The Universe Is All That Exists
- Thread starter alteredperception
- Start date
I am referring to currently what most scientists claim to be the most accurate theory of the universe. Of course none of claim our theories to be FACT, that is a ridiculous thing to think. Currently there are 3 main competing views.
1. The universe will keep expanding, entropy.
2. The universe will undergo a "big crunch" from the gravity overwhelming the expansive force.
(my theory) 3. If you travel far enough in any direction you will reach the same point. The universe is like a globe, except it has an added dimension. The universe will undergo changes, but has a definite order regarding its design. The universe is eternal. Trying to study it as we would study a galaxy, for instance, doesn't work, because the universe is existence itself.
1. The universe will keep expanding, entropy.
2. The universe will undergo a "big crunch" from the gravity overwhelming the expansive force.
(my theory) 3. If you travel far enough in any direction you will reach the same point. The universe is like a globe, except it has an added dimension. The universe will undergo changes, but has a definite order regarding its design. The universe is eternal. Trying to study it as we would study a galaxy, for instance, doesn't work, because the universe is existence itself.
it seems I've made a mistake on two counts one being the word invisible, after speaking with my wife it seems your view of invisible may be the correct one.ellion said:
but I had found this in a Thesaurus,
1. invisible (vs. visible), unseeable, camouflaged, concealed, hidden, out of sight, infrared, lightless, ultraviolet, undetectable, unseen, nonvisual, occult, imperceptible, unperceivable, covert
usage: impossible or nearly impossible to see; imperceptible by the eye; "the invisible man"; "invisible rays"; "an invisible hinge"; "invisible mending"
2. inconspicuous (vs. conspicuous), invisible, obscure, unnoticeable
usage: not prominent or readily noticeable; "he pushed the string through an inconspicuous hole"; "the invisible man"
both the two bolded words mean "Impossible or difficult to perceive by the mind or senses."
the other count, was I made a quote I heard, wrong IE"the imaginary, and the invisible are of the same ilk." should have been the invisible and the non-existant are very similar.
I still feel my version of invisible is correct but, would like to subsitute non-existent in it's place, that has the right meaning.
I would be grateful if you could help me with what you mean by different aspects of the supernatural, also whilst you explain your reasons for your believe of objective supernatural(an oxymoron), could you also post some links to verify it, thank you.ellion said:
so is the non-existent subjective or objective?.(if you believe this to be both, could you also post some links thank you)
telepathy would be considered supernatural by a lot of people. there are aspects of telepathy which would be considered subjective and aspects which would be considered objective. telekinesis would be considered supernatural by most people, again aspects would be considered objective and aspects of it are subjective.
what kind of links would you like?
objective supernatural is not an oxymoron.
an example to illustrate. a ghost is an acceptable example of the supernatural. if two people see a ghost it has an existence in objective reality. two people seeing a ghost is an example of the objective supernatural. would you agree?
the non-existent doesnt exist? so its not both, its neither
The supernatural is non-existent. If you think otherwise, you are an uneducated, niave, fool. Supernatural is defined in such a way that it is not possible. It is existence outside the natural world. This entire concept was created by our imaginition. If you believe in God, to be consistent, you have to believe in everything else created by our imaginition that is outside the natural world equally. You have to believe in ghosts, magic, zombies, fairies, etc. You have to accept all forms of religion, like the Egyptian beliefs. They are on the same playing field.
Either accept that God is no more believable than faries and denounce his existence, or spend your life worshipping all creations of the imagination that are supernatural.
