|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:46 pm
 |
|
|
 |
Thief Iconised Ghost Thief Iconised Ghost I dont believe in it. Of course, the world will end, all things come to an end, but that will just be the end of the earth, other things/planets will go on (until they come to their end too of course) But i dont believe that one day the believers will be taken from earth while the rest of us are left here to burn (sorry if thats inaccurate, thats just what i was told by one of my Islamic friends ages ago) What is supposed to happen in 2012? That theory is flawed. Existence cannot be substantiated without a higher power. In the case of atheism, the only possible explanation for the existence of a universe is that it exists do to one's own observations of it. In which case, the entire end of the universe would come around whenever your life ended. It's impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist after the end of our world (which would end your life as well) unless you believe in a power higher than yourself to sustain their existence. It's not religion, it's science. that theory is flawed. Its not impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist, because thats what i believe. I understand what you are saying (i think), that reality only exists as we think it does, and once we stop thinking it does, it stops existing (bad way to put it i know, but im sick >.<). But thats just a theory too wink one that i dont buy into entirely In order to contradict commonly accepted theory, you'd need to present an alternative. For example, if I say "Light refraction does not make the sky blue", I'd need to explain why. At current, we have no other explanation for proving existence BESIDES observation. The only beings we believe to have observation are ourselves, (I think, therefore I am), and God. If you do not believe in a God, then you MUST believe that your own observations determine your reality. There are simply no other theories. In essence, you're last post says "Everyone but me is wrong". While I'm willing to accept that, you must also accept that it's not my opinions, it's the only two opinions I've ever heard. If you have another explanation for what force sustains existence, then please provide your theory. But if you don't have a theory, I believe it'd be no more than ignorant to automatically discredit the commonly accepted ones. Also, keep in mind that until someone is able to provide a solution to Schrodinger's thought experiment, it is common scientific theory that the entire world is dependent on superstates (the existence of more than one thing at the same time, until someone observes a single state and the other possibilities collapse). If the leading scientists have difficulty disproving this, how should you plan to? I'm not trying to antagonize you; however, your line of thinking just seems to focus on the improbable. I'm willing to accept that there may be more explanations, but I'd like to hear them before you claim to believe in them.
Sorry i didnt explain it very well, flu makes thinking hard, i'll try again
Yes our observations determine our reality, i agree with you there. My thoughts are this (bear with me >.<): if my observations determine my reality, then your observations determine your reality, and so on. So therefore there must be multiple realities, right? But there must be things in common with all these realities- i see a chair, you see a chair, in both our realities there is a chair. So there must be one, common ("true") reality which has everyone's common observations in it. Basically, there must be some sort of cornerstone of absolute truth kinda thing. So if I die, the other people's realities continue to exist minus my reality. If everyone dies then there are no more observations, so only the one common "true" reality remains. So if the earth ends, it doesnt necessarily mean that the entire universe will end.
This is just my thoughts, and I havent done a lot of research on this kind of thing, i've only done a bit of work on discourse and subjectivities, and some work with Foucauldian ideas, so im probably talking out of my a** for the most part
I like the improbable ^_^ Im often proved wrong of course, but looking at the improbable and thinking about it is often lots of fun too mrgreen |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:05 pm
|
|
|
|
