Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:34 pm**

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:23 pm You're not even able to understand that you're not able to understand.

Fuuuuuuuck! You are so enlightened!

I thought it was just the sun shining out of your ass, but now I see that I was mistaken.

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:45 pm**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:34 pm
Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:23 pm You're not even able to understand that you're not able to understand.
Fuuuuuuuck! You are so enlightened!

I thought it was just the sun shining out of your ass, but now I see that I was mistaken.

You can't even trash talk right, I saw you edit this comment like 5 times. Make up your mind

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:55 pm**

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:45 pm You can't even trash talk right, I saw you edit this comment like 5 times. Make up your mind

5 TIMES? It's impossible.

The universe is timeless.

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 1:31 pm**

A timeless Universe would be the same as a static one but that cannot be true of this one as it is in constant motion
Whereas in a timeless Universe there would be no motion or entropy for everything would literally be frozen in time

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:09 pm**

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 1:31 pm A timeless Universe would be the same as a static one but that cannot be true of this one as it is in constant motion
Whereas in a timeless Universe there would be no motion or entropy for everything would literally be frozen in time

It really baffles me how people who only understand "time" in only one sense can waltz onto a philosophy forum.

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:21 pm**

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:09 pm It really baffles me how people who only understand "time" in only one sense can waltz onto a philosophy forum.

It's because the time-deity only talks to you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revelation

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:25 pm**

Atla wrote:
It really baffles me how people who only understand time in only one sense can waltz onto a philosophy forum

The concept of timelessness is not one that can be easily understood
Just because you understand it does not mean everyone else can too

I have zero problem with it as a concept but just cannot see how it applies to empirical reality
The only things that are known not to experience time are massless particles and nothing else

Maybe I am a hundred years behind you in my thinking as you suggest but there is not much I can do about that if it is actually true
I do accept however that most scientific knowledge is provisional outside of falsification so maybe time is not what it appears to be

Posted: **Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:40 pm**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:21 pm
Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 2:09 pm It really baffles me how people who only understand "time" in only one sense can waltz onto a philosophy forum.
It's because the time-deity only talks to you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revelation

Here, have a cookie

Posted: **Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:30 am**

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:05 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 11:59 am Frequencjes...they absorb frequencies...all is composed of waves.

Tell me what the eyes do not see if they do not see forms?
So? Waves aren't forms. Besides the world isn't composed of waves but an infinite variety of wavicles.

My eyes see a continuous world btw.
Geez my ass, dont ignore it. You said some not all, so time does exist.
Again: in the illusory sense yes, but all that behaviour is also subject to fundamental timelessness. Come back when you understand.

Wavicles...but not waves...okay the western world is fucked, now I know why everyone hates philosophers...

We are all fucked.

Posted: **Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:33 am**

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 1:31 pm A timeless Universe would be the same as a static one but that cannot be true of this one as it is in constant motion
Whereas in a timeless Universe there would be no motion or entropy for everything would literally be frozen in time

Time is the ratio of one static state to another. It is an approximation of one infinite movement (as no movement) through multiple states.

It would be equivalent to saying there is only one infinite line but we see it through multiple lines as ratios of the one line. Each line is still an line, and infinite, but it is an approximation of the one.

Posted: **Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:35 am**

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:17 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:04 pm Particles come in and out of vacuum according to modern physics. Void projecting itself is no longer void, void "voids" itself effectively.

Nothing projected is no longer nothing.
Lol that kind of vacuum is NOT a void, it's simply some kind of field we can't access directly/fully.

void "voids" itself effectively

And so does vacuum if you cannot access it. Void is only observed through multiple states, it is not a thing in itself but rather an observation of multiplicity.

Nothing projected is no longer nothing.

Ahh I can't take it anymore. In this thread you threw like 10-15 rather severe thinking errors at me, and 1 would already be too many.
I think I had my entertainment for now.

Philosophy Now Forum

1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity

Re: 1 = 0 = infinity