What is the purpose of the universe?

[Mudda]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

 

[ding]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

 

[eflatminor]

The purpose of the universe is to give statist assholes something to control.

Though I doubt they'd stop at controlling merely the universe. Surely there are others beyond the universe that need to be told what to do.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

 

[Mudda]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

 

[ding]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

Thank you. Although I am trying to do so from the unique perspective of an engineer because if I ever thought I was a philosopher I would have to slit my throat.

 

[ding]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

No. I have told you like 50 times that I have proof that I accept. There is no proof that you will accept. You are only here for your amusement. What part of this do you not understand?

 

[ding]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

So... do you have any proof or not?

 

[Mudda]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

Thank you. Although I am trying to do so from the unique perspective of an engineer because if I ever thought I was a philosopher I would have to slit my throat.

Ok ding, since you agree that you're philosophizing, I'll give you that.

 

[Mudda]

Objective proof of subjective perceptions is an oxymoron.

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

No. I have told you like 50 times that I have proof that I accept. There is no proof that you will accept. You are only here for your amusement. What part of this do you not understand?

It's fine if you want to make up stuff as "proof" that you accept. Just don't come in here and expect to call it actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof, because even you know it's not.

 

[ding]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

Thank you. Although I am trying to do so from the unique perspective of an engineer because if I ever thought I was a philosopher I would have to slit my throat.

Ok ding, since you agree that you're philosophizing, I'll give you that.

I changed my mind. I am proving it to you.

 

[ding]

One is either objective or he is not. If he is objective then he has no subjective perceptions. Let's take slavery as an example, ok? There was a time when some believed slavery was wrong and some believed it was right. They both had their "reasons" but one group had rationalized their reasons (i.e. subjective) and the other had not. We know today that slavery is wrong, that it was always wrong and will always be wrong. So you can you explain to me using this example how you believe objective proof of this subjective perception is an oxymoron? Because maybe I am not following the point you are trying to make.

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

No. I have told you like 50 times that I have proof that I accept. There is no proof that you will accept. You are only here for your amusement. What part of this do you not understand?

It's fine if you want to make up stuff as "proof" that you accept. Just don't come in here and expect to call it actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof, because even you know it's not.

Do you have any actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof that I am wrong?

 

[there4eyeM]

We may believe that there is an external reality that comes into our consciousness by the means of our perceptions. And we may believe that our perceptions are accurate. We cannot 'objectively' prove or confirm any of this, however. It all takes place deeply inside the head of the perceiver. Accepting that there is objective reality is a subjective, conscious conclusion. In 'reality', all of our talk and discussion of what we share is poetic at most, a very gross approximation of our internal state.

 

[Mudda]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

Thank you. Although I am trying to do so from the unique perspective of an engineer because if I ever thought I was a philosopher I would have to slit my throat.

Ok ding, since you agree that you're philosophizing, I'll give you that.

I changed my mind. I am proving it to you.

Prove what? That you're philosophizing?

 

[Mudda]

He's saying you're wrong. Again.

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

No. I have told you like 50 times that I have proof that I accept. There is no proof that you will accept. You are only here for your amusement. What part of this do you not understand?

It's fine if you want to make up stuff as "proof" that you accept. Just don't come in here and expect to call it actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof, because even you know it's not.

Do you have any actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof that I am wrong?

That you're wrong about everything or something in particular?

Yes.

 

[ding]

We may believe that there is an external reality that comes into our consciousness by the means of our perceptions. And we may believe that our perceptions are accurate. We cannot 'objectively' prove or confirm any of this, however. It all takes place deeply inside the head of the perceiver. Accepting that there is objective reality is a subjective, conscious conclusion. In 'reality', all of our talk and discussion of what we share is poetic at most, a very gross approximation of our internal state.

Then it shouldn't be too hard for you to explain how slavery is and isn't wrong, right?

 

[ding]

We'll see. I'm surprised you aren't asking him for proof, lol. Do you have any proof that that that is what he is saying?

According to you, I don't need any real proof.

No. I have told you like 50 times that I have proof that I accept. There is no proof that you will accept. You are only here for your amusement. What part of this do you not understand?

It's fine if you want to make up stuff as "proof" that you accept. Just don't come in here and expect to call it actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof, because even you know it's not.

Do you have any actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof that I am wrong?

That you're wrong about everything or something in particular?

Yes.

Do you have any actual, peer reviewed, scientific proof that I am wrong about anything? C'mon big talker, where is YOUR scientific proof?

 

[ding]

It is arrogant to think that you know the purpose of the universe.

Plus, you have no proof. Again.

If you opened this thread expect to find proof of why the Universe exist then you should not have ever opened the thread. He is clearly philosophizing.

Thank you. Although I am trying to do so from the unique perspective of an engineer because if I ever thought I was a philosopher I would have to slit my throat.

Ok ding, since you agree that you're philosophizing, I'll give you that.

I changed my mind. I am proving it to you.

Prove what? That you're philosophizing?

Dude, at this point I would take any actual peer reviewed scientific research on anything. Because for as much as you clamor for data, we both know you have none to back up your beliefs whereas I have been backing up mine. You don't even know how science works. I have forgotten more science than you know or will ever know.

 

[zaangalewa]

"Loss of ... energy" is impossible. Nothing creates or destroys energy.

That is technically true, but there is a cost for every energy to mass and mass to energy exchange. Given enough exchanges (i.e. infinite / eternal universe) there would be no usable energy / mass left. So in effect, entropy is the death of matter / energy so to speak. This is the easy way to know that the universe did have a beginning.

An easy way is often only a way to hell. (1) Energy is not able to be created nor able to be destroyed. (2) We are able to transform every form of energy in every other form of energy. Sure you are able to classify energy in levels of entropy - but with the heat of the sun (low level) nature produces for example gras and gras produces bodies for sheep and the sheep make cheese for our bodies and the smiles on the fotos of our bodies. This fotos have not a high entropy and not a high energy but a lot of informations for other human beings. So what's your real problem? We have more than enough energy and matter everywhere all around us. A serios real problem is: We kill the biosphere of this planet! Cares "the universe" about or should we take care?

 

[ding]

(2) We are able to transform every form of energy in every other form of energy.

No. We are not. There is a limit. For every energy to mass transfer and mass to energy transfer there is a cost of that transfer. Heat will be lost. This is why we cannot have perpetual motion machines. So your statement is incorrect as there is a limit on the number of exchanges possible within a closed system. Given enough time the usable energy will go to zero. This is why we know that we do not have an eternal and infinite universe. You are literally arguing against the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.