Kalam -- 5 minutes or less

[YourMaster]

Zeno's paradox is resolved by convergence. However, the more profound point is application of that paradox only involved an infinite series within a finite space. It didn't involve an infinite series in infinite space.

It's sad to see how far these guys are willing to go to prove the unprovable (given our lack of information). First, metaphysicians misapply these infinity paradoxes because of their premise that our intuition corresponds with all physical reality. An assumption that's not only unproven, but there are good reasons to think it's simply not true.

Take the above statements claiming superposition doesn't imply a contradiction (as we view contradictions in the macroscopic world). Even when you shoot one electron at a time you still get an interference pattern; meaning within the wave, particles in superposition are interfering (in essence) with themselves. This is evidence implying a particle exists in all possible states simultaneously while it travels as a wave.

To try and extrapolate any metaphysical rules or axioms from what we know about physical reality seems absurd. To try and say an infinity is impossible is equally absurd, because we simply have no reference point to arrive at such a far reaching conclusion. All of these cosmological arguments rest on the idea that absence of evidence is evidence; but they don't even have good cause to say the evidence is completely lacking. It's indeed inconclusive, but we do know enough to say the quantum world could very well not correspond with macroscopic reality (or that at least it doesn't correspond with it in all respects). For them the question mark leads to god, which I simply note is logic in reverse.

[lilpixieofterror]

Then you must have been a giant disappointment to teacher; and from the looks of it your buddy dropped a strawman (basing his tirade on something I never said) and then disappeared! So why don't you enlighten us with your vast knowledge of fractal geometry?

There is no strawman YM, Anon (the math professor) has agreed with me and disagreed with you, so again, who should I believe... you or the one that teaches math for a living?

[lilpixieofterror]

Quite so. The KCA is a theist's argument for the existence of God. In order for it to work the theist would (at least!) have to demonstrate that an infinite chain of causes can not exist, for instance by (more generally) proving that infinities can't exist. It's nonsense to ask the skeptic to prove that infinities exist and all the while assume they do not, simply because it is absurd to assume something does not exist just because it hasn't been proven. I think about the only instant where something is considered non-existent until proven is guilt in most legal systems.

Not that I think this is very relevant; for me the big problem for the KCA proponent is to prove a first cause must be God.

So you have proved that a fininite series of events can bring about an infinite series of events? (which is the actual argument Christians use, not the strawman that YM has brought forth) When did you make this breakthrough and when will you share your findings with the philosophical and scientific community as a whole becuase as far as I have heard, such beliefs are nothing more then theories that have never been shown to actually exist. Nobody has ever shown that two universes exist, let alone an infinite amount of them. Nobody has ever shown that there is such thing as 'invisible time'. Nobody has ever shown that you can count to infinity. If you seriously believe this is wrong, offer up your evidence that YM, Jaecp, and robertb have been so unwilling/incapable of producing.

[lilpixieofterror]

What are they disputing?

If a line is referenced with points 1-10, then it also has points between 1 and 2 that we could refer to as 1.(1-9)-2, basically between any given pair of concurrent points we have another decimal column we could add and describe the between those two points as so and so on and so on.

It isn't that complicated mathematically, is it? I don't get the objections here.

Then Jaecp, show me you can produce an infinite amount of points between the points, 0,0 and 0,1. The very definition of a point would make this kind of hard, since points are spaced apart, on a line, and sooner or latter (reguardless of how small you make these points) you will run out of space to put these points. If this is wrong, show me, on paper and reality, how you can do this because as far as I have found, even if we make the points .00000000001mm apart, you will still run out of room, sooner or latter.

[YourMaster]

So you have proved that a fininite series of events can bring about an infinite series of events? (which is the actual argument Christians use, not the strawman that YM has brought forth) When did you make this breakthrough and when will you share your findings with the philosophical and scientific community as a whole becuase as far as I have heard, such beliefs are nothing more then theories that have never been shown to actually exist. Nobody has ever shown that two universes exist, let alone an infinite amount of them. Nobody has ever shown that there is such thing as 'invisible time'. Nobody has ever shown that you can count to infinity. If you seriously believe this is wrong, offer up your evidence that YM, Jaecp, and robertb have been so unwilling/incapable of producing.

Your talking about a convergent series (look up Mendelbrot set). As for the rest, yup all theories (every single one). Do you have a magic crystal ball debunking those theories and conclusively proving yours?

[Jaecp]

Pixey, its math, surely you understand that.

You are asking me to do something ridiculous, get you a pencil and paper and do some points at that level of precision.

Physical limitation doesn't change how it works.

[YourMaster]

Dude she couldn't even squeak out above a 90 on her GT score (so you'll have to talk slow to her and use very simple worlds)

[robertb]

Then Jaecp, show me you can produce an infinite amount of points between the points, 0,0 and 0,1. The very definition of a point would make this kind of hard, since points are spaced apart, on a line, and sooner or latter (reguardless of how small you make these points) you will run out of space to put these points. If this is wrong, show me, on paper and reality, how you can do this because as far as I have found, even if we make the points .00000000001mm apart, you will still run out of room, sooner or latter.

