- Dec 25, 2018
- 88
- 21
- 33
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Freethinker
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
True, but the ability to disconnect from past is what saved me.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
True, but the ability to disconnect from past is what saved me.Yeah that helps because it indicates you actually do consider the past to be real and to have occurred, in the past.
Yeah I get that for sure. Here's to change!True, but the ability to disconnect from past is what saved me.
Numbers in mathematics represent concepts. The symbols for a number don't have to be identical as long as they recognisably refer to the same concept.Even mathematics itself is flawed by the simple equation 1=1. There is no thing that is the same as another thing. They can be as similar as you want them to be, but they will never be the same.
You see what I mean. Mathematics is a set of concepts, meaning they aren't real. Math works wonders for us, but it is not as perfect as existence.Numbers in mathematics represent concepts. The symbols for a number don't have to be identical as long as they recognisably refer to the same concept.
Absolutely correct.If time simply measures motion, like Earth's orbit and rotation, then wouldn't that make time a concept of imagination. By this I mean, wouldn't time be a human concept? It wouldn't exist at all!
What do you think of this?
Beautifully said my man!!Absolutely correct.
Time is simply the measurement of motion. It is a second distance measurement to confirm the first distance measurement.
Whether this is the distance a point on the earth's surface revolves back to its starting point. The distance the earth orbits the sun to return to its starting point. The distance a pendulum swings. The distance a second hand on a clock moves, or the distance between crests of electromagnetic waves due to the oscillation of a cesium atom (the distance an electron travels in one revolution).
Time is merely a second distance measurement. Easily confirmed mathematically as one can not divide two unrelated things without first converting one to the other. You can not divide gallons by ounces without first converting them to the same measurement. Likewise yards can not be divided by feet without first converting them to the same measurement. That distance can be divided by time without any conversion shows they are related and are exactly the same thing.....
The reality of concepts is immaterial (see what I did there?You see what I mean. Mathematics is a set of concepts, meaning they aren't real. Math works wonders for us, but it is not as perfect as existence.
I disconnect imaginary concepts from infinite reality. I think that's where this disconnect is.The reality of concepts is immaterial (see what I did there?).
My point was just that your particular criticism of mathematics was mistaken. But of course, Gödel showed maths to be incomplete and not demonstrably consistent.
I have no idea what you mean.I disconnect imaginary concepts from infinite reality. I think that's where this disconnect is.
Sorry, let me restate. I believe Imagination exists inside reality, but everything that happens in the imagination is not reality itself. So, mathematics is inside reality (i.e. immaterial,) but it is not a reality itself.I have no idea what you mean.
OK, thanks; the question that raises is whether mathematics is 'in the imagination', or is an abstraction of reality; i.e. is it created or discovered?Sorry, let me restate. I believe Imagination exists inside reality, but everything that happens in the imagination is not reality itself. So, mathematics is inside reality (i.e. immaterial,) but it is not a reality itself.
yah, but most don't like hearing the truth as it then affects their concept of magically expanding, bending, accelerating nothing..... I mean spacetime.... No, actually I mean nothing.... FAIRIE DUST.....Beautifully said my man!!
The only problem I have with mathematics being used to create or form the universe, which we later discover, is that our number system is based on our 10 fingers. If we had 8 fingers, or 12 fingers, then the base digit system would result in completely different patterns of use. By this I mean 1-8, then 10-18, then 20-28, etcetera would lead us to different mathematical discoveries. I have a hard time believing that we as humans discover mathematical patterns. It makes much more sense to me that we created them.You might be interested to hear that some physicist philosophers think that the basis of reality is information (I've yet to explore this in detail), and some - like Max Tegmarck - have proposed that the universe is a mathematical structure (not just described by mathematics, but fundamentally mathematical) - his book "Our Mathematical Universe" is a very good introduction to theories of reality, including his - and his argument is surprisingly strong...
I lost you there xD .yah, but most don't like hearing the truth as it then affects their concept of magically expanding, bending, accelerating nothing..... I mean spacetime.... No, actually I mean nothing.... FAIRIE DUST.....
Decimal numbers are just the base notation our culture happens to use (although we can use other bases for different situations - binary, octal, and hexadecimal for digital computing, for example). Other cultures have used bases other than 10 - the Chinese used hexadecimal; in olde England we used to use duodecimal (base 12 - a dozen, a gross, 1 foot = 12 inches, etc); the Babylonians used sexagesimal (base 60). The last two are arguably more convenient than decimal for calculations, with 12 being usefully divisible by 2,3,4, and 6, and 60 by 2,3,4,5,6,10,12,15,20, and 30, whereas 10 has only 2 and 5.The only problem I have with mathematics being used to create or form the universe, which we later discover, is that our number system is based on our 10 fingers. If we had 8 fingers, or 12 fingers, then the base digit system would result in completely different patterns of use. By this I mean 1-8, then 10-18, then 20-28, etcetera would lead us to different mathematical discoveries.
There's a good argument that we derive or abstract the foundations of mathematics from our experience of the natural world - in counting, logic, etc.; The Fibonnacci sequence, the Golden Ratio, pi, fractals, and many other mathematical entities are also to be found in the natural world. Once you establish the basic axioms and formalise the system, you can take it much further.I have a hard time believing that we as humans discover mathematical patterns. It makes much more sense to me that we created them.
Likewise. The reality you think you see around you is just a predictive model in your head; literally an imaginative construct, updated and corrected by the digital pulses sent from your senses. Good luck with distinguishing imagination from realityI hope you can one day separate the imagination from reality.
If mathematics is a set of observations, doesn't that agree with what I suggested earlier, that we didn't create it?Mathematics is a set of observations that works out a lot of times, but not so a lot times too.
I could say that you can measure time ... via regularly occurring events, like sunrises, and phases of the moon, but I understand what you're saying.
You could say that time is the forward procession of existence.
I used to think very similarly to you.
What has made a bit of a difference for me is Einstein's notion of a space-time continuum (or context), which proposes that time can be manipulated with the right combinations of extreme mass or velocity. I don't really have a sense of how that is, but it is interesting to contemplate.
The increase of entropy is evidence of time because it's a statistical consequence of systems changing, and time is a measure of change. In pragmatic physical terms, time is what clocks measure - and in doing so, they too increase entropy.Isn't entropy the evidence of the passage of time?
I lost you there xD .
But it is hard to contemplate these concepts. Especially at first. Sometimes I get anxiety when listening to metaphysics, and I've been contemplating the philosophy since I was a teen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?