Philosophy Now Forum

Atla wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 5:58 pm

Noax wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 1:35 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Wed Nov 20, 2024 5:24 am Well, no. The cyclic model isn't finite in time, it's infinite.

Yours is, is it not? You said time was circular, and a circle has finite circumference, but it has no bound.

Yes it's finite. It's like the eternal return but with only one "cycle". And all change is ultimately an everyday illusion, change doesn't exist fundamentally.

WOW, 'this' really is getting more 'random' and more 'nonsensical', now.

There is no antigravity, so if you invent it, you get to say the rules. Dark energy is the same density everywhere and does not increase with dis7tance, especially since distance is something that needs to be relative to something which violates the principle of there not being a preferred location in space.

Yes I meant relative distance between objects. But I guess you're right, in this case dark energy shouldn't be constant, it should have been weaker in the past because objects were closer to each other. (unless whatever, again too nebulous)
[/quote]

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2024 4:53 am

Noax wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2024 4:49 am

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2024 3:09 am When not just space but also time are circular, then "change over time" is like the difference between your two eyes right now.

Non sequitur

And identity is a meaningless concept.

If that were true, the court systems would not be able to function. Society would not be able to function.

But I'm not talking about pragmatic identity or pragmatic change here, everyday conventions, when I'm talking about how the universe fundamentally works.

LOL What this one is talking about is how it imagines things would 'work' in its own made up universe. Which as 'we' all here KNOW is a complete IMPOSSIBILITY.

AGAIN, the irrefutable Truth about the Universe and how It actually, fundamentally, works is far simpler