Existence vs Awareness

[Mercutio]

You are still wrong, Iacchus. If you have mass (and you do) and there is anything else with mass (and there is), gravity describes your attraction to one another.

Read a book, Iacchus. You are speaking as if authoritatively ("There are no forces, of gravity that is, except the "initial shove." Meaning you aren't being drawn towards anything."), when you have demonstrated no understanding of physics whatsoever. You are quite simply wrong.

Gravity does not work the way they show it in Road Runner cartoons.

 

[Iacchus]

And the moon has roughly six times less the mass as the earth which, is why we can jump six times as high on the moon.

 

[Taffer]

Really? It seems to have a lot to do with mass in fact. No mass? No gravity, you see.

No, it appears to work based upon mass. This does not mean that's how it really works. The law of gravity simply describes how bodies behave. It doesn't explain why they behave that way.

 

[Iacchus]

No, it appears to work based upon mass. This does not mean that's how it really works. The law of gravity simply describes how bodies behave. It doesn't explain why they behave that way.

Yes, and we could very well be living The Matrix. Thank you and good night.

 

[Taffer]

I'm speaking of freefall within open space (I assumed that's what Mercutio meant?), not within the atmosphere of a big hunk of mass such as the earth.

The only place in the universe where no gravity would act upon you is the 'center of mass' of the universe. And here, it is not that no gravity is acting upon you, but that all the gravitational forces cancel ou.

 

[Taffer]

Yes, and we could very well be living The Matrix. Thank you and good night.

Of course we could. What's your point, Iacchus?

 

[Tricky]

Just because I may be very selective about what I "entertain with my brain," does not make me stupid.

Then what's doing it?

If you don't learn how to cancel out the noise, you won't get a clear picture and understand what you're looking at.

You mean "noise" like evidence & logic? You needent worry. Your vision will forever remain unclouded by such things.

 

[RandFan]

Just because I may be very selective about what I "entertain with my brain," does not make me stupid.

Then what's doing it?

It's seems to me that Iacchus is making at least one unwaranted assumption.

 

[AmyWilson]

Isn't it amazing that anything exists at all, let alone that it's capable of being aware of itself? The probabilities must have been astounding that anything should just up and appear out of nowhere (in other words from absolute nothingness), and then, for the whole thing to take form and ultimately become aware of itself? Dude, that's too much to fathom!

Where there is a creation, there is a creator.

 

[Taffer]

Where there is a creation, there is a creator.

How do you know?

 

[Mercutio]

Where there is a creation, there is a creator.

Yes. This is the very essence of circular reasoning. The universe is the universe, but when people call it "creation", they are assuming something that they have no evidence for.

I don't know which of you should be more chastened, you (or rather, your troll persona) to be agreeing with Iacchus, or Iacchus, to have had your troll persona agree with him. Either way, you make a lovely couple. I wish you a long and happy life, far from here.

 

[Tricky]

Where there is a creation, there is a creator.

True. And there's no evidence that the universe was created, so there is no evidence for a creator.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

So, what makes it wrong then? Because I'm not adhering to a specific rule or something? You almost make it sound like I've broken some kind of law. Hmm ...

Well, you know what they say, "You can't have your cake and eat it."

The saying is, "You can't eat your cake, and have it too."

 

[Iacchus]

True. And there's no evidence that the universe was created, so there is no evidence for a creator.

Just evidence that we exist with "no strings" attached.

 

[Iacchus]

The saying is, "You can't eat your cake, and have it too."

Or, maybe it just sounds better that way? It appears that I left the "too" off at the end anyway. Sorry.

 

[Iacchus]

Yes. This is the very essence of circular reasoning. The universe is the universe, but when people call it "creation", they are assuming something that they have no evidence for.

The whole of human history is rife with tales of the supernatural.

 

[Iacchus]

Of course we could. What's your point, Iacchus?

Isn't this really your point, since we can't really prove it one way or the other? ... And, if we were living in The Matrix, doesn't this suggest that intelligence (thus giving rise to awareness) has been an inherent part of reality all along? After all, it implies that someone or, some intelligent thing set it up doesn't it?

 

[Nyarlathotep]

The whole of human history is rife with tales of the supernatural.

And the whole of human history is rife with tales of people faking supernatural events for their own gain. And the whole of humanhistory is rife with crazy people. And the whole of humanhistory is rife with people making mistakes and seeing perfectly ordinary things as supernatural. And the whole of humanhistory is rife with people ascribing supernatural explanations to things they simply do not understand.

Your point being?

 

[Taffer]

The whole of human history is rife with tales of the supernatural.

Argumentum ad popularum.

 

[Taffer]

Isn't this really your point, since we can't really prove it one way or the other? ... And, if we were living in The Matrix, doesn't this suggest that intelligence (thus giving rise to awareness) has been an inherent part of reality all along? After all, it implies that someone or, some intelligent thing set it up doesn't it?

Sure. Let's give you this point, for the sake of argument. Now all you have to do is prove we are living in "The Matrix".