Can you handle the Truth?

Started by Shakyamunison432 pages

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You didn't answer the question.

True or False: to say there are no absolutes is an absolute statement

No. To say something is not an absolute.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. To say something is not an absolute.

You just essentially said what I already said.

So you agree that absolutes exist?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You just essentially said what I already said.

So you agree that absolutes exist?

No, absolutes do not exist. You are getting confused between inadequacies in the English language and the real world. The real world is governed by relativity.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, absolutes do not exist. You are getting confused between inadequacies in the English language and the real world. The real world is governed by relativity.

That is an absolute statement.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That is an absolute statement.

Statements cannot be absolutes. Languages have limitations. The closest you can get to an absolute is infinity, and that is still not an absolute.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I'm talking about on Earth. Gravity is universal.

Bacteria...can you give me an example that is more substantial
like an animal or insect?

I don't mean on a quantum level when I say that a person cannot be in two separate places at the same time. Stop and think about it: do you live your life on this planet on a subatomic level? I know you look for loopholes in everything that I say but these are the facts. Besides Einstein did not agree with your theory at the subatomic level either.

[b]"Einstein himself is well known for rejecting some of the claims of quantum mechanics. While clearly contributing to the field, he did not accept the more philosophical consequences and interpretations of quantum mechanics, such as the lack of deterministic causality and the assertion that a single subatomic particle can occupy numerous areas of space at one time."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics [/B]


If it only applies to Earth, then by definition it is NOT universal.

Why would I do that? Bacteria is just as legitimate of an example as an animal or plant.

Einstein's view on quantum mechanics is now seen as the ultimate example of someone rejecting something because they didn't like the implications of it. He had no support for his objections even at the time and in modern science his opinion on quantum mechanics is next to worthless.

If one subatomic particle can exist in two locations, then multiple ones can do so as well. There is a nonzero possibility all subatomic particles in your entire body could undergo dual quantum states... in fact this has been shown to occur in large buckyballs. Rare but it happens.

Originally posted by inimalist
however, at least how the current understanding goes, such quantum states are very unstable, and something in the real world, even if only a single particle, would be interacting with far too many other particles and would become desynchronized through interactions. If this is applied to all particles in a living organism, it is almost assured that the particles themselves would desynchronize the other particles.

A buckyball with 60 carbon atoms and 48 flourine atoms was recently induced into dual states without anything like that occuring.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Statements cannot be absolutes. Languages have limitations. The closest you can get to an absolute is infinity, and that is still not an absolute.

Saying that statements cannot be absolute is another absolute.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Saying that statements cannot be absolute is another absolute.

Again, anomalies within a language do not qualify as an absolute.

Originally posted by King Kandy
If it only applies to Earth, then by definition it is NOT universal.

Why would I do that? Bacteria is just as legitimate of an example as an animal or plant.

Einstein's view on quantum mechanics is now seen as the ultimate example of someone rejecting something because they didn't like the implications of it. He had no support for his objections even at the time and in modern science his opinion on quantum mechanics is next to worthless.

If one subatomic particle can exist in two locations, then multiple ones can do so as well. There is a nonzero possibility all subatomic particles in your entire body could undergo dual quantum states... in fact this has been shown to occur in large buckyballs. Rare but it happens.

But I already clarified what I meant by universal so it does apply.

Are you a buckyball? No. I am talking about you being in two places at once not buckyballs.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Again, anomalies within a language do not qualify as an absolute.

You are digressing.

I am not discussing language I am discussing absolutes.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But I already clarified what I meant by universal so it does apply.

Are you a buckyball? No. I am talking about you being in two places at once not buckyballs.

If you had not included the word absolute, you would not be having this problem. The idea that you cannot be in two places at the same time maybe very likely, but it is not an absolute.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You are digressing.

I am not discussing language I am discussing absolutes.

No, you are playing words games with me.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If you had not included the word absolute, you would not be having this problem. The idea that you cannot be in two places at the same time maybe very likely, but it is not an absolute.

What problem?

You (personally) cannot be in two places at once.

Yes, this is an absolute because you cannot do it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, you are playing words games with me.

The only thing I play is my dvr, dvd player, vcr, and playstation.

No word games.

I have never been guilty of playing word games. I keep it straight and simple. I try not to shoot from the hip.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
What problem?

You (personally) cannot be in two places at once.

Yes, this is an absolute because you cannot do it.

That is incorrect. It maybe highly improbable, but it is not an absolute. I don't know why you cannot understand that. Maybe you are not educated enough to understand what I am saying to you.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is incorrect. It maybe highly improbable, but it is not an absolute. I don't know why you cannot understand that. Maybe you are not educated enough to understand what I am saying to you.

I'm saying that you personally cannot be in two places at once.

That is an absolute.

If you don't believe me then prove me wrong, (physically) come to where I am without leaving where you are and this will end this discussion post-haste.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
But I already clarified what I meant by universal so it does apply.

Are you a buckyball? No. I am talking about you being in two places at once not buckyballs.


No, your use of the word "universal" is completely meaningless. If by saying gravity is "absolute" you mean it is unalterable, universal, that it always applies, you are quite wrong. If you meant it only applies to Earth, then it is in no way "absolute".

Do you not see the theoretical implications of a buckyball doing it. If it can happen to a buckyball, it can happen to a man.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I'm saying that you personally cannot be in two places at once.

That is an absolute.

If you don't believe me then prove me wrong, come to where I am without leaving where you are and this will end this discussion post- haste.


Just because it's possible, doesn't mean you can just do it at will.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Just because it's possible, doesn't mean you can just do it at will.

Then I'm still right because I said at the outset of this discussion that you personally cannot occupy two places at the same time.