless two objects can occupy the same physical space.

Isn't that the reverse of Xeno's paradox?

They can't reach the limit because of the repulsive force, right?

The distance can not reach point of contact because of the force, right?

So the asymptote exists right?

Just because the value is not reached does not mean that is not the value.

maybe we have to take this to the SMT forum?

 

[punshhh]

Schrodinger's Catfish?

I wish he had a babel fish in his ear, it would make things easier.

 

[punshhh]

So it could be an Undetectable Pink Unicorn?

Not according to my infinite probability drive.

 

[tsig]

I wish he had a babel fish in his ear, it would make things easier.

That's assuming you're speaking a language. GIGO*

gibberish in gibberish out.

 

[PixyMisa]

They only exist as human constructs.

I would put it slightly differently:

They only exist as human constructs.

The abstract relationships mathematics represents are the same everywhere, humans or no humans. But if you want to talk about mathematics existing, then what you said is correct.

 

[Robin]

Only potentially, not in any finite material form.

Well there is your problem.

Pi is something that cannot possibly have any value other than the one it does. Not even potentially.

It is not something that could be decided by an omnipotent God.

It is something that cannot logically be otherwise.

Earlier you seemed to be hinting at the idea of mathematics being the figment of a creators mind.

Impossible.

The axioms and symbols and rules we use for doing mathematics are constructs of human minds.

But the relationships they reveal are logically necessary truths.

No God could have set those truths, no God could change them.

 

[Belz...]

Isn't that the reverse of Xeno's paradox?

They can't reach the limit because of the repulsive force, right?

Well, there's that, but I don't think you can physically occupy the same space, so it will never reach infinity anyway.

Just because the value is not reached does not mean that is not the value.

Just because you can write an 80-dimensional equation on a board doesn't make those 80 dimensions extant. There is no such thing as infinity.

 

[Belz...]

No God could have set those truths, no God could change them.

Precisely. If God can change the laws of logic, then he can both exist and not exist simulaneously, and 1 can equal 2. htf (how the ****) ?

 

[Dancing David]

Well, there's that, but I don't think you can physically occupy the same space, so it will never reach infinity anyway.



Just because you can write an 80-dimensional equation on a board doesn't make those 80 dimensions extant. There is no such thing as infinity.

If I remember I will make a post in SMT, I don't know.

 

[CurtC]

Precisely. If God can change the laws of logic, then he can both exist and not exist simulaneously, and 1 can equal 2. htf (how the ****) ?

I guess I can't tell religious believers what the god they believe in can do, but I have heard many times from some apologists, that the existence of logic (and I guess math) is itself proof of a god.

This is mainly from a camp of apologists called presuppositionalists. They argue that since logic has laws/rules, those laws/rules had to come from somewhere, therefore god. If you try to counter them with reason and logic, they claim that our even using reason and logic is conceding their point that a god has to exist.

There's a specific logical proof of god called the Transcendental Argument for God. Look it up if you like to play find-the-fallacy.