lifegazer said:
Your stupidity annoys me because it lowers the quality of the discussion and because you don't even listen to what has been said.
Being able to rationalise (mathematically) what another observer's RELATIVE!!!!!!!! values for space and time will be, given his circumstances, does not mean that the values of space & time are absolute. It just means that the individual's RELATIVE!!!!!!!! values for space and time are imposed upon awareness in an orderly fashion. I discussed this earlier when I coined the term: Ordered Variance.
Absolute values for space & time are values which everybody recognises, regardless of their circumstances. Absolute values for space & time are NOT variant values which can be fathomed by logic/mathematics.
You should not be participating in this thread unless you can understand basic principles/notions such as this.
What, notions you've made up?
You should not be participating in this FORUM unless you can understand basic principles like infinite space. Tell me, are you ready to admit your utter ignorance concerning infinite space?
"Does infinite space require there to be two fixed points such that the distance between them is infinite?"
If you answer yes, you should not be posting on the internet, period.
If you answer no, then you must also apologize for your earlier ego and ignorance, and we will finally be making progress.
Your 'RELATIVE!!!!!' insertion does nothing for the discussion. Yes, each observer is making relative measurements; this does not deny the fact that, relative to the frame of reference that includes the spacetime to be measured, an absolute value exists - within the relative spacetime frame.
Frankly, your posts have descended into utter nonsense lately. The light thing clinched it - you know nothing about anything.
Back to square one - We know that all that we know comes from our perceptions. Where do those perceptions come from? The evidence within those perceptions OVERWHELMINGLY points to an exterior world of spacetime with numerous objects, energies, etc. There is, however, no evidence whatsoever of a God, a world without spacetime, or any of your other lovely notions.
Hence, given the evidence, one must concede that the most likely explanation that fits the evidence is that an external world of things does exist, and that God does not.
Therefore, your challenges (aside from living a Disciple's life, which you simply ignored, and performing a miracle, which you cannot do) are to a) disprove the external world, and b) prove the existence of God.
So far, you have failed in both... so the Gentle Reader is still waiting for something worthy from you, LG.
Wraith - read his posts carefully. You'll understand as we move along how he is simply expressing a nihilistic solipsism, one in which not only does no one else really exist, but neither does he. The obvious result of this is that all who are having experiences must be God - since God is defined as all-that-is (circular logic, but we'll accept that for now). The not-so-obvious result of this is that nothing at all matters. God is powerless, and nothing Man does matters in the least. In fact, as you read further into his philosophy, you learn that there is no free will save God's own, and that God, being omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient, has already decided ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING that is ever going to happen, period. Hence, we are left with a philosophy that is utterly meaningless and limits God to a gibbering singularity unable to affect anything save God's own awareness, and then, only illusionarily.
You can't even benefit, not in the least, from embracing this so-called philosophy - neither can you perform miracles, nor can you embrace world peace - or even peace with your neighbors. Look at lg - he should be the one benefitting most from his philosophy, yet he suffers the most instead.
Fitting.
Tell me, Wraith - would you take diet advice from a fat man? Eat food prepared by an underweight chef? Buy a used plane from a man in a traction brace? Consider the analogy carefully... you'll see what I mean.
