My argument against materialism

[Dancing David]

I understand your argument and I agree to a point in a theoretical situation.

However in this case though we have a quite simple physical system, which appears to have come out of nowhere. it makes sense to me that it requires a "fabric" out of which its forms arise, it is this fabric I am looking for.

"WE don't know" is not nowhere.

 

[dlorde]

The Loom Of Time. That is suitably vague and mysterious.

Yes. On the Loom Of Time, the Weaver Of Reality weaves the shower-proof-yet-breathable, stain-resistant Tapestry Of Doom^tm with the Shuttle Of Experience, carrying the weft of the Thread Of Existence through the warp of the Yarn Of Belief, on the Floor Of Certainty, in the Factory Of Imagination (closed Sundays and bank-holidays)...

 

[punshhh]

The universe; more specifically, the quark-gluon plasma.

Thankyou that must be what Dafydd was quacking on about. Its interesting that it is a described as flowing like a liquid, sounds like a substance.

Are you aware of any theories about its emergence from the singularity?

Presumably at this density space and time where indistinguishable from the QGP.

My line of enquiry is quite simple really, I like to have the full picture of a cosmology. The materialism I was presented with initially, was rather disembodied, without foundation, afloat.

Now the mystery of what energy is in physical reality as we know it can be narrowed down to events in or perhaps pre' QGP, (time too I presume).

 

[Mashuna]

Yes. On the Loom Of Time, the Weaver Of Reality weaves the shower-proof-yet-breathable, stain-resistant Tapestry Of Doom^tm with the Shuttle Of Experience, carrying the weft of the Thread Of Existence through the warp of the Yarn Of Belief, on the Floor Of Certainty, in the Factory Of Imagination (closed Sundays and bank-holidays)...

I remember the episode when Dr Who met the Weaver of Reality.

 

[Mashuna]

I have already studied these things, I am following a line of enquiry in a debate. If we all went home and studied wiki, we wouldn't get much debating done would we.

Thankyou that must be what Dafydd was quacking on about. Its interesting that it is a described as flowing like a liquid, sounds like a substance.

Are you aware of any theories about its emergence from the singularity?

Presumably at this density space and time where indistinguishable from the QGP.

My line of enquiry is quite simple really, I like to have the full picture of a cosmology. The materialism I was presented with initially, was rather disembodied, without foundation, afloat.

Now the mystery of what energy is in physical reality as we know it can be narrowed down to events in or perhaps pre' QGP, (time too I presume).

I'm confused now. If you've studied these things, why are you asking these questions? Is this just your attempt at Socratic dialogue, or are you genuinely not aware of the answers to your questions?

 

[dlorde]

Its interesting that it is a described as flowing like a liquid, sounds like a substance.

It does, doesn't it?

Are you aware of any theories about its emergence from the singularity?

Not that I recall. I would expect there to be various mathematical derivations.

Presumably at this density space and time where indistinguishable from the QGP.

If you can posit a QGP, then, by definition, it must be distinguishable. Previous to that, who knows?

I like to have the full picture of a cosmology. The materialism I was presented with initially, was rather disembodied, without foundation, afloat.

You've been given the summary and links to the detailed explanations. You also claim to have studied it, although your posts suggest otherwise. If you want to make up your own picture by all means do so, but you've got links to the current consensus interpretation.

Now the mystery of what energy is in physical reality as we know it can be narrowed down to events in or perhaps pre' QGP, (time too I presume).

Energy is well defined and well understood by the physics community. There's no mystery.

 

[Belz...]

Fine, we have two things

atoms

energy

and x

That's THREE things, not two. And what is this "x" you're talking about ?

And haven't you understood about E = mc² already ?

if a materialist would give me one more thing 'x', maybe we could get onto the next subject.

There is no x, there is no next subject. There IS no bathroom.

From your last post(1696), it sounds as though we might be getting around to consciousness for 'x'.

No. Consciousness is the same as the rest: a behaviour.

 

[Belz...]

I'm quite happy to consider that there is no thing and no meaning to all this existence

That's not what I said. There's plenty of meaning. It's just that we MAKE IT UP as we go. I'm fine with that.

In fact this is what I have been doing in this thread and I have no difficulty in understanding the answers, its all straight forward.

In a pig's eye.

What is time?

You've just been told that "what is" is meaningless and yet you keep insisting.

it would round things off a bit.

In other words, it would make you feel better. Remember what I said about that ?

 

[tsig]

No I'm not trolling.

I grapple with concepts like this all the time. Now what was your explanation of what energy is again?

Let me rephrase the question, as we have moved on a bit;

What is energy?
or in or through what medium is its existence manifest.?

The concepts are winning.

 

[tsig]

The Loom Of Time. That is suitably vague and mysterious.

That would be Fruit of the Loom Time. It underlies everything.

