The origin of mankind

[Karl]

That's why I said "unknown" rather than "new." But mind you, a deaf person suddenly able to hear may very well feel like they are discovering a whole new world. We could now go into a conversation about the relationship between reality and our perception of it, but that may take things a little far - even for this thread.

 

"Unknown things about the universe" not a whole Unknown universe- which presumes a new universe. You have confirmed your thoughts by mentioning the deaf person hearing again. It's an equivocation on the word 'world' by the way. It's another version of "true for you but not for me" which is the sophist view.

 

Ive covered Objectivist view of perception in great detail in O101 :-) so, if you want to have a discussion on that it can be done there ?

 

 

[Michael Sternbach]

Thanks for the invitation.I will see what I can do. Yes, my previous post probably reflects my Subjectivist perspective. I should add that the mystery of DM and DE will ideally lead us beyond the "matrix" that our perception makes us believe to be the whole of reality.

[Marblehead]

Re:  Dark matter ,  from your own post ...

   "(with different Laws of Physics preventing us from detecting them)."  

Yes, I took liberties in saying that.  But I have not been able to eliminate it as a possibility so it is still a matter of consideration.

[Marblehead]

Im not saying any of that stuff may not constitute legit models , its just that the folks who generate these things don't even have faith in these ideas ,, and they are either unproven as of yet OR possibly will be  unprovable FOREVER.

I don't see how any of that can be considered firm enough to constitute evidence of anything , though it may provide theoretical fodder. 

Oh, all I am saying is that the possibility exists.  Yes, it is unprovable and will likely remain so.  But it cannot be exclude from considerations of what Dark Matter is.  At least, not until science can define what Dark Matter really is.

[Marblehead]

Physicists talk about "Dark Matter" to gloss over the fact that what is in the dark is the grey matter between their ears.

Well, let's face it, it's difficult to define something they can't actually detect yet. 

 

The galaxies very well when they add Dark Matter but they all fall apart when Dark Matter is removed based on the Laws of Physics as currently understood.

 

I have said before and will say again, I think there is more to gravity than is currently understood.  Therefore I leave open the possibility that Dark Matter is really an aspect of gravity that is not yet understood.

[Marblehead]

Believe it or not: Japan is also in the Universe.

Well, at least it is the Land of the Rising Sun.

[Marblehead]

Someday we may end up with a better answer than We dont know, Mh, but for now that answer is the best because it leaves open all the possibilities. IMO DARK stuff, to me seems like an attempt to re use, the old ideas, even though they dont actually add up. Perhaps all the stuff is beyond the threshold of the observable universe and its actually normal stuff. Or maybe Michael is right and the universe twists back on itself six times so that everything is actually falling back to a big crunch. and the effect is multiplied by six universe worths. The ideas can stack up like a house of cards if not held to the strictest standards of proof, and even then may not ever form a unified view.

Yes.  When we must confess that "we do not know" we need to leave all possible options for consideration.  If we ignore a couple possibilities we may never be able to find a valid answer.

[Marblehead]

1600 replies? whoa, that is a book.

 

And we are just getting started.

 

We still have to define "mankind" in order to discuss possible origins of mankind.

[Michael Sternbach]

Well, let's face it, it's difficult to define something they can't actually detect yet. 

 

The galaxies very well when they add Dark Matter but they all fall apart when Dark Matter is removed based on the Laws of Physics as currently understood.

 

I have said before and will say again, I think there is more to gravity than is currently understood.  Therefore I leave open the possibility that Dark Matter is really an aspect of gravity that is not yet understood.

 

Right. Even though Newtonian gravity is close enough an approximation for most purposes, we know now that General Relativity yields even more accurate calculations. But that may not be the final word on the matter. Maybe we just don't understand the laws of gravity on the very large scale yet. For that matter, we don't really understand the nature of gravity yet.

[Marblehead]

....more unknown things about THE universe :-) it didn't open up a new universe as that would be logically impossible.

