Reply To: Theory on the Universe

New Home Forums Metaphysical Theory on the Universe Reply To: Theory on the Universe

Author Replies
The_truth_is_ # Posted on June 5, 2012 at 10:36 am

This is a great thread. Very interesting. I’m really enjoying the replies…

Although, I find it a bit unnerving that no one here seems to think the laws of causality are of any importance, or at least no one seems to be mentioning them. The idea that something that exists now caused something that exists in the past is a bit more ridiculous the more you think about it. Backwards causality makes no sense in a forward-moving time “worm.” And even if you accept that time is relative, that doesn’t change the property of time as being forward-moving. Time, even relative to those stuck in a black hole, is forward moving, even if it is infinitely slow. And in hyperspace, time relative to our space-time is still forward-moving.

I find it extremely difficult to accept this sort of epistemic idealism because it requires a priori ideas of objects for objects to exist, but we can so obviously measure the reverse: our ideas are based on experiences, not the other way around.

As for the argument presented earlier about 1’s and 0’s, there couldn’t be a more obvious use of the fallacy of composition propped out in front of me. Reducing them to such integers only shows a false sense of understanding. The equivalent would be looking at a computer’s motherboard, knowing what chemicals went into creating it, and then saying, “I KNOW HOW IT WORKS! MWUAHAHA!”

No. That doesn’t cut it. It is not a very deep understanding of the universe to know that everything is reducible to mathematical speculations. It’s actually very high-school fundamental knowledge kind of thing. http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png

And knowing the basic functions of those mathematical speculations doesn’t make you any more an astronomer or physicist or chemist or biologist or psychiatrist or psychologist or philosopher.