parallel universes

Argue about anything under the sun, or over it or in it...

parallel universes

Postby aceofspades » Wed Nov 28, 2007 9:37 pm

Hi all, having just seen a documentary about parallel universes on TV I felt compelled to return to the clinic. Put simply, its all bullshit. The way they go on about 'every single decision you make is a fork in the road, creating parallel dimensions' blah blah blah. No its not!
Simple cause and effect theory puts paid to this daft idea. Every single thing that happens has a cause, therefore there are no 'alternatives', no 'other roads', what happens happens. That is the end to it.
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Postby monkeyonyourback » Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:59 pm

So what are you saying? No-one has any actual choices in life and it is all pre-determined? In which case what started this unchangeable chain of events off? There must have been a beginning to it all surely..
monkeyonyourback
Beginner
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:53 pm

Postby aceofspades » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:56 pm

Maybe, maybe not. Just because we think of time as going in a straight line that doesnt make it so. There may not have been a beginning, there may not be an end. Maybe time is cyclical, or maybe it goes all over the place with no apparent direction. Whether there was actually a 'beginning of time' or not doesnt take away from the cause and effect nature of the universe.
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Postby monkeyonyourback » Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:55 pm

[quote]There may not have been a beginning, there may not be an end. [/quote]

Of course there was a beginning, not heard of the big bang theory? It's rather well known in scientific circles. The point at which space and matter expanded into the nothingness that existed (or rather didnt exist) before. The official beginning of the universe. Ring any bells?
monkeyonyourback
Beginner
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:53 pm

Postby aceofspades » Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:10 pm

The key word there is THEORY. We don't know that the big bang was the beginning of everything, besides how can you have a beginning to everything? That implies that there was a period of time where there was nothing, then suddenly this something occured. You can't get something from nothing you know - Monty Python said so!
We already know that time is not a constant straight line, large amounts of mass and/or energy affect the flow of time causing it to slow down or speed up. Doesn't this suggest that there is not necessarily a beginning? If there was a time in the past when all the matter in the universe was condensed into a single point time itself would not even exist as we know it.
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Postby Mike » Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:01 pm

Anyone can support a beginning of time if they wanted. Given the nature of the Universe I can believe that there are more intelligent beings than ourselves.
Let me put it this way; a child believes that matter can be created or destroyed. We view ourselves as more intelligent. We conclude that matter can not be created or destroyed. A more intelligent being views our logic as childish... matter can in fact be created or destroyed. You can't deduce that there is no beginning by your laws of physics. Because by our laws of physics perpetual motion is impossible and if continuously cycling is what our universe is doing and what time is doing then our universe would have already ceased to have motion because there has already been an infinite number of cycles. Unless of course a creator created a cycle accordingly but that implies a beginning as well.
Mike
Beginner
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:28 am

Postby Nimbusnut » Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:34 pm

You're absolutely right!
I never understood what the purpose of a signature was, so I guess I shouldn't have one.
Nimbusnut
Beginner
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:06 pm
Location: Michigan

Postby Nimbusnut » Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:35 pm

You're absolutely wrong!
I never understood what the purpose of a signature was, so I guess I shouldn't have one.
Nimbusnut
Beginner
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:06 pm
Location: Michigan

Postby bluefire427 » Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:57 am

Mike wrote:Anyone can support a beginning of time if they wanted. Given the nature of the Universe I can believe that there are more intelligent beings than ourselves.
Let me put it this way; a child believes that matter can be created or destroyed. We view ourselves as more intelligent. We conclude that matter can not be created or destroyed. A more intelligent being views our logic as childish... matter can in fact be created or destroyed.


Well could it be in fact that the child's simplicity makes the universe make sense? of course we all dismiss the child's philosophy because of who said it. but maybe the child has just solved what scientists and philosophers have been looking for for hundreds of years.
bluefire427
Beginner
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 2:26 am

Postby Mike » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:09 pm

I agree with blue fire to a certain degree. This concept is somewhat backed up by the Chaos Theory, which states that some of our sciences and mathematics are obsolete because they are theoretically correct but cannot be proven physically due to the unruly nature existence. We'll never be able to measure anything exactly.

