Infinte Regress Timeline...

[Kharakov]

What I expressed in the statement is that at some level, the symbols and what they express could be the same.

Still doesnt compute.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2f-MZ2HRHQ[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Kharakov]

Nature doesn't add anything. Nature is everything in the universe. Nothing is added in nature. Things change, that is all.

Nope. Things behave according to their mass. Since masses can be added together or divided into smaller amounts (rock split in 2), you have things behaving according to very simple rules (in some cases).

Then again, maybe the whole thing is BS, and someone is pulling the leg of physicists.

 

[untermensche]

Nature doesn't add anything. Nature is everything in the universe. Nothing is added in nature. Things change, that is all.

Nope. Things behave according to their mass. Since masses can be added together or divided into smaller amounts (rock split in 2), you have things behaving according to very simple rules (in some cases).

Then again, maybe the whole thing is BS, and someone is pulling the leg of physicists.

It is only a human that measures masses.

The universe doesn't take any measurements. It just moves according to its nature.

The individual measurements that interest humans have no value to the universe. Nothing has value to the universe. It just is.

You confuse the activities of humans with activities that don't exist in the universe. Activities like taking measurements and wondering about amounts of things.

 

[ryan]

Yes, and the real equations are the ones in nature, not the ones written on paper. We can write 2 kg + 3 kg = 7 kg, but nature would only follow the correct equation.

It seems like mathematics follows the laws of nature and not the other way around.

There are no such thing as numbers in nature. There is no 2.

Are you saying that humans are not of nature? Is the number 2 outside of the realm of nature? Is it supernatural?

 

[Kharakov]

The universe doesn't take any measurements. It just moves according to its nature.

Umm, are you unaware that an object of mass M has an effect upon other objects due to its mass?

 

[untermensche]

Are you saying that humans are not of nature? Is the number 2 outside of the realm of nature? Is it supernatural?

It depends how we define "nature".

If we define everything humans invent as a part of "nature" then we can say that televisions naturally occur.

But if we separate human planning and human invention from the actions of "nature", then televisions are not naturally occurring. They arise through planned activity, not through natural changes.

You won't see televisions unless you have something like human planning and invention.

And you won't see the number 2 either. The number 2 isn't something that occurs apart from human planning and invention.

 

[untermensche]

The universe doesn't take any measurements. It just moves according to its nature.

Umm, are you unaware that an object of mass M has an effect upon other objects due to its mass?

There is effect but there are no calculations.

Things with mass don't continually make calculations as they fall to the earth. They just do it.

 

[ryan]

Are you saying that humans are not of nature? Is the number 2 outside of the realm of nature? Is it supernatural?

It depends how we define "nature".

If we define everything humans invent as a part of "nature" then we can say that televisions naturally occur.

But if we separate human planning and human invention from the actions of "nature", then televisions are not naturally occurring. They arise through planned activity, not through natural changes.

You won't see televisions unless you have something like human planning and invention.

And you won't see the number 2 either. The number 2 isn't something that occurs apart from human planning and invention.

If humans never existed on Earth, would the formula unit for water still have 2 hydrogen atoms?

 

[Kharakov]

Umm, are you unaware that an object of mass M has an effect upon other objects due to its mass?

There is effect but there are no calculations.

Things with mass don't continually make calculations as they fall to the earth. They just do it.

Yeah, so the most basic behaviors in the universe follow the axioms of arithmetic- it's an Occam's Razor type of deal: the simplest behaviors are described by the most basic language: math.

 

[untermensche]

It depends how we define "nature".

If we define everything humans invent as a part of "nature" then we can say that televisions naturally occur.

But if we separate human planning and human invention from the actions of "nature", then televisions are not naturally occurring. They arise through planned activity, not through natural changes.

You won't see televisions unless you have something like human planning and invention.

And you won't see the number 2 either. The number 2 isn't something that occurs apart from human planning and invention.

If humans never existed on Earth, would the formula unit for water still have 2 hydrogen atoms?

It is only a convention to say that water is one oxygen and two hydrogens, but the reality is that water is in a state of constant change with ions of OH - and H3O + and other ions forming continually.

So reality doesn't say there are 2 hydrogen atoms.

- - - Updated - - -

There is effect but there are no calculations.

Things with mass don't continually make calculations as they fall to the earth. They just do it.

Yeah, so the most basic behaviors in the universe follow the axioms of arithmetic- it's an Occam's Razor type of deal: the simplest behaviors are described by the most basic language: math.

No. Humans use formula's to model the behavior of the universe.

The universe uses no formulas. It doesn't need to, nor does it have any way to use formulas.

 

[ryan]

If humans never existed on Earth, would the formula unit for water still have 2 hydrogen atoms?

