TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Ask pseudo-philosophic questions, here
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Ask pseudo-philosophic questions, here

LOL
Like: If somethin is obviously nothing, and it develops...dos something develop, or nothing?
If you feel like scratching your butt, and you don't, and suddenly u dont feel like scratching again..why? and..Who scratched?
If you look up to the stars..you kinda look into the past, but..do they, looking at us, see into the future?

weird stuff

quote:

Like: If somethin is obviously nothing, and it develops...dos something develop, or nothing?

I don't get this one if something is nothing, then it is not something but it is nothing and can't develop.

quote:

If you feel like scratching your butt, and you don't, and suddenly u dont feel like scratching again..why? and..Who scratched?

Some damn pervert probably

quote:

If you look up to the stars..you kinda look into the past, but..do they, looking at us, see into the future?

They see the earth as it was in the past also.

There, I hope now that you know all the answers you can sleep well tonight.

Ooooo..... pseudo-philosophy, gotta love it.

quote:

Like: If somethin is obviously nothing, and it develops...dos something develop, or nothing?

Nothing, by definition, isn't something. Nothing cannot be anything, so the phrase "if something is obviously nothing" doesn't make any sense, because you're attributing a state of existence to a condition that doesn't possess any. "Nothing is what is not, and is not what is".

You can't even think about what "nothing" is, because the second you think about "nothing" you make nothing something (as the subject of enquiry) and you are already off the mark. Nothing is merely the totality of what is not and the opposite (negation) of the of the totality of what is. So I hope that helps. :-/

Anyway, my question is: can something be said to exist if no-one has ever encountered it before? (Think about it. )

by encounter...do u mean SEE? or does feel also count? Cause LOVE would be such an example...

and DAMN you for making this a real philosophical thread, not pseudo- anymore

Yes, by encounter I mean "coming into contact with" via any one of our senses.

And sorry if I've made it into a "real" philosophical thread, but if it's psuedo-philosophy you want, we can soon help that:

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

If those "Water and Salt" cookies are made only of water and salt, shouldn't the ocean be a big ass cookie?

Julie! Julieeeeeee, where are you??

they're talking about our nothing!!!

for the US east coasters:
why do we drive on the park way and park on the drive way.

quote:

Originally posted by kirbtastic for the US east coasters: why do we drive on the park way and park on the drive way.

Because the english language is screwed up.

quote:

Originally posted by kirbtastic for the US east coasters: why do we drive on the park way and park on the drive way.

We do that on the West Coast too....

What is the meaning of rain?

Why are we curious?

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter What is the meaning of rain?

Its that wet thing that comes from ths sky and makes plants grow... I think thats what its for...

quote:

Originally posted by Furel Its that wet thing that comes from ths sky and makes plants grow... I think thats what its for...

I don't want its purpose, I want it's meaning.

rain is the ying to the yang called fire

and a one-handed clap does make some noise..its silent though..never really thought that question was inspiring or something. maybe i didnt get its intention?

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Yes, by encounter I mean "coming into contact with" via any one of our senses. And sorry if I've made it into a "real" philosophical thread, but if it's psuedo-philosophy you want, we can soon help that: What is the sound of one hand clapping?

my friend can clap with one hand and it sounds as if he's clapping with both hands.

quote:

Originally posted by XxremedyxX my friend can clap with one hand and it sounds as if he's clapping with both hands.

that's the funniest thing ive read in a while

the stars and looking into the future.. hmm don't think it works.. since its not transmitted back is it?? so they see it.. but they don't recieve it??

wait i just confused myself..


but anyways, as they say,this is not the end. it is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning and finalising the end........^_^

If we see a star that is two billion light years away, then anyone near that star will see our sun as it was 4 billion years ago. If we could see a civilization 3 billion light years away, then they would not be able to see us (as, from their perspective, the Earth would not have formed).

Mind boggling.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade If we see a star that is two billion light years away, then anyone near that star will see our sun as it was 4 billion years ago. If we could see a civilization 3 billion light years away, then they would not be able to see us (as, from their perspective, the Earth would not have formed). Mind boggling.

no if ur looking at a star 2 billion light years away and they are looking back at us at the same time..they will see our sun as 2 billion years ago. and a lot of the stars that we physically see, no longer exist..no thats some shit

Can you walk past a turtle?
Theory says: NO!

lets say you stand 100 meters behind a turtle, both you and the turtle start walking in the same direction at the same time...
now, if you walk ten times as fast as the turtle, when youve reached the first place where the turte were, the turlte will be 10 meters in front of you.
then, when you reached the point where the turtle was when you were at 100 meters, the turtle will be at 1 meter, so on the turtle will be at 10 centimeters, 1 centimeter, 1 millimeter, 0.1 millimeters and so on, the distance just shrinking, but you never walk past the turtle right?

the first one to prove me wrong will get an email with some nice and funny pics =)

quote:

Originally posted by kirbtastic no if ur looking at a star 2 billion light years away and they are looking back at us at the same time..they will see our sun as 2 billion years ago. and a lot of the stars that we physically see, no longer exist..no thats some shit

Define "at the same time".