Iconised Ghost Thief Iconised Ghost Thief Iconised Ghost I dont believe in it. Of course, the world will end, all things come to an end, but that will just be the end of the earth, other things/planets will go on (until they come to their end too of course) But i dont believe that one day the believers will be taken from earth while the rest of us are left here to burn (sorry if thats inaccurate, thats just what i was told by one of my Islamic friends ages ago) What is supposed to happen in 2012? That theory is flawed. Existence cannot be substantiated without a higher power. In the case of atheism, the only possible explanation for the existence of a universe is that it exists do to one's own observations of it. In which case, the entire end of the universe would come around whenever your life ended. It's impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist after the end of our world (which would end your life as well) unless you believe in a power higher than yourself to sustain their existence. It's not religion, it's science. that theory is flawed. Its not impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist, because thats what i believe. I understand what you are saying (i think), that reality only exists as we think it does, and once we stop thinking it does, it stops existing (bad way to put it i know, but im sick >.<). But thats just a theory too wink one that i dont buy into entirely In order to contradict commonly accepted theory, you'd need to present an alternative. For example, if I say "Light refraction does not make the sky blue", I'd need to explain why. At current, we have no other explanation for proving existence BESIDES observation. The only beings we believe to have observation are ourselves, (I think, therefore I am), and God. If you do not believe in a God, then you MUST believe that your own observations determine your reality. There are simply no other theories. In essence, you're last post says "Everyone but me is wrong". While I'm willing to accept that, you must also accept that it's not my opinions, it's the only two opinions I've ever heard. If you have another explanation for what force sustains existence, then please provide your theory. But if you don't have a theory, I believe it'd be no more than ignorant to automatically discredit the commonly accepted ones. Also, keep in mind that until someone is able to provide a solution to Schrodinger's thought experiment, it is common scientific theory that the entire world is dependent on superstates (the existence of more than one thing at the same time, until someone observes a single state and the other possibilities collapse). If the leading scientists have difficulty disproving this, how should you plan to? I'm not trying to antagonize you; however, your line of thinking just seems to focus on the improbable. I'm willing to accept that there may be more explanations, but I'd like to hear them before you claim to believe in them. Sorry i didnt explain it very well, flu makes thinking hard, i'll try again Yes our observations determine our reality, i agree with you there. My thoughts are this (bear with me >.<): if my observations determine my reality, then your observations determine your reality, and so on. So therefore there must be multiple realities, right? But there must be things in common with all these realities- i see a chair, you see a chair, in both our realities there is a chair. So there must be one, common ("true") reality which has everyone's common observations in it. Basically, there must be some sort of cornerstone of absolute truth kinda thing. So if I die, the other people's realities continue to exist minus my reality. If everyone dies then there are no more observations, so only the one common "true" reality remains. So if the earth ends, it doesnt necessarily mean that the entire universe will end. This is just my thoughts, and I havent done a lot of research on this kind of thing, i've only done a bit of work on discourse and subjectivities, and some work with Foucauldian ideas, so im probably talking out of my a** for the most part I like the improbable ^_^ Im often proved wrong of course, but looking at the improbable and thinking about it is often lots of fun too mrgreen
I agree with you there, except on one small thing. I don't think the true reality can exist without everyone else's reality.
Some people say that there is only one reality, that belongs to one person or being, and that everyone else's reality is dependent on that reality. Others speculate that every reality is dependent on every other reality, meaning that no reality is more powerful than any other, and there is no "true" reality, but simply a combination of where all the other's overlap that is generally accepted as reality.
But as long as we acknowledge that there are multiple realities, we can't deny anyone's beliefs as a possibility. What you believe can affect your observations, and therefore your reality as well. For example, someone who claims to see spirits may very well see spirits that don't exist in anyone else's reality. Those spirits are completely real, to that person, but don't exist for anyone else as they can't observe them. In this way, religion and mysticism still are very real and exist, just perhaps not in every reality. But that doesn't make them any less real. They may not be real to you, but they may very well be real and observed by others.