It is only a convention to say that water is one oxygen and two hydrogens, but the reality is that water is in a state of constant change with ions of OH - and H3O + and other ions forming continually.

So reality doesn't say there are 2 hydrogen atoms.

Interesting, I did not know that.

Let me try again. If humans never existed, would the Earth have 2 geographic poles?

 

[Juma]

It is only a convention to say that water is one oxygen and two hydrogens, but the reality is that water is in a state of constant change with ions of OH - and H3O + and other ions forming continually.

So reality doesn't say there are 2 hydrogen atoms.

Interesting, I did not know that.

Let me try again. If humans never existed, would the Earth have 2 geographic poles?

The structure that you models by using the number 2 would still be there. The number 2 would not.

 

[another1]

288 pages and you've ground it down to the number two. Bingo, you explained why nothing occurs at any moment in any rationally explained way. My definitive explanation for everything is the number two now. Thank you for ironing out this phenomenon occurring, but not because of two. The object at the end of time is 2 because 1 let 7 eat 9 during the now not, yet isn't is occurring past back when 0 seemed such an elegantly drawn shape. Can you exclude numbers for the less intelligent among you? Numbers are hard. Don't do numbers anymore, they are all false and stupid. Imagination is more important than numbers and it creates numbers as evil little decoys. Don't make people go down that road please. Do you feel me?

 

[untermensche]

It is only a convention to say that water is one oxygen and two hydrogens, but the reality is that water is in a state of constant change with ions of OH - and H3O + and other ions forming continually.

So reality doesn't say there are 2 hydrogen atoms.

Interesting, I did not know that.

Let me try again. If humans never existed, would the Earth have 2 geographic poles?

The poles are two distinct, yet similar things.

It is only the mind of humans that abstracts two distinct things and calls them the same thing.

It is an abstraction, like saying you have two apples. You ignore all the things about the apples that are different and only focus on the similarities.

Only a human can think they have two apples. To nature that doesn't abstract, you have one apple with a certain size shape and color and you have another apple with a slightly different size shape and color. They are distinct, yet similar entities.

 

[ryan]

Interesting, I did not know that.

Let me try again. If humans never existed, would the Earth have 2 geographic poles?

The structure that you models by using the number 2 would still be there. The number 2 would not.

So then what is the number 2?

 

[ryan]

Interesting, I did not know that.

Let me try again. If humans never existed, would the Earth have 2 geographic poles?

The poles are two distinct, yet similar things.

It is only the mind of humans that abstracts two distinct things and calls them the same thing.

It is an abstraction, like saying you have two apples. You ignore all the things about the apples that are different and only focus on the similarities.

Only a human can think they have two apples. To nature that doesn't abstract, you have one apple with a certain size shape and color and you have another apple with a slightly different size shape and color. They are distinct, yet similar entities.

But I can say that there are 2 different things. As far as differences can go with a limited variety in the universe, there doesn't need to be similarities.

 

[untermensche]

But I can say that there are 2 different things. As far as differences can go with a limited variety in the universe, there doesn't need to be similarities.

All things are different. No two things are exactly alike.

It is only a human mind, or more broadly, an animal mind, that can erase this fact and only look at similarities.

 

[ryan]

But I can say that there are 2 different things. As far as differences can go with a limited variety in the universe, there doesn't need to be similarities.

All things are different. No two things are exactly alike.

I can't possibly trust that you know this.

It is only a human mind, or more broadly, an animal mind, that can erase this fact and only look at similarities.

I was trying to say that there can still be 2 things even though they are different.

 

[untermensche]

All things are different. No two things are exactly alike.

I can't possibly trust that you know this.

I don't have to go that far.

The number two was invented before people knew that all things were made up of the same thing (atoms, particles).

I could ask, what two things were known to be the exact same thing when the number two was invented?

It is only a human mind, or more broadly, an animal mind, that can erase this fact and only look at similarities.

I was trying to say that there can still be 2 things even though they are different.

Calling two distinct and different things "2 things" is to isolate them from all else that exists.

That is something a human can do, but the universe does not make these arbitrary groupings.

 

[ryan]

I can't possibly trust that you know this.

The number two was invented before people knew that all things were made up of the same thing (atoms, particles).

You said, "All things are different. No two things are exactly alike", and then you post this. What is going on here?

It is only a human mind, or more broadly, an animal mind, that can erase this fact and only look at similarities.

I was trying to say that there can still be 2 things even though they are different.

Calling two distinct and different things "2 things" is to isolate them from all else that exists.

That is something a human can do, but the universe does not make these arbitrary groupings.

But we are in the universe, so the universe is capable of doing whatever a human can do.