If we could see a civilization orbiting a star 2 billion light years away, we see their civilization as it would have existed 2 billion years ago from our position (no perfect observer). Thus, the civilization we see (2 billion years old), if they were to look out into our part of the universe where the "light-lag" is still 2 billion years (that is they see 2 billion years into their past) they are seeing our planet as it was 4 billion years ago. If the civilization we see is three billion years old, they wouldn't know that we existed.... they literally couldn't see us because - from their perspective, we haven't come into existence yet.

quote:

Can you walk past a turtle? Theory says: NO! lets say you stand 100 meters behind a turtle, both you and the turtle start walking in the same direction at the same time... now, if you walk ten times as fast as the turtle, when youve reached the first place where the turte were, the turlte will be 10 meters in front of you. then, when you reached the point where the turtle was when you were at 100 meters, the turtle will be at 1 meter, so on the turtle will be at 10 centimeters, 1 centimeter, 1 millimeter, 0.1 millimeters and so on, the distance just shrinking, but you never walk past the turtle right? the first one to prove me wrong will get an email with some nice and funny pics =)

Ah Zeno's Paradoxes, gotta love em.

If we walk 10 times faster than the turtle, and the turtle has a 100m headstart, by the time we walk 100 meters the turtle will only have walked 10:

100m vs 110m

If we walk another 10 meters:

110m vs 111m

If we walk another meter:

111m vs 111.1m

If we walk another 10cm:

111.1m vs 111.11m

And so on. So long as we continue to reduce the size of the distance we move (with a first distance of 100m or less), we will never overtake the turtle. It's like if you pick an object and walk half the distance there, then half of the remaining distance, then half of that distance and so on, you'll never actually reach the object. You get infinitely close, but you won't get there. However, what happens if we take the last distances and increase the distance we move to, say, 1 meter again? Then we are left with:

112.1 vs 111.21

Voila, we've overtaken him.

It can be expressed as the functions:

10x against x+100

If someone wants to plot those we can workout where the guy would actually overtake the turtle (it'll be 111.111111111 rec. I'm guessing). So, when do I get my e-mail?

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Define "at the same time". If we could see a civilization orbiting a star 2 billion light years away, we see their civilization as it would have existed 2 billion years ago from our position (no perfect observer). Thus, the civilization we see (2 billion years old), if they were to look out into our part of the universe where the "light-lag" is still 2 billion years (that is they see 2 billion years into their past) they are seeing our planet as it was 4 billion years ago. If the civilization we see is three billion years old, they wouldn't know that we existed.... they literally couldn't see us because - from their perspective, we haven't come into existence yet. Ah Zeno's Paradoxes, gotta love em. If we walk 10 times faster than the turtle, and the turtle has a 100m headstart, by the time we walk 100 meters the turtle will only have walked 10: 100m vs 110m If we walk another 10 meters: 110m vs 111m If we walk another meter: 111m vs 111.1m If we walk another 10cm: 111.1m vs 111.11m And so on. So long as we continue to reduce the size of the distance we move (with a first distance of 100m or less), we will never overtake the turtle. It's like if you pick an object and walk half the distance there, then half of the remaining distance, then half of that distance and so on, you'll never actually reach the object. You get infinitely close, but you won't get there. However, what happens if we take the last distances and increase the distance we move to, say, 1 meter again? Then we are left with: 112.1 vs 111.21 Voila, we've overtaken him. It can be expressed as the functions: 10x against x+100 If someone wants to plot those we can workout where the guy would actually overtake the turtle (it'll be 111.111111111 rec. I'm guessing). So, when do I get my e-mail?

okay, i confess myself defeated... just PM me with your mail adress and i shall send it right away!

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Define "at the same time". If we could see a civilization orbiting a star 2 billion light years away, we see their civilization as it would have existed 2 billion years ago from our position (no perfect observer). Thus, the civilization we see (2 billion years old), if they were to look out into our part of the universe where the "light-lag" is still 2 billion years (that is they see 2 billion years into their past) they are seeing our planet as it was 4 billion years ago. If the civilization we see is three billion years old, they wouldn't know that we existed.... they literally couldn't see us because - from their perspective, we haven't come into existence yet.

after readin it 8 times i still dont get it. their time- position, our time-position, why's that relevant? There are two oranges and a line connecting them. Orange A sees orange B like orange B sees orange A. A 2 billion year lag is a 2 billion year lag, so if we see them with delay x, why's their delay 2x ? Why does it add up?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.