Though I'm starting to sound like a bad episode of Evangelion. xp |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:50 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:55 pm
|
|
|
|
Thief Iconised Ghost Thief Iconised Ghost Thief Iconised Ghost I dont believe in it. Of course, the world will end, all things come to an end, but that will just be the end of the earth, other things/planets will go on (until they come to their end too of course) But i dont believe that one day the believers will be taken from earth while the rest of us are left here to burn (sorry if thats inaccurate, thats just what i was told by one of my Islamic friends ages ago) What is supposed to happen in 2012? That theory is flawed. Existence cannot be substantiated without a higher power. In the case of atheism, the only possible explanation for the existence of a universe is that it exists do to one's own observations of it. In which case, the entire end of the universe would come around whenever your life ended. It's impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist after the end of our world (which would end your life as well) unless you believe in a power higher than yourself to sustain their existence. It's not religion, it's science. that theory is flawed. Its not impossible to believe that other worlds will continue to exist, because thats what i believe. I understand what you are saying (i think), that reality only exists as we think it does, and once we stop thinking it does, it stops existing (bad way to put it i know, but im sick >.<). But thats just a theory too wink one that i dont buy into entirely In order to contradict commonly accepted theory, you'd need to present an alternative. For example, if I say "Light refraction does not make the sky blue", I'd need to explain why. At current, we have no other explanation for proving existence BESIDES observation. The only beings we believe to have observation are ourselves, (I think, therefore I am), and God. If you do not believe in a God, then you MUST believe that your own observations determine your reality. There are simply no other theories. In essence, you're last post says "Everyone but me is wrong". While I'm willing to accept that, you must also accept that it's not my opinions, it's the only two opinions I've ever heard. If you have another explanation for what force sustains existence, then please provide your theory. But if you don't have a theory, I believe it'd be no more than ignorant to automatically discredit the commonly accepted ones. Also, keep in mind that until someone is able to provide a solution to Schrodinger's thought experiment, it is common scientific theory that the entire world is dependent on superstates (the existence of more than one thing at the same time, until someone observes a single state and the other possibilities collapse). If the leading scientists have difficulty disproving this, how should you plan to? I'm not trying to antagonize you; however, your line of thinking just seems to focus on the improbable. I'm willing to accept that there may be more explanations, but I'd like to hear them before you claim to believe in them. Sorry i didnt explain it very well, flu makes thinking hard, i'll try again Yes our observations determine our reality, i agree with you there. My thoughts are this (bear with me >.<): if my observations determine my reality, then your observations determine your reality, and so on. So therefore there must be multiple realities, right? But there must be things in common with all these realities- i see a chair, you see a chair, in both our realities there is a chair. So there must be one, common ("true") reality which has everyone's common observations in it. Basically, there must be some sort of cornerstone of absolute truth kinda thing. So if I die, the other people's realities continue to exist minus my reality. If everyone dies then there are no more observations, so only the one common "true" reality remains. So if the earth ends, it doesnt necessarily mean that the entire universe will end. This is just my thoughts, and I havent done a lot of research on this kind of thing, i've only done a bit of work on discourse and subjectivities, and some work with Foucauldian ideas, so im probably talking out of my a** for the most part I like the improbable ^_^ Im often proved wrong of course, but looking at the improbable and thinking about it is often lots of fun too mrgreen I agree with you there, except on one small thing. I don't think the true reality can exist without everyone else's reality. Some people say that there is only one reality, that belongs to one person or being, and that everyone else's reality is dependent on that reality. Others speculate that every reality is dependent on every other reality, meaning that no reality is more powerful than any other, and there is no "true" reality, but simply a combination of where all the other's overlap that is generally accepted as reality. But as long as we acknowledge that there are multiple realities, we can't deny anyone's beliefs as a possibility. What you believe can affect your observations, and therefore your reality as well. For example, someone who claims to see spirits may very well see spirits that don't exist in anyone else's reality. Those spirits are completely real, to that person, but don't exist for anyone else as they can't observe them. In this way, religion and mysticism still are very real and exist, just perhaps not in every reality. But that doesn't make them any less real. They may not be real to you, but they may very well be real and observed by others. Though I'm starting to sound like a bad episode of Evangelion. xp
I agree with everything u said there. The onyl thing i cant bring myself around to believing is that there isnt one true reality, because there has to be something there for us to observe right? Otherwise what are we all looking at?
Most mental illness is a matter of opinion. Thats not to say that people dont suffer! Of course people suffer greatly with mental illness. But remember that homosexuality was considered a mental illness.
Schizophrenia is a hard thing to diagnose anyway without worrying about whose reality is real. Personally, i have great issues with the way that schizophrenia is diagnosed and defined. But thats a whole different kettle of fish >.< |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:53 am
|
|
|
|
I have another one.
The Large Hadron Collider.
Wiki The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a particle accelerator and hadron collider located at CERN, near Geneva, Switzerland. Currently under construction, the LHC is scheduled to begin operation in May 2008. The LHC is expected to become the world's largest and highest-energy particle accelerator.
