Re: Please help me with the verification of this law

In article <1178832390.950288.58090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
The_Man <me_so_horneeeee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 10, 1:49 pm, Mitchell Jones <mjo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1178792153.001855.204...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

rAgAv <ragav.pa...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Law--"Every physical, observable effect has a physical, observable
cause preceding it and the cause and effect are related by the laws of
interaction of physics"

is this law correct? Is there any proof? Has this law been published?
Can somebody disprove this?

Regards
--
rAgAv

***{The nature of a thing lies in the sum and arrangement of its parts.
Every thing that exists and every phenomenon that occurs has a
recipe--an exclusive list of things which, if assembled in a particular
way by nature or by man, will produce that thing or phenomenon. The
thing or phenomenon is the effect, and the act of assembly (bringing
together in the required way those specific components and no others) is
the cause. Hence we can say that everything that happens has its cause.
Observers are irrelevant, except in cases where they are elements of the
effect or the cause.

The proof of the law of causality, that everything which happens has its
cause, lies in the principle of continuity, that no thing may come into
existence out of nothing or vanish into nothing.

But this is patently false. Photons come into existence, and vanish
into nothing all the time. Particle / anti-particle pairs come into
existence out of a "vacuum".

***{The fact that you placed "vacuum" in quotes, above, suggests that
you do not even believe your own statement--which means: you are
perfectly aware that supposedly "empty space" is not empty at all, and,
in fact, is filled with a medium having mass and containing enormous
amounts of energy. Hence there is in fact no evidence whatsoever that
any of the particles in question appear out of nothing or vanish into
nothing.

Even worse, it is trivial to demonstrate, via a simple reductio ad
absurdum, that the principle of continuity is true--i.e., that it is
literally impossible for things to come into existence out of nothing or
vanish into nothing.

If, for example, you assume that it is possible for things to come into
existence out of nothing, then your sensations might be doing
that--which means: you would have no basis for the inference from
sensation to source--which means: you would have no basis for inferring
the existence of the external world, including your arms, legs, torso,
internal organs, or anything external to your own mind, including the
laughable textbooks that teach irrationalist physics, and the stupid
professors who write them.

Likewise, if you assume that things can vanish into nothing, then your
sensations might be doing that--which means: you would have no basis for
concluding that your self, mind, or whatever you call the thing that
looks out through your particular window on the world, even exists.

Therefore if the principle of continuity is false, then you have no
basis for believing in the existence of anything, including yourself,
the external world, science, Heisenberg, "virtual particles,"
"electron-positron pairs," "quantum mechanics," "relativity," or any
other damn stupid thing from the zoo of irrationalist physics.

Since the assumption that the principle of continuity is false leads to
utter absurdity--to wit: the collapse of the entire structure of human
knowledge--it follows that the principle of continuity must be true.
Q.E.D.

--Mitchell Jones}***

[snip]

*****************************************************************
If I seem to be ignoring you, consider the possibility
that you are in my killfile. --MJ
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: attractive force via particle exchange - how?
    ... >> pathways through space and exert force by contact. ... >> have no basis for belief in the existence of anything, ... > that there is a correspondence principle that makes one nature/behavior ... validity of the principle of continuity, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: attractive force via particle exchange - how?
    ... >>> have no basis for belief in the existence of anything, ... A wave, for example, by definition follows not one continuous ... >> that there is a correspondence principle that makes one nature/behavior ... > of the principle of continuity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Please help me with the verification of this law
    ... interaction of physics" ... cause, lies in the principle of continuity, that no thing may come into ... existence out of nothing or vanish into nothing. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Useful ASCII Codes
    ... data that contradicts the experimental evidence that expanding fusible ... meta-metalanguage, recursively, ad infinitum, in principle. ... subject of your inconsistent thinking? ... existence, or non-existence, of a transcendent beingness. ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Re: Please help me with the verification of this law
    ... that such discussions require them to question premises that are so ... he proceeds under the assumption that no thing can come into existence ... out of nothing or vanish into nothing, ... the sensations as indications of things external to his consciousness. ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast