Fallacies

[SoylentGreen]

Because it's infinite?



Relativistic mass? You mean it will only appear to infinitely increase?

you got it.

If it really did happen that the mass itself increased, then it would either be the largest black hole in existence, or the mass would be infinitely big and there would be no space.

relative mass refers to the mass of kinetic energy required to move mass at that speed. an object will increase speed as more energy is applied to moving it. an infinite amount of energy is required to move an object at infinite speed.

[PlatoNot]

The idea of infinity exists, and is not mathematically incorrect. That is not the same as saying anything observed in nature is infinite.

The cause and effect model reveals something always existed. It is unrefutable. If something did always exist then it has existed for an infinite amout of time.

It is not by chance that God said, "I AM." We are temporal creatures and hence view everything with respect to time. Even my explanation of something always existing is not correct actually. It should be something is. That, however, introduces more difficulty into the argument since we, as temporal creatures, do not really understand something is.

A light beam does not experience time as we know it. It only knows the present. Which is a terrible statement, since it implies a light beam, a photon, can know anything. In any case, a wave of light exists outside of time as we know it.

I don't know exactly what you are trying to say here. Light has a speed. light can be deflected. Einstein defined time as existing only where one object is moving with respect to another object in space.

There are a ton of physicists, most of them, in fact, who would dispute your last couple of statements.

I understand that perfectly. I do wonder, however, if they dispute it while recognizing the cause and effect conclusion.

Which is not to say you are wrong, only that you are treading on shaky ground.

I understand that also. Sometimes I refuse to even contemplate what a timeless entity is all about and what effect that has on us. I am so time based it is truly difficult to think in these realms.

The Bible does say that, "Time shall be no more." Maybe we will understand then.

[PlatoNot]

And it is the kind of thinking one might expect from a child.

Insults will not cover your inability to understand.

So follow the logic then. Everything has a cause and effect except for one thing. Because you say so?

No, because its logically conclusive. How long do you have to say, "A caused B. Where did B come from? C caused B. Where did C come from?" before you realize you are entering an endless regression and come to the conclusion something down there in the regression didn't come from anything? That's absolutely logical. Its also logical that the something had to always exist.

It's not logic at all. it is a leap of logic based on some dubious assumption.

What is the assumption?

How did you get from someone having a father to no father at all. What were the steps of reason used?

A was the father of B. Who was the father of A? C was the father of A. Who was the father of C? D was the father of C. Who was.... Wait a minute, I see where this is headed and it is headed on forever unless someone did not have a father but has existed forever. (something that has existed forever has no cause, or father)

[SoylentGreen]

Insults will not cover your inability to understand.

Nor does the reasoning of a child be necessarily sound.

No, because its logically conclusive. How long do you have to say, "A caused B. Where did B come from? C caused B. Where did C come from?" before you realize you are entering an endless regression and come to the conclusion something down there in the regression didn't come from anything? That's absolutely logical. Its also logical that the something had to always exist.


What is the assumption?


A was the father of B. Who was the father of A? C was the father of A. Who was the father of C? D was the father of C. Who was.... Wait a minute, I see where this is headed and it is headed on forever unless someone did not have a father but has existed forever. (something that has existed forever has no cause, or father)

Logic requires that each step follow on from the next. So A follows b, follows C follows D etc. But then for no reason at all you decide you have had enough following the steps and decide it's time to stop.

But you give no reason other than an arbitrary decision that infinity is impossible. You make an assumption that infinity cannot exist. why?

[PlatoNot]

Nor does the reasoning of a child be necessarily sound.

Logic requires that each step follow on from the next. So A follows b, follows C follows D etc. But then for no reason at all you decide you have had enough following the steps and decide it's time to stop.

Its because anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see its an endless regression which is impossible. Having come to that very simple understanding, one has only to ask, what is possible. In most heads, a light comes on and the individual says someone didn't have a father. That being the case that someone has no beginning or always existed. Get it?

But you give no reason other than an arbitrary decision that infinity is impossible. You make an assumption that infinity cannot exist. why?

I didn't say anything about infinity being impossible. You are confusing me with other posters.

