TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Cant figure out why we hate the middle east...
Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 20:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
a hypothetical with contradictory premises contradicts itself, necessitating no argument.


Explain how its contradictory. Because it sounds like you dont know what youre talking about.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 20:53:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Now im sure you have a doctorate in particle physics, but I wouldnt say that a higher dimensional entity would necessarily contradict the existence of a lower one. Unless you understand the other dimensions a lot more than I do??????


iirc, the heisenberg uncertainty principle states that a quantum particle's velocity and position can not be accurately measured, measuring one to absolute accuracy makes it impossible to measure the other, leading to one of the three options i suggested.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 20:55:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Explain how its contradictory. Because it sounds like you dont know what youre talking about.


the heisenberg uncertainty principle states A is true
your hypothetical tells of a god who can invalidate A


Posted by MrJiveBoJingles on Apr-17-2007 20:55:

"A being that can predict everything" + "particles whose behavior cannot be predicted."

Does not compute. It's like the old one about God creating a rock too heavy for him to lift.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 20:57:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
iirc, the heisenberg uncertainty principle states that a quantum particle's velocity and position can not be accurately measured, measuring one to absolute accuracy makes it impossible to measure the other, leading to one of the three options i suggested.


Thats like saying that photosynthesis might use quantum particle effects to convert sunlight so one of these three options can be assume from that:

Earth is actually a microwave
God wants plants to love light
Einstein was an idiot.

Unless you explain the connection between Heisenbergs theory and the conclusions you reach, I see no reason to believe any of them are valid claims.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 20:58:

quote:
Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
"A being that can predict everything" + "particles whose behavior cannot be predicted."

Does not compute. It's like the old one about God creating a rock too heavy for him to lift.


i said all present and all observing. I didnt say able to see the future @@


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:01:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
i said all present and all observing. I didnt say able to see the future @@


allow me to ammend mrjive's point: "A being that is all present and all observing" + "particles whose behavior cannot be observed with absolute accuracy." does not compute.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Thats like saying that photosynthesis might use quantum particle effects to convert sunlight so one of these three options can be assume from that:

Earth is actually a microwave
God wants plants to love light
Einstein was an idiot.

Unless you explain the connection between Heisenbergs theory and the conclusions you reach, I see no reason to believe any of them are valid claims.


i'm not sure it can be stated any plainer, by saying you don't see the connection you're showing you lack basic knowledge/understanding of quantum physics.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
allow me to ammend mrjive's point: "A being that is all present and all observing" + "particles whose behavior cannot be observed with absolute accuracy." does not compute.


I never said he could observe them accurately.

Read the words I used

All present, all observing.

Not all precise, all accurate, and psychic

Plus that is for 3Dimensional objects measuring. I dont believe Heisenberg envisioned a 4th+dimensional object disrupting quantum particles.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
i'm not sure it can be stated any plainer, by saying you don't see the connection you're showing you lack basic knowledge/understanding of quantum physics.


lol like you have any idea.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:08:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
I never said he could observe them accurately.

Read the words I used

All present, all observing.

Not all precise, all accurate, and psychic


in which case god's practice of observing means absolutely dick regarding the HUP.

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Plus that is for 3Dimensional objects measuring. I dont believe Heisenberg envisioned a 4th+dimensional object disrupting quantum particles.


does my practice of observing a 2-dimensional image disrupt it? if so, how?


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:11:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
lol like you have any idea.


as exemplified in this thread, i do. thanks for noting the obvious, even if sarcastically so, further digging your own hole.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:13:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
as exemplified in this thread, i do. thanks for noting the obvious, even if sarcastically so, further digging your own hole.


Yeah, im caught in the crushing grip of your philosophy bullshit


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:19:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Yeah, im caught in the crushing grip of your philosophy bullshit


i love how you do that, when you're faced with an argument you don't understand, and you call it philosophy bullshit - it's so cute!


Posted by Nrg2Nfinit on Apr-17-2007 21:21:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
i love how you do that, when you're faced with an argument you don't understand, and you call it philosophy bullshit - it's so cute!


now picture him with some fake tits and butt implant..


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:27:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
i love how you do that, when you're faced with an argument you don't understand, and you call it philosophy bullshit - it's so cute!


No, you decided to be a douche and not try to have an interesting discussion

And philosophy majors have a problem with that which is why I called it philosophy bullshit.

Ill rephrase it : Your sophistry bullshit.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:32:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
No, you decided to be a douche and not try to have an interesting discussion


that's one interpretation, another is that you're too dense to realize it's not a particularily interesting hypothetical, and one which is easily settled.

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
And philosophy majors have a problem with that which is why I called it philosophy bullshit.

Ill rephrase it : Your sophistry bullshit.


except i'm not a philosophy major, or any major for that matter. and if it was truly a sophism, kindly show how so.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:37:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
that's one interpretation, another is that you're too dense to realize it's not a particularily interesting hypothetical


I didnt know extra-dimensional being affecting the very fabric of our universe was such a tired old horse for you.

and saying "Youre too stupid to understand my brilliance" is a cop-out especially coming from you. If you cant explain it in a way that makes sense to other people, its usually your fault. You dont know enough about all this to only be understood by PHDs in quantum mechanics.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
I didnt know extra-dimensional being affecting the very fabric of our universe was such a tired old horse for you.


yeah, about that extra-dimensional part... it didn't appear in your hypothetical. regardless, you haven't answered the counter-question.

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
and saying "Youre too stupid to understand my brilliance" is a cop-out especially coming from you. If you cant explain it in a way that makes sense to other people, its usually your fault. You dont know enough about all this to only be understood by PHDs in quantum mechanics.


i'm not saying you're too stupid to understand my brilliance, i'm saying you're too stupid to understand basic quantum mechanics theory (to use your words and the antagonising stance i've adopted). lastly, unless mrjivebojingles possesses a PHD in quantum mechanics, your final claim is invalid.

p.s. what makes you think you know the extent of my knowledge?


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:52:

"i'm saying you're too stupid to understand _____"

I guess that ends this conversation.


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 21:55:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
"i'm saying you're too stupid to understand _____"

I guess that ends this conversation.


is that an acknowledgement of the truth value of the statement? or just a bruised ego?


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 21:56:

If thats your stance, youre not worth talking to.


Posted by ZeJayMan on Apr-17-2007 22:02:

Theres no way in justifying hating the entire middle east over this incident.


Oh Here's why why we should hate America





http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-04/17/content_5989208.htm


Come on now. Boring....


Posted by Psy-T on Apr-17-2007 22:06:

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
If thats your stance, youre not worth talking to.


hmm?

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Because it sounds like you dont know what youre talking about.

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
lol like you have any idea.

quote:
Originally posted by Orbax
Ill rephrase it : Your sophistry bullshit.


mmhmm. practice what you preach rev.


Posted by Orbax on Apr-17-2007 22:12:

quote:
Originally posted by Psy-T
hmm?





mmhmm. practice what you preach rev.


I was being specific to the topic of quantum physics whereas you were generalizing my intelligence and capacity to understand. rev.


Pages (8): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »

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