We live in a infinite universe

[slipknot0129]

Is that a yes or no?, Can you create a rock too heavy for you to lift?

Yes I'm omnipotent. As I used my omnipotent power to have the human experience.

 

[baron]

I have omnipotent power, as in my power is unlimited.

Our patience, on the other hand, is not.

 

[John Jones]

Being that the universe is infinite. I've met a lot of higher beings. I seen elder God Raiden once, that was a cool experience. I also seen a girl named Pryvani. She's a Titan. Yeah the universe is infinite, it means all fictional characters are real in the universe. You can talk to them all you want.

You forgot to limit your response to a single short sentence. Insecure?

 

[John Jones]

I'm saying nothing is impossible. We have omnipotent power. Because the universe is infinite.

So Mohammad Ali could beat Jesus H Christ in a heavyweight championship fight in Madison Square Garden?

That would be way cooler than any old Thrilla in Manila. I think it would fit in with xian theology too as long as Ali beat him to death 2000 years ago, and Jesus rose from the dead to give a press conference and some trash talk about a second title challenge.

Imagine Jesus appearing to doubting Saint Thomas with his nose and jaw broke, some cracked ribs, missing teeth, and both eyes swollen shut. That is some iconography right there!

Yep. Nothing is impossible.

 

[slipknot0129]

So Mohammad Ali could beat Jesus H Christ in a heavyweight championship fight in Madison Square Garden?

That would be way cooler than any old Thrilla in Manila. I think it would fit in with xian theology too as long as Ali beat him to death 2000 years ago before he (Jesus) rose again.

Imagine Jesus appearing to doubting Saint Thomas with his nose and jaw broke, some cracked ribs, and both eyes swollen shut. That is some iconography right there!

Yep, Nothing is impossible.

Yeah the universe is infinite.

 

[John Jones]

Yeah the universe is infinite.

Buh-bye!

 

[Steve]

Wow! A thread about nothing and it has almost 300 posts in it.

 

[Beady]

Wow! A thread about nothing and it has almost 300 posts in it.

Wasn't "Seinfeldt" a "show about nothing"? It's considered a classic. "Nothing" seems to be prime entertainment.

This signature is intended to irritate people.

 

[Steve001]

God made the universe perfect.

Would you elaborate on this perfection you see?

 

[Steve001]

I have omnipotent power, as in my power is unlimited.

Power to do what? Do tell.

It's hard to distinguish between someone trolling and someone posting their inner most beliefs. I'm uncertain which category you fall into.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Power to do what? Do tell.

It's hard to distinguish between someone trolling and someone posting their inner most beliefs. I'm uncertain which category you fall into.

The former. However my question stands;

Slipknot in your belief, Is it possible for you to create a rock too heavy for you to lift?

 

[bruto]

Apparently omnipotence exempts one from the need to make sense or to respond to posts with other than platitudes, but we must make allowances, as our newest magus makes his way step by step up the ladder of holy incoherence.

You can always tell the greatest sages. They're the ones wandering the streets with frayed laces flapping flies open babbling as their fried synapses smoke and crackle, gutted by glory, strafed by the blinding magnificence of the all.

 

[Belz...]

False analogy. You can't analogise quantum processes with the macro world.

That's funny because physicists have been doing exactly that for almost a century. You just have no idea what that mechanism would be like, and for good reason: it makes no sense.

So let's recap. You made a claim in one of your first posts that something cannot come from nothing. You didn't provide any evidence.

Damn it, Baron, we were doing so well, and now you bring up this lie again. I did provide evidence, remember? I quoted Hawking talking about exactly that. Now, you might say that's not evidence, but then neither is quoting his "belief" to support you.

No it isn't, it's an argument from the fact an object in zero dimensions is well known to be a data point with no physical properties. These are mathematical constructs and cannot exist in the real world.

Do you have evidence for this claim?

Go on then, tell me how mass can physically exist in zero dimensions.

Asked and answered.

Data doesn't physically exist, it is only physically represented.

Have you heard about information theory or not?

 

[baron]

That's funny because physicists have been doing exactly that for almost a century. You just have no idea what that mechanism would be like, and for good reason: it makes no sense.

Scientists summarise QM in terms the public can understand, they do not attempt to actually do the physics in that way. Are you now making the claim that quantum processes all have known mechanisms? Because I'd like to see your evidence for that!

And have we not established that something not making sense is no barrier to it occurring in QM? Nothing in QM makes sense in anything other than mathematical terms. You reject the idea you get something from nothing simply because you personally can't imagine it happening. What better illustration of argument from incredulity than that?

Damn it, Baron, we were doing so well, and now you bring up this lie again. I did provide evidence, remember? I quoted Hawking talking about exactly that. Now, you might say that's not evidence, but then neither is quoting his "belief" to support you.

