28 Jun 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckMaybe you should try becoming a Hollywood screenwriter.
I'm suggesting that should science have a theory for existence. The lead theory should be a temporal loop.
All this gnashing of teeth at the creationist twats that show up and yet nobody has a better idea than them.
In fact I'm going a step further by suggesting that our history and present are actually artifacts of the future.
28 Jun 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckBut the evidence is against it, and as I already pointed out, there are some serious problems with paradox's.
I'm suggesting that should science have a theory for existence. The lead theory should be a temporal loop.
All this gnashing of teeth at the creationist twats that show up and yet nobody has a better idea than them.
Of course we do.
In fact I'm going a step further by suggesting that our history and present are actually artifacts of the future.
What if our future is an artifact of the past? Oops, that's already how people view it.
My favorite theory is that there is no past or future. There are only possible pasts and possible futures and a now.
02 Jul 12
4 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadI couldn't agree more. That's a serious 'Oops' though.
But the evidence is against it, and as I already pointed out, there are some serious problems with paradox's.
[b]All this gnashing of teeth at the creationist twats that show up and yet nobody has a better idea than them.
Of course we do.
In fact I'm going a step further by suggesting that our history and present are actually artifacts of th hat there is no past or future. There are only possible pasts and possible futures and a now.
By restructuring our language to point to the future, we can create a paradigm for thought that leads to a better future than the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse.
Just out of curiosity Twitehead, do you really believe in the greater anthropic principle and if so why do we perceive any particular reality over another??
02 Jul 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckThe interesting thing is that you too believe in directional time and causality and have been forced to use time travel and time loops in order to get causality running backwards. However the overall flow in your scenario is still in the standard direction of time.
I couldn't agree more. That's a serious 'Oops' though.
02 Jul 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadNo I don't. I'm a maniac. What's your stand-point??
The interesting thing is that you too believe in directional time and causality and have been forced to use time travel and time loops in order to get causality running backwards. However the overall flow in your scenario is still in the standard direction of time.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
03 Jul 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckNo, we should not be able to answer that question, any more than we should be able to answer "If you believe in netwon's principle of grativy. Why do sheep have four legs if they're not inseacts??".
You should be able to answer my question.
If you believe in the greater anthropoic principle. Why do we perceive this particular reality if it's not a temporoal loop??
The parts of your "question" have no logical connection, and therefore, it's not strictly a question at all, let alone one which requires answering.
Richard
03 Jul 12
8 edits
Originally posted by Shallow BlueSo let me get this straight. You're comparing the question of quiescent existentialism to the number of legs on insect sheep?? Interesting. A little bit Isaaac Asimov but interesting all the same.
No, we should not be able to answer that question, any more than we should be able to answer "If you believe in netwon's principle of grativy. Why do sheep have four legs if they're not inseacts??".
The parts of your "question" have no logical connection, and therefore, it's not strictly a question at all, let alone one which requires answering.
Richard
Chris.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
03 Jul 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckDo you have any clue what you are talking about because you are talking gibberish as far as I am concerned.
So let me get this straight. You're comparing the question of quiescent existentialism to the number of legs on insect sheep?? Interesting. A little bit Isaaac Asimov but interesting all the same.
Chris.
I get the strong impression that you have no idea what science is or how it operates.
Originally posted by googlefudgeShouldn't we be structuring ourselves towards the future and not the past??
Do you have any clue what you are talking about because you are talking gibberish as far as I am concerned.
I get the strong impression that you have no idea what science is or how it operates.
The age of Aquarius is over. It's about time we took responsibility for our actions.
It's about time.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
03 Jul 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ck
Shouldn't we be structuring ourselves towards the future and not the past??
The age of Aquarius is over. It's about time we took responsibility for our actions.
It's about time.
Shouldn't we be structuring ourselves towards the future and not the past??
I literally have no idea what this means.
The age of Aquarius is over
The age of what?
It's about time we took responsibility for our actions.
Well I can agree that a person/society/civilisation should take responsibility for their actions.
But I have no idea how this has any relevance or baring on anything we are discussing.
04 Jul 12
7 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeMy question (partly) is whether Silicon based life in the future is able to manipulate quantum routers of the present.Shouldn't we be structuring ourselves towards the future and not the past??
I literally have no idea what this means.
The age of Aquarius is over
The age of what?
It's about time we took responsibility for our actions.
Well I can agree that a person/society/civilisation should take responsibilit ...[text shortened]... ons.
But I have no idea how this has any relevance or baring on anything we are discussing.
Are we a just pawns in computer chess game. Is our future history?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
04 Jul 12
Originally posted by Thequ1ckIs this some kind of joke?
My question (partly) is whether Silicon based life in the future is able to manipulate quantum routers of the present.
Are we a just pawns in computer chess game. Is our future history?
Are you just putting together random words and posting them because that's what this sounds like.
04 Jul 12
5 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeIt's some serious questions. I just walked into a sci-fi convention. Everyone had their little pointy ears on and I'm like 'what the ****?'
Is this some kind of joke?
Are you just putting together random words and posting them because that's what this sounds like.
So you're gonna build a big kettle is space is that it?