JohnJBannan wrote:E=MC^2 is not claiming anything does faster than light. It is only showing energy and mass equivalence.
JohnJBannan wrote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/05/27/why-does-emc2/
JohnJBannan wrote:You really aren’t making any points here. Your assertion that multiplying c x c is somehow improper flies in the face of General Relativity and physics. Multiplying C x C is part of the equation E=MC^2, and is necessary to calculate work in the joules unit.
JohnJBannan wrote:II. THE ARGUMENT FROM CREATIO EX NIHILO (BY JOHN J. I)
The creatio ex nihilo argument proves the existence of God by demonstrating that because all physical reality in the cosmos is caused there must be an uncaused transcendent reality that causes physical reality to appear from non-existence. Anything with parts is caused by those parts. If those parts were uncaused, then the parts could not change because a changed part would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. The order of uncaused parts would also be uncaused, because parts require order and could not exist in an uncaused state without an uncaused order. Anything made of uncaused parts would be uncaused, because the uncaused order of uncaused parts cannot be changed, because a changed order would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. Therefore, any composite that can change cannot be uncaused and its parts cannot be uncaused.
Because physical reality in the cosmos entails only parts and composites that can change, then physical reality cannot be uncaused. Because matter which experiences time can be caused from or transform into timeless photons, then time itself cannot be uncaused. Moreover, physical reality cannot cause itself, because if part A is caused by part B which in turn is caused by part A, then the ultimate cause of part A would be itself which is impossible because a being cannot be contingent on itself. The cause of physical reality must ultimately be an uncaused reality that does not change and cannot be made or transform into something else. The ultimate cause of physical reality must therefore transcend physical reality and cause physical reality to appear from non-existence or creatio ex nihilo. Because physical reality cannot be caused by nothing, this uncaused transcendent reality is not nothing but what we call God.
Meno_ wrote:JohnJBannan wrote:II. THE ARGUMENT FROM CREATIO EX NIHILO (BY JOHN J. I)
The creatio ex nihilo argument proves the existence of God by demonstrating that because all physical reality in the cosmos is caused there must be an uncaused transcendent reality that causes physical reality to appear from non-existence. Anything with parts is caused by those parts. If those parts were uncaused, then the parts could not change because a changed part would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. The order of uncaused parts would also be uncaused, because parts require order and could not exist in an uncaused state without an uncaused order. Anything made of uncaused parts would be uncaused, because the uncaused order of uncaused parts cannot be changed, because a changed order would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. Therefore, any composite that can change cannot be uncaused and its parts cannot be uncaused.
Because physical reality in the cosmos entails only parts and composites that can change, then physical reality cannot be uncaused. Because matter which experiences time can be caused from or transform into timeless photons, then time itself cannot be uncaused. Moreover, physical reality cannot cause itself, because if part A is caused by part B which in turn is caused by part A, then the ultimate cause of part A would be itself which is impossible because a being cannot be contingent on itself. The cause of physical reality must ultimately be an uncaused reality that does not change and cannot be made or transform into something else. The ultimate cause of physical reality must therefore transcend physical reality and cause physical reality to appear from non-existence or creatio ex nihilo. Because physical reality cannot be caused by nothing, this uncaused transcendent reality is not nothing but what we call God.
Exactly, unless ... the new evil genious can overcome his doubtful creator.
JohnJBannan wrote:Meno_ wrote:JohnJBannan wrote:II. THE ARGUMENT FROM CREATIO EX NIHILO (BY JOHN J. I)
The creatio ex nihilo argument proves the existence of God by demonstrating that because all physical reality in the cosmos is caused there must be an uncaused transcendent reality that causes physical reality to appear from non-existence. Anything with parts is caused by those parts. If those parts were uncaused, then the parts could not change because a changed part would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. The order of uncaused parts would also be uncaused, because parts require order and could not exist in an uncaused state without an uncaused order. Anything made of uncaused parts would be uncaused, because the uncaused order of uncaused parts cannot be changed, because a changed order would be caused by the change and hence not uncaused. Therefore, any composite that can change cannot be uncaused and its parts cannot be uncaused.