[SoylentGreen]

Its because anyone with a modicum of intelligence

Sorry, can you explain to me again the bit about why you don't like being insulted?

can see its an endless regression which is impossible. Having come to that very simple understanding, one has only to ask, what is possible. In most heads, a light comes on and the individual says someone didn't have a father. That being the case that someone has no beginning or always existed. Get it?

Well no, the light did not come on for me. Once started down the road of A follows B follows C follows D , etc, there is no stopping.
Here's an example ,, tell me that last number in pi.

I didn't say anything about infinity being impossible. You are confusing me with other posters.

Ok that was me making a guess as to why you stopped counting fathers.
You still need a reason besides you couldn't be bothered counting any more.
that's another guess FYI.

[Thanatos]

Well no, the light did not come on for me. Once started down the road of A follows B follows C follows D , etc, there is no stopping.
Here's an example ,, tell me that last number in pi.

Four. God told me so.

I'll articulate the opposing views here.

In our ordinary experience the infinite does not exist. Never mind what they believe they're arguing: infinity is not allowed.

You can have something with a very long history. A photon is a packet of energy that oscillates back and forth between an electrical and a magnetic field. If you counted how many times a photon in starlight had oscillated to reach you the answer would be... long. However there was ultimately a first cause for that photon; some star somewhere emitted it.

Soylent is positing a list of causes for life as we know it that's truly infinite. The history of an infinitely old photon would not merely result in a number that's larger than the largest number you can count to but truly infinite. This mathematical distinction often gets lost. If you allow for infinities and put first cause at infinity then yes that works.

As I do not believe in infinities as real physical things I personally side with PlatoNot regardless of what I think of some of the other arguments I see.

[SoylentGreen]

Four. God told me so.

I'll articulate the opposing views here.

In our ordinary experience the infinite does not exist. Never mind what they believe they're arguing: infinity is not allowed.

You can have something with a very long history. A photon is a packet of energy that oscillates back and forth between an electrical and a magnetic field. If you counted how many times a photon in starlight had oscillated to reach you the answer would be... long. However there was ultimately a first cause for that photon; some star somewhere emitted it.

Soylent is positing a list of causes for life as we know it that's truly infinite. The history of an infinitely old photon would not merely result in a number that's larger than the largest number you can count to but truly infinite. This mathematical distinction often gets lost. If you allow for infinities and put first cause at infinity then yes that works.

As I do not believe in infinities as real physical things I personally side with PlatoNot regardless of what I think of some of the other arguments I see.

For me the question is not whether infinite can happen, but that once started on the track of an infinite chain , what is the logical stopping point. Platonot has yet to present one. even though she is quite confident she has one.

[Kuldeep]

Are we really continue discussing fallacies??

To be fallacies are noticiable, un-noticiable, intentional, un-intential errors but not so apparent and obvious. Many a times such errors get away un-noticed.

[PlatoNot]

Well no, the light did not come on for me. Once started down the road of A follows B follows C follows D , etc, there is no stopping.
Here's an example ,, tell me that last number in pi.

That's not an example. That's a mathematical certainty because the sequence of numbers for pi keep repeating.

Aristotle came to the conclusion there had to be a "Prime Mover" because he say movment in the universe. His conclusion came about the same way, and endless regression hence the "Prime Mover" who was not moved but begain the movement.
Cosmological argument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't think you get this because you don't want to get it.

[Jinei]

That's not an example. That's a mathematical certainty because the sequence of numbers for pi keep repeating.

Pi actually never repeats. It goes on forever without repeating at all. The point here is that you can't take the easy way out of an infinite series and say, "well pi must equal exactly 3.14," because you could always calculate the next few decimal places (MathWorld - Irrational Numbers). Similarly, you can't just supply a Prime Mover to end an infinite regress because you could always claim that something "moved" the mover.

[PlatoNot]

Pi actually never repeats. It goes on forever without repeating at all.

3.142857142857142857142857142857...
Please note that 142857 keeps repeating.
Pi can be expressed exactly as 3 1/7

The point here is that you can't take the easy way out of an infinite series and say, "well pi must equal exactly 3.14," because you could always calculate the next few decimal places (MathWorld - Irrational Numbers). Similarly, you can't just supply a Prime Mover to end an infinite regress because you could always claim that something "moved" the mover.

Aristotle supplied a "Prime Mover" as the only logical answer to movement in the universe and cause and effect for said movement, and given the two of you, I'm going with Aristotle.