If anyone is interested in a good reading check out Conversations With God by Neale Donald Walsch. Its not quite as religious as the title implies, but very interesting and I guarantee if you're intelligent enough to realize that the book isn't trying to make you believe in God, it will be very influential on your way of thinking.
Mike
Beginner
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:28 am

Postby aceofspades » Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:31 pm

While there is certainly an element of randomness in the sub-atomic world according to quantum theory's particle/wave duality and probabilistic nature of said partciels/waves, this does not apply to the macroscopic world so i stand by my original post. There are no forks in the road which create a parallel universe were the alternative path was taken, everything is effectively predetermined all the way back to whatever counts for a beginning.
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Postby Taco185 » Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:33 pm

aceofspades wrote:There are no forks in the road which create a parallel universe were the alternative path was taken, everything is effectively predetermined all the way back to whatever counts for a beginning.


But would also predetermine all the way forward to the end presumably? We can safely conclude predeterminism travels by Delorean.

In order for the universe to have a predetermined path from start to finish, would require a creator, whom would be able to simultaneously control ever piece of matter contained with the universe so to obtain said creators goal.

As time only exists in the immediate present*, I can't comprehend how without the aid of divine intervention, that while all the matter in the universe is working in harmony (baring in mind E=MC^2), its doing so towards some predetermined goal.

*The past only exists in our memory's and the future is only memory's in waiting.
Taco185
Beginner
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:08 pm

Postby aceofspades » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:37 pm

I think you're making up your own argument here, I have said nothing about a 'creator' with their own 'goal', I am just saying that there is a reason for everything that happens.

Example: The apparently random outcome of the throw of a dice is not truly random, it is dependent on factors which we are unable to process so we cannot predict the result but this does not make it random.

Theoretically it would be possible to 'predetermine all the way forward to the end' ie predict the future. But to do so would require a machine capable of modelling the entire universe precisely. Which is clearly impossible since such a machine would basically be containing the universe, and since said machine would be in the universe itself it would have to contain itself!
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Postby Taco185 » Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:06 am

aceofspades wrote:I think you're making up your own argument here, I have said nothing about a 'creator' with their own 'goal', I am just saying that there is a reason for everything that happens.


And your reasoning for everything just happens for a reason is? You don't, because there isn't an argument to answer too.

aceofspades wrote:Example: The apparently random outcome of the throw of a dice is not truly random, it is dependent on factors which we are unable to process so we cannot predict the result but this does not make it random.


A dice has 6 sides, once we have rolled the dice we can predict the dice will land on one of its sides, but which side it unpredictable (i.e random) but the whole process is a result of random occurance. The factors which we require this event to happen;

1. The design of the dice.

My history of the Dice is a little sketchy I must admit, but the dice must of been invented by someone (a human - who evolved through a random process) who required a device to randomly choose 1 of 6 choices.

2. Manufacture of the dice. We'll choose wood, though the same applies to a plastic, marble or a stone die. The wood that the die was carved out of, was a result of a process that took millions of years and a result of another fairly random event, the birth of our planet.

3. Actually throwing the die.
What if you don't want to throw the die? The event can't be take place without this highly important event. Again, this is a result from the randomness of evolution. Wouldn't of taken much for us to have stubby little arms, unable to throw such a device. And if we evolved in such a way that we couldn't use a die, why would of we designed one in the first place?

aceofspades wrote:Theoretically it would be possible to 'predetermine all the way forward to the end' ie predict the future. But to do so would require a machine capable of modelling the entire universe precisely. Which is clearly impossible since such a machine would basically be containing the universe, and since said machine would be in the universe itself it would have to contain itself!


So it's only theoretical that the future can be predicted? I agree with you. Which is totally against the spirit of this forum, so your wrong.
Taco185
Beginner
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:08 pm

Postby aceofspades » Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:52 am

And your reasoning for everything just happens for a reason is? You don't, because there isn't an argument to answer too.


My reasoning is everywhere. You only have to look around to see it. Every event that happens can be traced to a cause, we may not fully understand the cause but that does not mean it doesnt exist. True randomness can only exist if something happens without cause. Your dice example is a case in point, the dice didnt simply appear lying on a particular side, the very existence of the dice was brought about by a sequence of events, and its position is the result of a number of factors including (probably) the height of the throw, the weight of the dice, speed of the wind etc etc... Your example proves absolutely nothing in your favour whatsoever.

An example which would prove your point (or at least prove the opposite of what I am arguing, God only knows what your actual point is) would be the existence of an object or event which has no cause. If you can do that I will happily concede victory in this matter to you and also eat my own feet.

So it's only theoretical that the future can be predicted? I agree with you. Which is totally against the spirit of this forum, so your wrong.

A fair point, we shall have to agree to agree on that one. Unfortunately.
aceofspades
Beginner
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:16 am

Next

Return to Other debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron