RE: What view of Origins is more profound?
October 14, 2009 at 10:15 pm
(This post was last modified: October 14, 2009 at 10:18 pm by Violet.)
(October 14, 2009 at 9:22 pm)Tiberius Wrote: It seems to me that Saerules is trying to explain away physics with mathematics (which is a human invention after all...not a "science" strictly). The problems I foresee in this are:<giggle> Fire is fire, unless it isn't a fire
1) Mathematics is abstract. The number "1" doesn't actually exist anywhere in the universe...we invented it in our minds.
2) Saerules has shown a complete lack of mathematical skill in other threads, so I wouldn't trust anything she had to say on mathematical proofs of the universe being cyclic...
A telephone is a telephone, unless it isn't a telephone.1 is the concept of the identity... that I am me and not you
Unless you are going to debate me on that? 
I take it that Sol is not Sol and is instead a telephone? Therefore telephones give light and heat? ^_^ Well of course they do, but not as much as Sol generates Simply, one glass is half full, and another glass is filled to the brim. It is not an abstract human idea that one is holding more water: it is the physical truth.
As for what it seems to you (and 2): That you haven't justified believing what I say is no concern of mine... and hopefully soon you will see fit reason to read what I have to say
Anyway, @theVOID: I haven't had been anywhere to watch those videos you posted... but hopefully will be able to see them this weekend
Than you for posting them. Also, your analysis seems to me quite likely... Discover magazine has failed us 
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
