Please explain how "scope" attached to "existence" differs from "scope" attached to "causality." We see clearly from your first quote (bold text) that...
Your use of "emergence" in your context here refers to the existence of material things as distinguished from the sense of "emergence" that describes ...
By saying "there is no limitation to the number of forms that can be via emergence." are you making reference to abstract thought? These are boundarie...
Consider: You go to a park to play baseball. A big sign posted says "No Restrictions in This Park." You go to the office of the administrator with a r...
Language, which posits things performing actions, cannot apply to non-existence because it allows no language and its concepts. Our minds, likewise, s...
You say "No, I'm not jumping to a conclusion without reason." Here's an example of it. This quote shows you doubling down on unsupported declarations....
Since you describe a change of state from non-existence to existence, how do you evaluate from the initial state to the final state? Your translation ...
"Scope of existence" equals "existence encapsulates everything that is." "Plays within The universe" equals "Occurs within the universe." With these t...
You're saying the scope of causality is equal to the scope of existence? If so, how is it that causation is contained within existence? Are you thinki...
A definition defines a restriction, viz., the meaning of the word it defines. Consider: when no restrictions is applied to the writing of the dictiona...
So how is there a change of state from nothing to the physics of the universe? Since we agree non-existence and existence are closed and cannot intera...
Since you supply only phrases without context, I think your evidence is no less vague than that you ascribe to my words. Consider: a) 2+2=4; b) 4. Wit...
Here's the quote with the pertinent statement in bold; click on your name at the bottom and it will take you to your post from two days ago. You don't...
Let's look at a stipulated uncaused existence. You apply the restrictions when you try to deny them. No rules is a restriction. No restrictions is a r...
I'm asking you if causation began after the universe existed. Can you quote my ambiguous language? Here is my unedited quote: Here's more evidence you...
Since the argument from set theory supports your claim no first cause lies outside of the scope of existence, why do you object to it? Why do you say ...
Do you think the mathematical and logical precision of set theory is mis-applied to your theory? If so, why have you chosen for your title: "The logic...
Since existence encapsulates everything that is, that includes the entire scope of causality within the closed system of existence? If the entire scop...
The logic of a universal origin and meaning Extract of Philo’s Main Points My point is only that existence has no outside cause for its being. Are you...
Bob Ross appears to imply that a universe with a beginning not incepted from nothing must have been predated by existences outside itself, and thus su...
If free will inhabits the world, where it is contained, then must we conclude, by your argument above, that free will does not exist? Non-physical tim...
You say QM uncertainty is the result of applying the past-to-future arrow of time. How is it that QM uncertainty, the result of a false representation...
You don’t know if the arrow of time and the arrow of entropy are connected? How does the function of free will, which is to observe, for example, "The...
As I understand your timeline of future-to-past, the linkage along the channel of possibility connecting ontological possibility and logical possibili...
What happens to the principle of entropy within the future-to-past arrow of time? Can the anti-determinist representation be called the free will repr...
We know ontological possibility and logical possibility are linked. We know ontological possibility inhabits the future. We know that the free will by...
In the case of physical things, the arrow of time moves from ontological possibility (the future) towards logical possibility (the past) and from logi...
Your statement makes a distinction between a representation of the recollected de facto past, which may or may not be true, and the contemplated de fa...
My use of "logical possibility" is based on your use of it in the quote immediately below: Here's the link my quote is based on: Measurement Problem D...
Non-Physics: What I Learned Logical possibility extends beyond physics into the realm of non-physics Physical things, in order to emerge into existenc...
The photon has a random, uncertain direction that is constrained by a probability that keeps it nearly perpendicular to the axis. More importantly, th...
Let's look at your second unedited quote: In your unedited quote, the relation of probability (probability distribution) is present, rather than a rel...
All of this is theoretical physics. It won't modify relativity without experimental verification. Does it exist? Freewill expresses as desires and ant...
If you can't do that, then your inability is evidence Heisenberg Uncertainty is not a measurement problem; it's an existential limitation on possible ...
If the future is present to the mind, then it's present in the mind in the present as the present. No amount of word-gaming will change this simple tr...
Let's read them one after the other. The illusion of continuity is not in relation to the probability distribution... ? The probability distribution i...
My scope of the observable includes abstract ideas. What does your scope of the observable include beyond physical things and abstract ideas? Bear in ...
Since a QM vector can be accurately measured for both magnitude and direction, all of the info is available. The complication is that both measurement...
The future is present in the now as an abstract thought. The mind understands that plans toward a goal are about the future, but this understanding is...
If the gap in the existence of a particle - from one point in its trajectory to another point - is ontologically real, then, as I've said, that's your...
The particle is not supposed. The particle is a photon. It has been established that a photon takes 5.39x10^-44s over the duration of one Planck lengt...
Now my language is unclear. What I should've said is, "Your original language, in my opinion, expresses a contradiction." My counter-narrative to your...
. For simplicity, let us say that our thoughts are experienced by us in the empirical present. Right now I’m expecting you to respond to what I’m writ...
My question above is directly related to your argument supporting your denial of my charge of contradiction. I repost it below: A clarifying example t...
You'll notice I've bolded the part of my statement that says an active defense is needed when the prosecution does have proof - I should've said "evid...
Don't be mislead by the fact the prosecution must prove its case against the defendant, and not the other way around. Both the prosecution and the def...
Consider: Two basketball players. Each player tries to hit the same jump shot from the same free throw line. A statistical analyst watches each player...
Your claim is a refutation of my claim. It makes a declaration about the truth content of my claim, finding it to be zero. Why do you think your refut...
So your answer is, "No, we directly experience neither the future nor the present. Only the past is observed directly." Since sensory processing by th...
You've also made a claim. In rational discourse, propositions need the support of logical arguments. Why do you think you're exempt from this requirem...
Comments