 

Well, if you will, consider that the previous universe continued to expand into infinity and all that was left was one extremely super large and dense Black Hole.  Now consider that Singularity of this present universe was that Black Hole.  Singularity (the Black Hole) went Bang!

[Karl]

Thanks for the invitation.I will see what I can do. Yes, my previous post probably reflects my Subjectivist perspective. I should add that the mystery of DM and DE will ideally lead us beyond the "matrix" that our perception makes us believe to be the whole of reality.

 

You will get the answer to that on 101. I'm sure it will dispel your misunderstanding of the objectivist view and you will see that there is no conflict with subjectivism on that point. An objectivist is neither materialist or intrincisism.

[Stosh]

Well, if you will, consider that the previous universe continued to expand into infinity and all that was left was one extremely super large and dense Black Hole.  Now consider that Singularity of this present universe was that Black Hole.  Singularity (the Black Hole) went Bang!

It spread until it popped?

[Karl]

Well, if you will, consider that the previous universe continued to expand into infinity and all that was left was one extremely super large and dense Black Hole.  Now consider that Singularity of this present universe was that Black Hole.  Singularity (the Black Hole) went Bang!

 

There wasn't a previous universe, that's the point. The universe might have been smaller, larger, hotter, more dense or a host of other things, but it has always been the universe. There was no previous one and there won't be a future one.

 

If you mean the previous incarnation of the universe then perhaps you are correct, but personally I have no idea. I'm at my limit with 'atom' and even then I have a conceptual kind of image of clouds of particles whizzing around a emphemeral core. A black hole to me is just a super dense mass which cannot let light escape from its surface, probably because the immense pressures prevent ignition anyway, a kind of black body radiator which is a super cooler, but it's miles out of my sphere of understanding.

[Michael Sternbach]

It spread until it popped?

 

[Spotless]

I still haven't found out how human beings got created and since when we have been on this planet.Did we come from outer space? Or did we evolve from animals? Were extraterrestrials or angelic beings involved? Let's start to find out!

Read some books about it, listen to the various mediums, let the Athiests and scientists have their due and pretty soon you will become an expert on what you still don't know. It is all so "fascinating".

 

fas·ci·nat·ing

ˈfasəˌnādiNG/

adjective

extremely interesting.

"fascinating facts"

synonyms: interesting, captivating, engrossing, absorbing, enchanting, enthralling, spellbinding, riveting, engaging, compelling, compulsive, gripping.......

Edited May 27, 2016 by Spotless

[Marblehead]

It spread until it popped?

No.  It compressed (gravity) until it could no longer contain itself then it exploded.

 

I'm sure you have experienced something like that yourself.  I know I have.

[Marblehead]

There wasn't a previous universe, that's the point.

 

How do you know?  No one who has ever lived in this universe knows.

 

Your second paragraph is acceptable.  We really must acknowledge that we don't know what happened before the beginning.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Marblehead

[Karl]

How do you know? No one who has ever lived in this universe knows.

 

Your second paragraph is acceptable. We really must acknowledge that we don't know what happened before the beginning.

Because we call it the universe and that is what it is. It is the highest conceptual level. There could be two universes because 'uni' one.

 

If there was hypothetically one which collapsed, then it had to collapse to something. As energy is neither created nor destroyed then we can be sure that this collapsing universe changed its state but continued existing as the universe until it expanded once again.

 

If you are question the conservation of energy and the possibile existence of multiverse then you have to explain how that contradicts everything we currently understand and on which our knowledge is built. I'm not saying it's impossible, but, like tooth fairies, you have to produce one first.

 

There was no beginning and there will be no end.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Karl

[Stosh]

No.  It compressed (gravity) until it could no longer contain itself then it exploded.

 

I'm sure you have experienced something like that yourself.  I know I have.

Darn, I prefer the other , If the spread of the universe strains its ability to remain coherent , I could see it tearing and everything rushes out as a new universe. Then everything doesnt have to turn around for no apparent reason. .. and then we know what happened before the new beginning ,, since we are in it. 

