My Apple Challenge IV

[AV1611VET]

There is no answer to garbage.

Cabal bagged it nicely. I take it you hate hypothetical questions, don't you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Fair enough, but my main point is still how would we measure it (a posteriori)?

Measure what? That's the whole point of the question.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are ways which you could differentiate a system in which a apple was created ex nihlio and one in which the apple was already present.

As I pointed out to MrGoodBytes some time ago --- even if I re-enacted it on videotape --- it wouldn't prove that the apple in question was created ex nihilo.

If I showed you an apple that I said was created ex nihilo, then materialized another one in front of you out of thin air, it wouldn't prove that the first one I showed you came into existence the same way the second one did.

 

[Cabal]

Correct --- I'm simply asking what would change --- not how much would it change.

I see...my question was more about the scale of the experiment. The original apple challenge, while essentially having the same answer as this one, seemed kinda outlandish (requiring absolute knowledge of the amount of energy in the universe), whereas this one, it's only the energy contained within the room one has to monitor?

 

[[serious]]

Perhaps you could also reply to my edit about looking for evidence of trickery after the fact?

If there exists a rational way it could come to be there other than magic, i would assume the non magic answer to be correct.

 

[AV1611VET]

Gotta run --- the Ding-Dong ice cream truck is coming --- BBL!

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

No!

If you'll bother to read my OP correctly, you'll see I cannot give you what you want here without answering it.

In other words, the answer I'm looking for is simply:

• The amount of mass in the universe would increase in proportion to the amount of mass in the apple.

But what you want me to do --- right from the start --- even before you write down an answer --- is set up some way to measure the amount of mass/energy before the apple was created, and after it was created.

That would give the answer away.

That's like saying:

• Okay, class, here's your final exam. Before I give it to you though, look at the last page and notice the extra credit question: 2 + 3 = ?
• Before you answer this, let me show you how to write the number "5".

I thought I had posted on this earlier but apparently not. I don't think you need to do anything impossible like trying to measure the mass/energy of the universe before and after this ex nihilo creation. As I said I don't think you have thought through the implications of ex nihilo creation. Here are the question you need to answer.

How fast was the ex nihilo creation? Was it instantaneous?

What happened to the air that was occupying the space now occupied by the ex nihilo apple? Was it displaced as one would expect?

If the air was displaced instantaneously it would be accelerated to superluminal speed and thus it should give off Cherenkov radiation as it dropped below light speed.

The displacement of the air by the ex nihilio apple should produce a shock wave and a small (or maybe not so small if it was instantaneous) sonic boom, perhaps it would even blow the box apart.

The air pressure in the box would be increased so the box should be lifted up to allow the air to escape.

These effects would be difficult or impossible to duplicate through slight of hand.

 

[milkyway]

Do you remember making this statement:



If you think JEHOVAH doesn't exist, then see if you can move Israel back to where they "belong" without meeting Him.

Get the picture now?

Sorry but I really don't get what you're saying.

However powerful the myth, however far back into antiquity it stretches, doesn't make it real.

King Arthur and Merlin, anyone?

 

[LeSabot]

Post of Awesomeness!

+1 internet for you! I like the way you think.

(physics student?)

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

Measure what? That's the whole point of the question.

Why is it that biblical literalists have such difficulty with reading comprehension?

AV, am I right in saying that in comparison with the original apple challenge, the fact that this is done in a smaller space means we wouldn't necessarily have to know the net energy change of the universe, just a room? The energy of a room shouldn't change that much while the experiment takes place?

followed by

how would we measure it

Tricky stuff. "it" = "net energy change". See how that might work?

 

[AV1611VET]

I thought I had posted on this earlier but apparently not. I don't think you need to do anything impossible like trying to measure the mass/energy of the universe before and after this ex nihilo creation. As I said I don't think you have thought through the implications of ex nihilo creation. Here are the question you need to answer.

How fast was the ex nihilo creation? Was it instantaneous?

What happened to the air that was occupying the space now occupied by the ex nihilo apple? Was it displaced as one would expect?

If the air was displaced instantaneously it would be accelerated to superluminal speed and thus it should give off Cherenkov radiation as it dropped below light speed.

The displacement of the air by the ex nihilio apple should produce a shock wave and a small (or maybe not so small if it was instantaneous) sonic boom, perhaps it would even blow the box apart.

