Re: GOD=G_uv A MESSAGE TO "Max"

From: ZenIsWhen (ZenIsWhen_at_anywhere.com)
Date: 08/16/04 

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:30:23 -0400

"Scot McDermid" <scotmc@optNOSPAMonline.net> wrote in message
news:rdVTc.367$vc4.154343@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
>
> "George Hammond" <research137@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1gUTc.131845$8_6.45397@attbi_s04...
>
> Alan asked:
> > > But actual physical reality exists without this image. I fully expect
> > > actual physical reality to exist even after we're all dead. Don't you?
> >
> > [Hammond]
> > Contrary to your expectations, the ANSWER IS NO !!!
> > The World would not exist if we were all dead!
>
> Aha! Well that actually ties a lot of your theory together.
> What you are saying might actually be internally consistent.
> Internally consistent but based on that false premise.
>
> Existence is not subjective. Existence is objective.
> Now I'm sure I won't be able to prove that to you.
>
> > First, let me say I am exceedingly grateful to have your focused
> > attention on this CRUCIAL issue.
>
> Yes... it is crucial. Your whole theory rests on it.
>
> > The fact is
> > that the world "exists" actually means:
> >
> > "exists" = "is existing" = "is observable by a human being"
>
> Yes "is *observable*" but when there is no human present
> to observe it, would you say that it continues to exist?
> Would you say it (pick an object) blip in and out of existence?
>
> > The reason for this is that Science CANNOT define "mass, length and
> > time" EXCEPT by reason of human "intuition". There IS NO
> > definition of "mass, length and time" other than the process of holding
> > up a brass cylinder of "mass" and a platinum rod of "length" and asking
> > for a "majority vote
> > of intuitive opinion" as to whether these represent EXAMPLES of
> > what is commonly "opined" to be "mass, length and time". Any physicist
> > will confirm this.
>
> Yes.. I'll actually agree. Without human to define mass, length
> and time, then these concepts would not exist.
>
> > The concept and "definition" of "mass, length and time"
> > is SOLELY BASED on the existence of a HUMAN PERCEPTUAL
> > INSTINCT. They have no "existence" apart from the perceptual
> > system of a human being!
>
> I'll agree.
>
> > Ergo.... if all human beings die tomorrow, MASS, LENGTH AND TIME
> > die with them!!!!!
>
> Yes. I agree.
>
> > The "universe" and "reality itself" dies with them.
>
> No, wrong. That does not necessarily follow.
> Human conceptions would die. That brass
> cylinder of "mass" and platinum rod of "length"
> you mentioned above would continue to exist.
> There would simply be no one there to know
> the significance of those objects.

You're being sane, rational, reasonable, logical and even civil.
Sadly, that will all be lost on Hammond!

Relevant Pages