Edited May 27, 2016 by Stosh

[Karl]

Darn, I prefer the other , If the spread of the universe strains its ability to remain coherent , I could see it tearing and everything rushes out as a new universe. Then everything doesnt have to turn around for no apparent reason. .. and then we know what happened before the new beginning ,, since we are in it. 

 

Rushing out to where ? There is no 'out'. It's the universe you nitwit ;-) LOL ( how many times do you have to be told :-) I don't know you will definitely have to go on the naughty step) it doesn't have an outside of itself, or that would be the universe, in which case we are in a small bubble within the universe, but that small bubble isn't the universe.

[Stosh]

Rushing out to where ? There is no 'out'. It's the universe you nitwit ;-) LOL ( how many times do you have to be told :-) I don't know you will definitely have to go on the naughty step) it doesn't have an outside of itself, or that would be the universe, in which case we are in a small bubble within the universe, but that small bubble isn't the universe.

Silly man, the empty space rushes out right along with the matter.. duh Edited May 27, 2016 by Stosh

[Karl]

Silly man, the empty space rushes out right along with the matter.. duh

Rushes out to where ? Space isn't a thing, it's a dimension a distance between A and B. There is no point at which it is devoid of everything, or it wouldn't be anything. Even if some - let's call it stuff- could leak out, it couldn't leak anywhere outside of where there is no outside. You can't poke a hole in the universe because that would mean the universe was not the universe.

 

I'm not a scientist-obviously :-)

 

If you have a beech then put up two flags. Then we measure the space between the two flags, but that isn't an area devoid of anything because we happened to measure to concentrate on the flags. There are distances between the air molecules, sand grains and so many smaller and smaller kinds of things that there may not be an end to them. So space is full of stuff, chocolate full of stuff, it's only our conception that allows us to make specific distinctions between planets and Suns. If we didn't have the faculty then everything would just be everything in one big chaotic soup.

Edited May 27, 2016 by Karl

[vonkrankenhaus]

If the universe exists, it began.

 

Whatever has a beginning, has an end.

 

This is what we may call the "manifested universe".

 

If it manifested, it will un-manifest.

 

But there is what we could call the "infinite universe".

 

If it is infinite, it has no beginning, and thus no end.

 

Since it is not defined, it will not un-define.

 

Materialist science studies what is manifested.

 

It is not a system designed to find the beginningless beginning.

 

Like the human mind is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[Marblehead]

Because we call it the universe and that is what it is. It is the highest conceptual level. There could be two universes because 'uni' one.

Just because we put a label on it doesn't necessarily make it true.

 

If there was hypothetically one which collapsed, then it had to collapse to something. As energy is neither created nor destroyed then we can be sure that this collapsing universe changed its state but continued existing as the universe until it expanded once again.

We are playing with words here but I won't disagree with you.

 

If you are question the conservation of energy and the possibile existence of multiverse then you have to explain how that contradicts everything we currently understand and on which our knowledge is built. I'm not saying it's impossible, but, like tooth fairies, you have to produce one first.

No argument here either.  I am just on the edge of how far I can go with this and still be speaking the truth as I understand it.

 

No, I cannot prove the existence of multiverses.  Even if it is true it likely would be unprovable.

 

I have some garden fairies.

 

There was no beginning and there will be no end.

I agree but ... one day I will die.  That will be the end of Marblehead.

[Karl]

If the universe exists, it began.

 

Whatever has a beginning, has an end.

 

This is what we may call the "manifested universe".

 

If it manifested, it will un-manifest.

 

But there is what we could call the "infinite universe".

 

If it is infinite, it has no beginning, and thus no end.

 

Since it is not defined, it will not un-define.

 

Materialist science studies what is manifested.

 

It is not a system designed to find the beginningless beginning.

 

Like the human mind is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

 

You know nothing at all which has a beginning or an end on a universal material scale. Instead we have causality. Things are converted from one thing to another. The only thing that can be said to end is the individual life for a living entity.