Because physical reality in the cosmos entails only parts and composites that can change, then physical reality cannot be uncaused. Because matter which experiences time can be caused from or transform into timeless photons, then time itself cannot be uncaused. Moreover, physical reality cannot cause itself, because if part A is caused by part B which in turn is caused by part A, then the ultimate cause of part A would be itself which is impossible because a being cannot be contingent on itself. The cause of physical reality must ultimately be an uncaused reality that does not change and cannot be made or transform into something else. The ultimate cause of physical reality must therefore transcend physical reality and cause physical reality to appear from non-existence or creatio ex nihilo. Because physical reality cannot be caused by nothing, this uncaused transcendent reality is not nothing but what we call God.
Exactly, unless ... the new evil genious can overcome his doubtful creator.
You misspelled “genius”.
JohnJBannan wrote:God does not create in time. Therefore, God does not lead to infinite regress.
JohnJBannan wrote:An indivisible unit of spacetime does not have space or time.
JohnJBannan wrote:It is that which creates space and time. I told you it was weird. It doesn’t have geometry either, but creates geometry. Don’t think of it like the tiniest cube of spacetime possible. It is rather an indivisible unit of spacetime reality.
JohnJBannan wrote:Infinite regress is impossible, because time and causation must have a beginning. See OP Beginningless Time Paradox and Beginningless Causation Paradox.
Ecmandu wrote:JohnJBannan wrote:Gib,
God’s existence is not created existence. God is uncaused. Created existence is caused. God’s uncaused existence can logically precede caused existence. No infinite regress is required.
An indivisible unit of spacetime creates spacetime and cannot be what it creates.[/quote
That’s very problematic in its own right John.
So there’s no motion; god...
And then there’s suddenly motion; god
That means god made something out of nothing!
If god can make something out of nothing, then why not a universe without god?
Meno_ wrote:John wrote,
"Exactly, unless ... the new evil genious can overcome his doubtful creator.
You misspelled “genius”.
Sorry, genius .....or, ingenious ......"
The difference is both subtle and/or obvious,
This is the point that Marx failed @, he downplayed the essential as an existential disqualification , using quantified "sense data".
It became appearent soon that Russel's idea led to infinite regress, and that regress was the unfathomable Nietzche said was reflexive, it " looked back" upon reflecting on it.
The axiomatic reflexive must be over come, the subtle must give way to the original reflection.
That original reflection is the material, but underneath it is a world of difference.
That world is even deeper, way deeper, then the mirror image world, the automation befuddling mere material existence, and it begs for that difference, lest all become a shadow world.
Existence is the shadow of the ideal, and that begging, further begs a remembrance. That remembrance is what is inscribed in eternity.
That eternity is the immediate, unmoved, mover.
The either this (material) could only be understood to deduce unto a point, a point in time-space , specifically limited one , that could be understood to bracket an specific existential ssituation.
An epoche.
With the failure to contain the regressive existence between what should have taken place, and what did? 30 years of displacement into a suspended animation took place.
That generation , held in suspended animation, fractured a carefully assembled detente, and reflected disingenuously into it's material negative.
The genius knew better, It's memory could be re-assembled instantaneously.
Of course the irreduceability of it leads to lower levels of fragmentation, past the critical point, and that is why containment becomes a primary defense against total chaos.
This is why, policy triumphs against social discursive points of reference.
The consciously constructed god of necessity is a real as the one which presumably developed from inorganic matter.
If the latter, then such development needs transcendentally objective premises, and becomes an eternal ontological reality. It becomes it, and it is becoming.
The former, is forever haunted by Descartes' evil genious, the latter is assured primacy in a miraculous world, and lucky the one who find the genie to obey the command.
Note: in a manner of speaking, once this command is obeyed, Faust is forgiven. The problem with the evil genius is that it predicated on a chaotic reassamblage, wherein the absolute regression can never be exactly authenticated with enough hurt, or extension into the particular from the universal, that it can keep the reflection in a consistent mode.
The devil dissuaded humility, and can not transcend it into a pride that can never be accounted for. That becomes the genie's out, through an extension, a gap, that need not hold to a fallacious system ( when a devilish person seeks an absolute wish to be granted within the first wish)
And that follows from sequential needs of greed, since even it knows that if it wishes everything at first, he may not have anything else to wish for next. It can not remember that there may really be other things to wish for beyond the absolute, because it has no belief in it.
There are ontological references to such:
Jesus refusing Satan's offer of everything He could envision from a high hill.
And then the difference between a ' genie, and genius:
'So there is no linguistic relation between the two words, but they were eventually bound through phonetics and similar meaning. ... By coincidence, the Arabic word jinn means a kind of supernatural being below the angels, and starting in the 18th century, the word genie (and also genius) became conflated with jinn.'
