Re: A finite universe?
- From: RadicalLibertarian@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 8 Feb 2006 06:02:08 -0800
You said -
--------------------
The Universe is the Universe and observability is observability.
*The* Universe is not simultaneously finite and infinite. (Not in a
single parameter.)
--------------------
If only part of the universe is observable to us, then percieved
existence becomes all that nature will allow us to observe. So,
universe is finite. But there is more of it beyond the limitations of
our ability to observe, and may very well be infinite. So, it's both.
My only sin here is mixing nonexistence and existence into the same
usage and calling the resulting compound a "universe". It may very well
be considered differently.
Now, coming from a completely different angle.......
There are 2 rocks on a table. Do you consider this to be 2 individual
systems with 1 rock each, or is it a single system of 2 rocks ? Does it
matter ? Are these ways of observing equivalent ? Are they equal ?
If truth is subdivided into subtruths, are the subtruths still truths
if they are considered in isolation from the totality of all truth ? I
think that there is something "missing" from each of the subtruths, and
the missing thing is the connection to the rest of truth.
As soon as you isolate a truth and look at is as being independent or
detatched from the rest of the universe, it becomes untrue in a way.
.
- References:
- A finite universe?
- From: boanerges35
- Re: A finite universe?
- From: RadicalLibertarian
- Re: A finite universe?
- From: Mark Martin
- Re: A finite universe?
- From: RadicalLibertarian
- Re: A finite universe?
- From: Mark Martin
- Re: A finite universe?
- From: RadicalLibertarian
- A finite universe?
- Prev by Date: Re: Elementary question 1: Entanglement.
- Next by Date: Re: Electrons in the universe
- Previous by thread: Re: A finite universe?
- Next by thread: Space Tourism News Community
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|