(May 10, 2013 at 11:46 am)Simsim Wrote:(May 10, 2013 at 4:44 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote: You know... this has got me thinking. Despite knowing Nora never existed, I can't prove that. I can prove that I'm not Nora, I can prove that my name is an anagram of hers, but I cannot prove that this account wasn't made by Nora and I stole the account and my name is just a coincidence. Maybe she does exist? Maybe she looks just like my avatar! Maybe I have her tied to my bed. Who knows?
I think there is something wrong about the idea of that we cannot prove something not to be existent, Nora.
For example, if someone asks me to prove there is no alive humans on Mercury I can do that, because (1) Humans have not have the technology to live on mercury (2) Mercury doesn't support the evolution of carbon-based intelligent life including humans.
But theoretically, according to the multiverses interpretation of quantum mechanics, the universe takes every possible path, but we are concerned only with the path we can observe. This is the "existent path" for us.
For your case I know certainly there is no girl tied to your bed who is called Nora and who made this account and I can prove that this is completely wrong through dozens of logical evidences.
The problem for me is that I don't trust logic itself too much ... Neither brains nor their logic can be trusted to the possible maximum degree.
Please excuse my intrusion....
You are trying to disprove the existence of something within some confined space.
There are no humans in mercury.
Nora isn't in my bedroom.
etc..
But can you disprove the existence of an entity define as being non-corporeal, non-physical, which is everywhere at the same time, and created the Universe we inhabit?
Can you disprove that the flying spaghetti monster exists in the unbounded non-physical space of whatever it means to be "outside the Universe"?