And it is possible that such co-incidence was far more.
JohnJBannan wrote:Meno_ wrote:John wrote,
"Exactly, unless ... the new evil genious can overcome his doubtful creator.
You misspelled “genius”.
Sorry, genius .....or, ingenious ......"
The difference is both subtle and/or obvious,
This is the point that Marx failed @, he downplayed the essential as an existential disqualification , using quantified "sense data".
It became appearent soon that Russel's idea led to infinite regress, and that regress was the unfathomable Nietzche said was reflexive, it " looked back" upon reflecting on it.
The axiomatic reflexive must be over come, the subtle must give way to the original reflection.
That original reflection is the material, but underneath it is a world of difference.
That world is even deeper, way deeper, then the mirror image world, the automation befuddling mere material existence, and it begs for that difference, lest all become a shadow world.
Existence is the shadow of the ideal, and that begging, further begs a remembrance. That remembrance is what is inscribed in eternity.
That eternity is the immediate, unmoved, mover.
The either this (material) could only be understood to deduce unto a point, a point in time-space , specifically limited one , that could be understood to bracket an specific existential situation.
An epoche.
With the failure to contain the regressive existence between what should have taken place, and what did? 30 years of displacement into a suspended animation took place.
That generation , held in suspended animation, fractured a carefully assembled detente, and reflected disingenuously into it's material negative.
The genius knew better, It's memory could be re-assembled instantaneously.
Of course the irreduceability of it leads to lower levels of fragmentation, past the critical point, and that is why containment becomes a primary defense against total chaos.
This is why, policy triumphs against social discursive points of reference.
The consciously constructed god of necessity is as real as the one which presumably developed from inorganic matter.
If the latter, then such development needs transcendentally objective premises, and becomes an eternal ontological reality. It becomes it, and it is becoming.
The former, is forever haunted by Descartes' evil genious, the latter is assured primacy in a miraculous world, and lucky the one who find the genie to obey the command.
Note: in a manner of speaking, once this command is obeyed, Faust is forgiven. The problem with the evil genius is that it predicated on a chaotic reassamblage, wherein the absolute regression can never be exactly authenticated with enough hurt, or extension into the particular from of the universal, that it can keep the reflection in a consistent mode.
The devil dissuaded humility, and can not transcend it into a pride that can never be accounted for. That becomes the genie's out, through an extension, a gap, that need not hold to a fallacious system ( when a devilish person seeks an absolute wish to be granted within the first wish)
And that follows from sequential needs of greed, since even it knows that if it wishes everything at first, he may not have anything else to wish for next. It can not remember that there may really be other things to wish for beyond the absolute, because it has no belief in it.
There are ontological references to such:
Jesus refusing Satan's offer of everything He could envision from a high hill.
And then the difference between a ' genie, and genius:
'So there is no linguistic relation between the two words, but they were eventually bound through phonetics and similar meaning. ... By coincidence, the Arabic word jinn means a kind of supernatural being below the angels, and starting in the 18th century, the word genie (and also genius) became conflated with jinn.'
And it is possible that such co-incidence was far more.
You are making this more complicated than it need be. Something’s got to be uncaused or we wouldn’t be here. God is the best choice for such an uncaused being.
Ecmandu wrote:John,
Let me explain this in the simplest possible way that I can explain this to a human.
Almost every possible decision that you make in this species will send you to hell.
A zero sum consent violating reality is not divine.
We live in a hell realm.
If you’re smart, not just in this small species, but cosmically smart, as long as even a SINGLE being in all of existence is having their consent violated in some way, shape or form, you will forever regret all your memories.
You have to understand, there’s not the ‘grand leader’, we have to get all our souls together to make decisions.
JohnJBannan wrote:Ecmandu wrote:John,
Let me explain this in the simplest possible way that I can explain this to a human.
Almost every possible decision that you make in this species will send you to hell.
A zero sum consent violating reality is not divine.
We live in a hell realm.
If you’re smart, not just in this small species, but cosmically smart, as long as even a SINGLE being in all of existence is having their consent violated in some way, shape or form, you will forever regret all your memories.
You have to understand, there’s not the ‘grand leader’, we have to get all our souls together to make decisions.
Would you consent to evolution? If not, you wouldn’t exist.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users