Here is how you can falsify it lilpixie, since you seem a bit confused.

Name a real number that cannot be divided by 2.

That is all you have to do.

I say that there is no real number that cannot be divided by 2, thus for any line, I can fined a point on said line's center that is distinct from it's end points.

If you can name a real number that cannot be divided by 2, then you are correct and there are not an infinite number of points between 0,0 and 0,1.

[lilpixieofterror]

Your talking about a convergent series (look up Mendelbrot set). As for the rest, yup all theories (every single one). Do you have a magic crystal ball debunking those theories and conclusively proving yours?

Do you have any evidence that proves that these exist in anything beyond theory? Yes or no? Also, why is it that the math professor has specifically stated that infinity is not a number? I personally think that you are digging this stuff up from Wiki and haven't actually taken any of the math classes about this. Math 101, infinity is not a number and whenever this is used in math, it is used to describe either a number that can't be caculated or it's used to say a series of numbers that goes on and on and on. Such as the answer to a problem being X<5.

[lilpixieofterror]

Here is how you can falsify it lilpixie, since you seem a bit confused.

Name a real number that cannot be divided by 2.

That is all you have to do.

I say that there is no real number that cannot be divided by 2, thus for any line, I can fined a point on said line's center that is distinct from it's end points.

If you can name a real number that cannot be divided by 2, then you are correct and there are not an infinite number of points between 0,0 and 0,1.

Changing the topic to something eaier to refute, eh? Show me a point, without spacing please or show me that it is possible to draw an infinite series of points, on a line. I'll be waiting for you to actually produce the evidence and show that this exist, beyond theory. Going to do this yet or will you jus tkeep saying, "WAAAA!!!! it can be divided by 2!" over and over and over again? Sorry robert, but the very definition of a point, is spacing, so no matter how small you make the points, you will eventally run out of room. You can't dodge this robert.

[lilpixieofterror]

Dude she couldn't even squeak out above a 90 on her GT score (so you'll have to talk slow to her and use very simple worlds)

Poor YourMoron, didn't actually pay attention to the fact that the AF uses a different scoring system then the army does. The high 80's in the AF, makes you capable of doing every job in the AF. Poor YM, he couldn't even be bothered to look up a simple fact before he ranted.

[robertb]

Changing the topic to something eaier to refute, eh? Show me a point, without spacing please or show me that it is possible to draw an infinite series of points, on a line. I'll be waiting for you to actually produce the evidence and show that this exist, beyond theory. Going to do this yet or will you jus tkeep saying, "WAAAA!!!! it can be divided by 2!" over and over and over again? Sorry robert, but the very definition of a point, is spacing, so no matter how small you make the points, you will eventally run out of room. You can't dodge this robert.

At what point, pardon the pun, do you run out of room lilpixie?

I gave you a way to show it, but it seems that you did not get it.

Go ahead, give me any line with two end points.

I bet I can divide it.

[lilpixieofterror]

Pixey, its math, surely you understand that.

You are asking me to do something ridiculous, get you a pencil and paper and do some points at that level of precision.

Physical limitation doesn't change how it works.

Physical limitations are where reality is made of Jaecp. One of the weakness of math is that it doesn't always work the same as reality. For example, is it possible to have 5.3 doctors per 1000 people? Unless you know of any 1/3rd of a doctor that is walking around, the math (in this case) doesn't make reality and it would be rounded down to 5 doctors per 1000 people. Likewise, the very physical definition of a point is that it has spacing and takes up room. So how can you fit an infinite amount of something, into a fininite space? Even if we make these points, very very small (far beyond the abilities of even the most advanced technology), you still will run out of physical room. There is simply no possible way, to make an infinite amount of something, fit into a finite amount of space. This isn't some new idea, but a simple fact and if you think it's wrong, go ahead and show that you can fit an infinite amount of something, into a fininite space.

[lilpixieofterror]

At what point, pardon the pun, do you run out of room lilpixie?

I gave you a way to show it, but it seems that you did not get it.

Go ahead, give me any line with two end points.

I bet I can divide it.

I guess robertb, still doesn't get it and is still trying to pretend as though theory is reality. Ok Robertb, show me that you can fill a cylinder with 5 cubic feet of space, with an infinite amount of air. I'll be waiting for your demonstration (or more likely, the resulting explosion that will result once the cylinder explodes from being over filled). Basically, you can divide it all you want, but you are creating now end and starting point and again... you can even divide it up to smaller than an electron, and you can make it smaller. Great! Sounds good on paper, now make it reality. Show me that it is physically possible to fill a fininite amount of space, with an infininte amount of something. Can you do it or will the cylinder explode long before you ever reach the infinite because you'll quickly learn that you can't make your theory, work in reality?

[robertb]

I guess robertb, still doesn't get it and is still trying to pretend as though theory is reality. Ok Robertb, show me that you can fill a cylinder with 5 cubic feet of space, with an infinite amount of air. I'll be waiting for your demonstration (or more likely, the resulting explosion that will result once the cylinder explodes from being over filled).

What does the amount of air in a cylinder have to do with whether or not there is an infinite number of points between any two points on a given line?