The air pressure in the box would be increased so the box should be lifted up to allow the air to escape.

These effects would be difficult or impossible to duplicate through slight of hand.

Cute --- but like I said --- please don't make this any harder than it is.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tricky stuff. "it" = "net energy change". See how that might work?

Why do you want to measure the net energy change? Do you suspect that's the answer?

 

[AV1611VET]

With the exception of Cabal, who answered it outright, you guys are approaching the problem like this:

Challenge --- White to move and mate in two ---
​

You guys:

• How did Black get in that position?
• What was the name of the opening?
• What move is it?
• Where is this being played?
• What time of day is it?
• What was Black's last move?
• Prove it's White's turn to move.

Anything but answering it.
​

 

[[serious]]

AV, the issue is you are doing your best to make it untestable where as real life is testable. We can certainly look at the situation and make predictions based on either hypothesis. There would be distinct signs of it poofing into existance as Bandersnatch said. There would be trickery involved if it were trickery and that trickery would leave evidence most likely. Likewise, both divine creation and evolution make testable predictions. Evolution's work out, creationists don't. We see a twin nested hierarchy with no evidence of a global constriction 4000 years ago (flood) or human constriction 6000 years ago (adam and eve).

 

[LeSabot]

You guys:

• How did Black get in that position?
• What was the name of the opening?
• What move is it?
• Where is this being played?
• What time of day is it?
• What was Black's last move?
• Prove it's White's turn to move.

Anything but answering it.
​

Chess has known rules. If all you had was that chess board and the question I can't see how it would be out of line for someone to ask how the pieces move. Maybe you think that there is some innately understandable framework to chess, but even in that totally ridiculous state of affairs there is no way that you can expect that for reality. Right?

 

[Nathan Poe]

With the exception of Cabal, who answered it outright, you guys are approaching the problem like this:

Challenge --- White to move and mate in two ---​

You guys:

• How did Black get in that position?
• What was the name of the opening?
• What move is it?
• Where is this being played?
• What time of day is it?
• What was Black's last move?
• Prove it's White's turn to move.

Anything but answering it.​

I'll do better than that -- mate in 1:

White creates another Q ex nihilo at b8 -- Checkmate.

Of course, if we were playing by the rules of chess, the answer would be something more like:

1. Qd6 PxQ
2. Rc1#

But of course, the whole point of your apple challenges is that the rules do not apply in creation, so your chess analogy, like your challenges themselves, is meaningless pseudosophic drivel.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, the issue is you are doing your best to make it untestable where as real life is testable.

You cannot test the universe as God created it.

Let's call up FB's points, and apply them to Genesis 1 ---

• How fast was the ex nihilo creation? Was it instantaneous?

Six days.

• What happened to the air that was occupying the space now occupied by the ex nihilo apple? Was it displaced as one would expect?

No air existed until Day Two.

• If the air was displaced instantaneously it would be accelerated to superluminal speed and thus it should give off Cherenkov radiation as it dropped below light speed.

Okie-doke.

• The displacement of the air by the ex nihilio apple should produce a shock wave and a small (or maybe not so small if it was instantaneous) sonic boom, perhaps it would even blow the box apart.

I'm sure God could easily have absorbed any shock wave --- and again --- no sonic boom would have been created.

• The air pressure in the box would be increased so the box should be lifted up to allow the air to escape.

No air = no air pressure.

• These effects would be difficult or impossible to duplicate through slight of hand.

I agree.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Cute --- but like I said --- please don't make this any harder than it is.

I am not making it harder. I am pointing out that you have failed to think through the implications of ex nihilio creation.

 

[AV1611VET]

Chess has known rules. If all you had was that chess board and the question I can't see how it would be out of line for someone to ask how the pieces move. Maybe you think that there is some innately understandable framework to chess, but even in that totally ridiculous state of affairs there is no way that you can expect that for reality. Right?

Remember: reality didn't exist until it was created. And in my hypothetical, we're suspending [some] reality to make a point, right?

 

[AV1611VET]

I am not making it harder. I am pointing out that you have failed to think through the implications of ex nihilio creation.

I have a feeling I understand it a lot better than you do, my friend. You don't know the different between it and magic --- remember?