 

[dafydd]

Thankyou that must be what Dafydd was quacking on about. Its interesting that it is a described as flowing like a liquid, sounds like a substance.

Are you aware of any theories about its emergence from the singularity?

Presumably at this density space and time where indistinguishable from the QGP.

My line of enquiry is quite simple really, I like to have the full picture of a cosmology. The materialism I was presented with initially, was rather disembodied, without foundation, afloat.

Now the mystery of what energy is in physical reality as we know it can be narrowed down to events in or perhaps pre' QGP, (time too I presume).

Any chance of you emitting an answering questions type of quack? What is this easy to explain mystery? What is this mysterious x? You don't even understand one pixel of the full picture of cosmology.

 

[punshhh]

It does, doesn't it?

Not that I recall. I would expect there to be various mathematical derivations.

If you can posit a QGP, then, by definition, it must be distinguishable. Previous to that, who knows?

You've been given the summary and links to the detailed explanations. You also claim to have studied it, although your posts suggest otherwise. If you want to make up your own picture by all means do so, but you've got links to the current consensus interpretation.

Energy is well defined and well understood by the physics community. There's no mystery.

Well I beg to differ, the mystery remains, its just easier to see now. Unless you fall into Belz's camp where there is no is.

The QGP event either popped into existence from or in nowhere, or it occured in an already existing environment.

I would hazard a guess at the latter, as the former would present some odd questions.

So if we have a prexisting environment, surely this environment is the singularity, of "infinite" density?

This by definition is unfathomable hence the mystery remains.

 

[punshhh]

The concepts are winning.

The concepts are like putty.

 

[kenkoskinen]

As I perused the discussion it appears participants are puzzled about the mystery of existence i.e. us within the universe. I can't solve all the problems but can add to the chase. Firstly, we are within the universe and so be our observations/detections. Secondly since Einstein's special theory of relativity it has been understood that time and space are interwoven. There isn't any time outside of space. Space consists of at least the three common dimensions and time is the 4th (but it's not a spatial dimension). The fact that space/time is real has been proven numerous times (see Gravity Probe A experiment and the GPS corrections to the time variable which are needed to make it work; there are many more such as the impact of cosmic rays in Earth's upper atmosphere).

The inflationary hot Big Bang Model is successful in explaining several problems about the origin of the universe but it is still incomplete. It can't successfully explain how our universe emerged or by passed the initial singularity (a point of infinite energy and zero space/time volume). It's nonsense, yet here we sit. It may well be some other explanation can account for the singularity problem.

I will be writing a paper later this year to suggest a more reasonable alternative to the big bang genesis. See my website http://antspub.com

 

[dafydd]

The concepts are like putty.

Still avoiding questions?

 

[dafydd]

As I perused the discussion it appears participants are puzzled about the mystery of existence i.e. us within the universe. I can't solve all the problems but can add to the chase. Firstly, we are within the universe and so be our observations/detections. Secondly since Einstein's special theory of relativity it has been understood that time and space are interwoven. There isn't any time outside of space. Space consists of at least the three common dimensions and time is the 4th (but it's not a spatial dimension). The fact that space/time is real has been proven numerous times (see Gravity Probe A experiment and the GPS corrections to the time variable which are needed to make it work; there are many more such as the impact of cosmic rays in Earth's upper atmosphere).

The inflationary hot Big Bang Model is successful in explaining several problems about the origin of the universe but it is still incomplete. It can't successfully explain how our universe emerged or by passed the initial singularity (a point of infinite energy and zero space/time volume). It's nonsense, yet here we sit. It may well be some other explanation can account for the singularity problem.

I will be writing a paper later this year to suggest a more reasonable alternative to the big bang genesis. See my website http://antspub.com

Can I have back those five minutes I spent at that site?

 

[dafydd]

Well I beg to differ, the mystery remains, its just easier to see now. Unless you fall into Belz's camp where there is no is.

The QGP event either popped into existence from or in nowhere, or it occured in an already existing environment.

I would hazard a guess at the latter, as the former would present some odd questions.

So if we have a prexisting environment, surely this environment is the singularity, of "infinite" density?

This by definition is unfathomable hence the mystery remains.

Why do you speak as if all your uninformed guesses are facts? What is this mystery?

 

[Belz...]

Well I beg to differ, the mystery remains, its just easier to see now. Unless you fall into Belz's camp where there is no is.

Stop acting like an ignorant slob. You know full well what I meant if you know how to read at all. You can't ask what something "is", only what something "does". You are unable to understand this, and there is no point to anyone trying to explain anything to you, anymore. Go away.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

As I perused the discussion it appears participants are puzzled about the mystery of existence i.e.

Only very few actually. Tough luck with those though. And even more tough luck with all the other ones.

 

[punshhh]

Why do you speak as if all your uninformed guesses are facts? What is this mystery?

Feel free to give an alternative explanation of where the QGP event came from.

Did it arise in a singularity or not?