Here is from another site:
Quote: "The Mayans predicted the world to end on December 22nd, 2012." "Nostradamus predicted the biggest event in human history to occur sometime between 2006-2012" What: Large Hadron Collider, a 17 Mile wide circumference particle accelerator and collider. Where: 50 to 150 meters underground between the Switzerland and France border When: Begins operation sometime in 2008. Who: Over 2000 physicists from 34 countries, universities and laboratories. When in operation, over 7000 scientists from 80 countries will have access to the LHC. Why: To find the Higgs Boson particle aka the God Particle. Cost: 2600 Million Swiss Francs (1700 Million Euro), plus 210 Million Francs for the cost of Experiments. Other questions they hope to get answered:Is the popular Higgs mechanism for generating elementary particle masses in the Standard Model violated? If not, how many Higgs bosons are there, and what are their masses? Will the more precise measurements of the masses of baryons continue to be mutually consistent within the Standard Model? Do particles have supersymmetric ("SUSY") partners? Why are there apparent violations of the symmetry between matter and antimatter? Are there extra dimensions, as predicted by various models inspired by string theory, and can we "see" them? What is the nature of dark matter and dark energy? Why is gravity so many orders of magnitude weaker than the other three fundamental forces? Safety Concerns:Destruction of the Earth or even our Entire Universe. Creation of a stable black hole (google: Black Hole) Creation of strange matter that is more stable than ordinary matter Creation of magnetic monopoles that could catalyze proton decay Triggering a transition into a different quantum mechanical vacuum (google: False vacuum)
It´s a very small chance but still a chance. xd
Enjoy you last days on earth rofl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:13 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:32 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:09 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:39 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:30 pm
|
|
|
|
Why do you believe that?
I guess I can't grasp having a specific date, or even specific year, that I will most assuredly die on, assuming I haven't died already by then. That would make me...24 years old upon death. While it's difficult to imagine myself old, it's also difficult to imagine that I will never be old.
And as far as perceptions of realities and multiple realities, I am an atheist, and I don't see why other planets couldn't exist without our existence and our observations of them. Scientists believe the universe to be much bigger than the area we are able to observe. But planets and stars we haven't seen could still easily exist. Hell, aliens could easily exist, and the only reason we don't define them as existing is because we haven't observed them or definitive evidence of them.
To me, I just feel that it doesn't matter. Whether or not something exists or not, and how observations effect that, really just looks like speculation to me. And I feel that it just doesn't matter all that much. It is interesting to hear theories and opinions and ideas about it and talk about it nonetheless.
To me, the bottom line on this whole apocalypse business, is that it gives people a reason to follow the Carpe Diem philosophy and not waste their precious time, no matter what the length of that time is. Whether or not anyone actually chooses to take that motivation is another story, since people would rather dismiss it as all bullshit anyway, because they'd rather believe they have plenty of time to procrastinate all the time away.
That's not to say I believe in any one religion's views on the apocalypse. But I sometimes feel people don't believe in it because they don't want to believe in it, and not because they can actually find logical fallacies in any of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:20 am
|
|
|
|
Artanus Judgment day is when everyone nukes everyone else. And the U.S. Will most likely start it.
I love you heart This is what I've been saying. Then, the human race anihalated, cats will get off thier lazy asses and rule the world. (Lioness, tigers, cheatas, house cats...) (Not lions, they are lazy bums)
You mentioned 'not wasting thier final years', but unless you mean everyone retire and pursue thier favorite hobbies, it doesn't make sence. All our 'work' into making names for ourselves and doing anything really, is pointless if the world/universe ever stops existing.
Also, can anyone here imagine nothing? Maybe it's just how I view even my own membories in 3rd person, or something, but I can imagine a wold in a galaxy cesing to exist, a galaxy in a universe, but if it's just one universe, and it's all there is, then I just can't see it not existing. I know this sounds stupid, but I just can't fathom nothing existing.
~Metalic_Noodles |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 11:57 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Angelic_Highlights Vice Captain
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:14 pm
|
|
|
|
*cough*
Hem HEM
*reels off* A Myth is a story/tale/explination to explain something, usually an event or nature, that is not proven by science.
*breathes*
*grabs a blunt object*
A myth does NOT mean lie, and just because somehting is a myth doesn't me is isn't true.
*grins evilly*
So basically, religion is myth. God is used to explain many things, and the existance of such a being, or many, has yet to be proven by science.
*looses focus, and begins rattling off*
Congress shall make no loaw respecting an establishment of religion or the free exsercise there of, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people, peacibly to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grevences.
(Yes, that is memorized, and yes my spelling sucks, and yes that was random, but whenever I thinki of rattling something off that pops into mind.)
~Metalic_Noodles |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