Either accept that God is no more believable than faries and denounce his existence, or spend your life worshipping all creations of the imagination that are supernatural.
ellion said:
telepathy
supposed Communication through means other than the senses, as by the exercise of an occult power.
supposed communication between two persons without recourse to the senses.
purportedly communication from one mind to another without using sensory perceptions.
telekinesis, The movement of objects purportedly by the exercise of occult power.
psychokinesis, The production or control of motion, especially in inanimate and remote objects, purportedly by the exercise of psychic powers.
ellion the key words are supposed, purported both meaning to presume, assume, to be true or real without conclusive evidence.
so I'm sorry, they can not be regarded as objective.
therefore we can only come to the conclusion, that until such a time that, they can prove the supernatural, it must be regarded as imaginary.
you can post some links if you wish, but I seriously doubt they could prove the impossible.
ellion you may wish to go to this site as he is offering 1 million dollars to anybody who can prove the supernatural, in any way shape or form.
no your wrong again, if your going to communicate using the english language please use the actaul definitions as opposed to your own interpretaions.
i thought we had addressed this problem earlier.
there is no supposed or purported in the definitions so the key words are your own creation. do with them what you will, but dont ask me to address your creations.
if you regard them as imaginary, then do so, but do not tell me they are my imagination when you have not even given enough thought to the subject to present true and undistorted definition of the meanings.
.
i thought we had addressed this problem earlier.
there is no supposed or purported in the definitions so the key words are your own creation. do with them what you will, but dont ask me to address your creations.
see my above post they are objective or subjective depending on what aspect of them we are talking about, the problem we have is that you are more eagre to deny there existence, than you are to have an actual discussion.stefan said:
we can only come to a definite conclusion when all posibilities have been explored and all avenues of investigation have been exhausted. then and only then can we come to a conclusion. to say they dont exist is not exploring all possibilities.
if you regard them as imaginary, then do so, but do not tell me they are my imagination when you have not even given enough thought to the subject to present true and undistorted definition of the meanings.
.
Last edited:
I sorry, but I do prefer the actual interpretations to yours so you will find the sources at the begining of each, and no we had'nt address this earlier.ellion said:
dictionary.com : telepathy, Communication through means other than the senses
wikipedia: telepathy, is the supposed ability to communicate information from one mind to another,
infoplease: encyclopedia, telepathy, supposed communication between two persons without recourse to the senses.
dictionary,telepathy, communication between minds by some means other than sensory perception
dictionary.com psychokinesis, The production or control of motion, especially in inanimate and remote objects, purportedly by the exercise of psychic powers.
wikipedia, Psychokinesis (literally "mind-movement") or PK is the more commonly used term today for what in the past was known as telekinesis. There have been anecdotal reports of such apparent phenomena throughout history in various cultures. For example, poltergeist activity is typically characterized by objects being moved without apparent explanation, though some people claim that this is accounted for as unintentional PK by children going through puberty.
As with all psi phenomena, there is wide disagreement and controversy within the sciences and even within the field of parapsychology as to the very existence of psychokinesis and the validity or interpretation of PK-related experiments. To date there has never been a scientifically demonstrated instance of psychokinesis.
as you can see above with the sources I seem to have bumped into some more of my aledged "own creations", perhaps I'm doing it telepathically.ellion said:
as I've said they cant be objective, I'm not denying there existence they have none in objective reality, only subjective reality.ellion said:
what I said was,"that until such a time that, they can prove the supernatural, it must be regarded as imaginary." I have'nt disregarded the possiblity have I.ellion said:
but you cant assert that they are real, sorry.
see above, thank you.ellion said:
Last edited:
I would have to agree that "Objective Supernatural" is an oxymoron.ellion said:
As soon as a "supernatural phenomenum" is scientifically proven then it is no longer supernatural but natural (and our understanding of the natural would need revising from the current position).
Please state a current "supernatural" phenomena that is anything other than subjective.
Two people seeing the same thing and coming to the same conclusion that it is a supernatural event does not make it a supernatural event. It merely means that two people have seen the same thing and come to the same conclusion. That's all.
Noone has ever objectively seen a ghost - only subjectively
They have only ever seen things they think are ghosts (hence the subjectivity).
Hence your attempt to use it to disprove the original remark is, alas, flawed.
enton,
STOP!!!!
STOP!!!!
ENTON! These people aren't even HERE any more!
I'm not concerned with him. I just wanted him to STOP making stupid one line comments on posts that are 6 months old, to people that aren't even here, and driving the current ones off to page two or three. That's all.