(July 28, 2012 at 3:19 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: Why do you continually use examples of what is understood to compare to reality.
Because reality, like those examples, is also understood.
(July 28, 2012 at 3:19 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: It must be safe to assume that you believe you understand reality as well as numbers.
Nope, I understand the numbers better.
(July 28, 2012 at 3:19 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: This leads me to go back to where this began. You claimed that it's non-nonsensical to ask how big reality is. I make no claims to understand what reality is, I know how I perceive it but am wise enough to make a distinction between my perception and to make claims about what questions I can answer with certainty about whether its nonsensical or not.
Accepting limits imposed by your stupidity is wise.
(July 28, 2012 at 3:19 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: What makes you think you can? If the material is all that exists then why do you propose reality cannot be measured?
As I have explained many times already - for anything to be measured, we require a standard of measurement that exists independently form the object being measured. Since all such standards would automatically be a part of reality - measuring it is nonsensical.