That quote was not in any way evidence that Hawking believes you cannot get something from nothing. It didn't even attempt to address that issue, it has nothing to do with the concept! If you think it did then you totally misunderstand what he's talking about.

My Hawking quote, on the other hand, explicitly referenced getting something from nothing and repeatedly stressed that this was literally nothing, as in a complete absence of anything. You couldn't hope for a clearer statement.

Do you have evidence for this claim?

You want evidence that a data point is zero dimensional? What else could it be? Anyway - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_(geometry)

More specifically, in Euclidean geometry, a point is a primitive notion upon which the geometry is built. Being a primitive notion means that a point cannot be defined in terms of previously defined objects. That is, a point is defined only by some properties, called axioms, that it must satisfy. In particular, the geometric points do not have any length, area, volume, or any other dimensional attribute.

Asked and answered.

It has definitely been asked but never answered, I guarantee that.

Have you heard about information theory or not?

Obviously I have. It has no relevance I can see to this topic.

 

[Craig4]

Being that the universe is infinite. I've met a lot of higher beings. I seen elder God Raiden once, that was a cool experience. I also seen a girl named Pryvani. She's a Titan. Yeah the universe is infinite, it means all fictional characters are real in the universe. You can talk to them all you want.

Yeah, uh that's great smiles nervously and slowly backs out of the room.

 

[Belz...]

Scientists summarise QM in terms the public can understand, they do not attempt to actually do the physics in that way.

Wow, talk about stating the obvious! I'm asking you to do the former, not the latter.

That quote was not in any way evidence that Hawking believes you cannot get something from nothing. It didn't even attempt to address that issue, it has nothing to do with the concept!

He specifically was talking about how universe are born! How is that not exactly the issue?

You want evidence that a data point is zero dimensional?

No, I want evidence for the claim I quoted. Why do you ask me if I asked evidence for something I didn't ask for? This is bizarre.

It has definitely been asked but never answered, I guarantee that.

I answered it in the POST YOU QUOTED (#251)! How cculd you have missed it when you replied to it?

Obviously I have. It has no relevance I can see to this topic.

If you think that, then you absolutely don't understand the idea.

 

[baron]

Wow, talk about stating the obvious! I'm asking you to do the former, not the latter.

Do you have any evidence for your claim or not? I'm going with not and drawing a line under it.

He specifically was talking about how universe are born! How is that not exactly the issue?

How on earth does that back up your claim that 'something cannot come from nothing'. People talk about how universes are born all the time, does that indicate that everybody believes 'something cannot come from nothing'?

And even if Hawking was talking of a hypothesis where something did not originally come from nothing (which does not follow at all), so what? Let's for a moment assume that's the case, so we have Hawking say

A is a possible scenario for the appearance of the universe and in this case something did not come from nothing. B is also a possible scenario for the appearance of the universe and in this case something does come from nothing (literally nothing whatsoever).​

You seem to think that he has therefore said that something cannot come from nothing. That logical fallacy is so ludicrous there's not even a name for it.

No, I want evidence for the claim I quoted. Why do you ask me if I asked evidence for something I didn't ask for? This is bizarre.

Er, yes. I say an 'object' in zero dimensions is a data point with no physical properties. You ask for evidence so I provide the quote that says exactly this, and you pretend it never happened and call it bizarre. It's bizarre alright.

I answered it in the POST YOU QUOTED (#251)! How cculd you have missed it when you replied to it?

This is absurd, and funny too. Let's recap.

* I asked you how mass can exist in zero dimensions.
* You reply, 'Asked and answered'.
* I dispute this and you refer me to post #251 in which you respond "Mass, for example" in reply to what attributes a zero dimensional object might have.

Is this really your standard of evidence? Aside from the single quote you provided, which was in any case irrelevant to the topic, do you have a shred of evidence to support anything you have said?

If you think that, then you absolutely don't understand the idea.

Sure, what about pelicans?

(And when you reply "What have pelicans to do with it?" I can fail completely to justify my statement and simply reply, "If you think that, then you absolutely don't understand the idea," because that way everyone will think I know something really important that you don't).

 

[surreptitious57]

Virtual particles come from nothing. And they are called virtual not because they do not exist [ they do ]
but because they only do so for an infinitesimal period of time. Also data points are abstract not physical

 

[Hokulele]

Being that the universe is infinite. I've met a lot of higher beings. I seen elder God Raiden once, that was a cool experience. I also seen a girl named Pryvani. She's a Titan. Yeah the universe is infinite, it means all fictional characters are real in the universe. You can talk to them all you want.

That's not evidence the universe is infinite, that's evidence it was developed by Blizzard. You just need to make sure you have paid your monthly subscription to see all that.

 

[Myriad]

Nothing is impossible in this universe.

Is it possible that you are wrong?