Are Time and Space Real?

[Merge]

Quote by: Tycoon There is no such thing as empty space. "Empty space" would only be a potential place for matter to exist in in the future.

But I am saying there such a thing as empty space. it is "a potential place for matter to exist in in the future." I'm fine with this.

Quote by: Tycoon I know it's like saying the same thing, but I would word it as objects existing independently from space. As I said, space is simply a potential place for matter to exist. So, I would say that space exists dependant upon matter.

And I'm saying space isn;t dependent on matter because if there was empty space, I could point and say, "hey, look, space."

And also, my apple example might be more usefull here than I thought. On your system, if there is no empty space, there could be no truly hollow apple. Is this wrong?

[Tycoon]

But I am saying there such a thing as empty space. it is "a potential place for matter to exist in in the future." I'm fine with this.

Yes, but this proves that space is dependant upon matter. We only use it to define areas in which matter has existed, does exist and might exist in the future.

And I'm saying space isn;t dependent on matter because if there was empty space, I could point and say, "hey, look, space."

It would still only be called space because you would be using to define a place where matter could exist.

On your system, if there is no empty space, there could be no truly hollow apple. Is this wrong?

Yes, there could because matter might eventually exist there.

I want to bring up something I said on the Free Will thread. There is one basic law that is true for all things: cause and effect. What does space effect, assuming it is not a physical thing? Nothing. You know why? Because space is not a cause. Space does not exist.

[MplsBison]

Quote by: Tycoon There is one basic law that is true for all things: cause and effect.

False.


At the quantum level all events are possible in the future and instead of causality we get probability.

[Tycoon]

At the quantum level all events are possible in the future and instead of causality we get probability.

Explain. You have no argument backing that. Just because you say so doesn't make it true.

[jumph1gh]

Isn't oxygen or other gases everywhere on Earth therefore, there is no "empty space"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no empty space is earth. It is always occupied by light or gases.

[MplsBison]

That's how quantum mechanics works.


Any event can potentially cause any possible event.

The chance that each event will happen is assigned a probability.



The domino model loses context.

[Tycoon]

Jumph1gh, there are possibly areas in space where no matter or light has reached yet. That would be termed empty space.

The chance that each event will happen is assigned a probability.

Like I said in the other thread, the probably is an illusion. The event will either be caused by a various number of causes or it will not occur because those causes do not take place. It is not probability.

[jumph1gh]

Tycoon, as I said I only meant in Earth.

[Tycoon]

Tycoon, as I said I only meant in Earth.

Well you could look at it on a smaller scale, such as the empty space between atoms.

[jumph1gh]

Wouldn't empty space just accupy itself? Like empty space is accupied by the emptyness? o.o Heh a bit lost.

[Merge]

Quote by: Tycoon It would still only be called space because you would be using to define a place where matter could exist.

Why would I be using it to define a place where matter could exist? I call it space because that's what it is. It is an area of specific space. I don't see an argument requiring me to consider space only in conjunction with matter. You've only claimed that I have to.

Quote by: Tycoon I want to bring up something I said on the Free Will thread. There is one basic law that is true for all things: cause and effect.

I'll grant that this is true for all physical objects.

Quote by: Tycoon What does space effect, assuming it is not a physical thing? Nothing. You know why? Because space is not a cause. Space does not exist.

This argument fails unless you can explain to me why the cause/effect requirement for objects existing applies to space as well.

[Tycoon]

Why would I be using it to define a place where matter could exist? I call it space because that's what it is. It is an area of specific space. I don't see an argument requiring me to consider space only in conjunction with matter. You've only claimed that I have to.

We thought up our concepts of space, such as cubic inches. Why would we have thought them up if not to define specific amounts of matter for specific densities? Space is simply a concept invented by us to define.

This argument fails unless you can explain to me why the cause/effect requirement for objects existing applies to space as well.

Because it applies to everything else that exists.

[Merge]

Quote by: Tycoon We thought up our concepts of space, such as cubic inches. Why would we have thought them up if not to define specific amounts of matter for specific densities? Space is simply a concept invented by us to define.

Why we conceive of space has no bearing on its actual existence. I can grant you all of this and still have no real argument saying space isn't real. And I said earlier that I understand this position for depth and width, but I don't think it applies to space. "Space" is normally considered in terms of a property of objects (how much they take up, what space they occupy), but this doesn't mean that's all it is.

Quote by: Tycoon Because it applies to everything else that exists.

It applies to all matter. That doesn't justify it's application to a non-matter thing like space.

[Compugasm]

If time didn't exist, we wouldn't have music.

[MplsBison]

Quote by: Tycoon Like I said in the other thread, the probably is an illusion. The event will either be caused by a various number of causes or it will not occur because those causes do not take place. It is not probability.

You can continue to claim anything you want dispite the fact that you're proven wrong.

[Tycoon]

It applies to all matter. That doesn't justify it's application to a non-matter thing like space.

You mean its application to a non-existant thing like space.

You can continue to claim anything you want dispite the fact that you're proven wrong.

You haven't proven anything. I've been proving you wrong. You come up with some quantum level probability bullshit that proves nothing, and I proved that wrong. You can't just go around saying that you've proven me wrong when you've done nothing.

And learn how to spell "despite".

[MplsBison]

The double slit experiment proves you're wrong.

[Tycoon]

You can't just name experiments, you have to explain and source them. You haven't proven anything.

[MplsBison]

Double-slit experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

when electrons are fired one at a time through a double-slit apparatus they do not cluster around a single point diametrically opposite the emitter but instead one by one fill in the same old interference pattern with which we have now become quite familiar. However, they do not arrive at the screen in any predictable order. In other words, knowing where all the previous electrons appeared on the screen and in what order tells us nothing about where the next electron will hit.

If your way of thinking were true, then a single photon fired at a time toward a double slit would yeild only a singular exposure mark on the photographic plate.


But that doesn't happen.

[Tycoon]

If your way of thinking were true, then a single photon fired at a time toward a double slit would yeild only a singular exposure mark on the photographic plate.

Oh? I'm sure there are even smaller causes that would create the varried pattern in this experiment. It doesn't prove anything.

Why do you think it doesn't yeild a single exposure mark? Simply because there was the chance they could hit different areas? Bull.

Disprove my statement.

When you roll dice the dice do not land on sixes because there was the chance they would, but because that is the way you rolled the dice.

Also, I'm going offline for a while. Don't take this as me giving up, but as I am only fifteen I do happen to have better things to do than argue with narrow-minded people such as yourself.