The passage you quoted did not state that motion is defined merely as having a spatiotemporal position, making yours an overtly fallacious argument. I...
Because if a 4D object's position depends on time, it has a gradient with respect to time (equivalent statements). By definition that is motion. ^ Thi...
Then motion is possible by definition, since the time-dependence of an object's position is retained in the eternalist picture. Again, refer to the im...
You agree that motion, as I have defined it, falls out eternalism by definition, or, in your own words: And yet "motion is impossible" in eternalism a...
Yes. By the kinematic definition of motion, motion is possible in eternalism. As I said ages ago and multiple times, if you have a different definitio...
Yes, it is embarrassing. But this is what I keep telling people who think physics is intellectually difficult: any idiot can do it, you just have to b...
This seems to be par for the course: every opportunity I've suggested to consider how motion is possible in eternalism, you have given some excuse to ...
No, but I feel you are, whenever you sense impending progress, drawing back. If you agree that motion depends only on time-dependent spatial positions...
None. You do not need to "change" spatial location to have a length, or properties depending on space, unless, as I've repeatedly asked, you're using ...
Precisely, and yet it has spatially-dependent altitude (a gradient). So why can you not admit that in 4D a body has time-dependent positions (another ...
Surely that's trivial to discount. First, it assumes the answer to the question by asserting that "the ideas themselves are not the product of a mater...
I'm not asking about motion, I'm asking about length. It is relevant because duration in 4D is a length. I can calculate the gradient of the mountain ...
No. What is it that changes position at all? Forget eternalism. Just a mountain at a given moment in time, an aerial photograph if you will. The summi...
This isn't really in the picture, though. The probability of being beyond the slits grows. That is the closest you can get to "the two apparatus slits...
That was part of my caveat. But this too may be deterministic. There are people who would starve to deatg before stealing a loaf of bread. There are c...
Yes, iirc I did ask for clarity on "3D part", I wasn't sure if you meant the body or its spatial coordinates. Continuity is what makes it the same obj...
Are you thinking of tennis? In what sense did your father win physics? But you understand there's no quantum gravity theory accepted by the scientific...
Oh, I think I understand. But that is satisfied by continuity. The mountain at the summit is the same mountain as the one at the foot. What is it then...
It's possible. I once heard Chomsky speak on moral relativism and I dismissed him as an idiot, so I never gave much care for his views after that. Pro...
On the contrary, I can appreciate the successes of scientific achievement to date while recognising that current paradigms will almost certainly be ov...
I actually agree with that. There is little evidence that macroscopic bodies can be in superposition. Most physicists would agree with the above. As y...
More like a conspiracy theory? Inevitably. It is, I suspect unlike your belief system, a self-correcting system. Because no transition is necessary. M...
Apologies, you mentioned this before and I meant to respond but didn't. Your 0 + 0 + 0 + ... = 0 representation is that of yay many independent, non-i...
Empirically and independently verified dementia... probably isn't dementia. Or do you think science is some kind of mass hallucination? :rofl: That's ...
Atheists would say anyone who says that is too loose with their definitions. Every human who ever lived or ever will live is definitively a believer o...
That's (2) by definition. Gravity is the mediator between the mass of one material body and the action on another. That is also (2). The curvature of ...
*Comparatively* noble. If we're going absolutist, morality derives from God, right? So it is noble by virtue of him doing or sanctioning it. I think t...
None that I've heard, but go for it! That's not what I said. It is unnecessary for science to explain everything. Either: 1. the immaterial world does...
Of course. That is true of spatial positions too. If a spatial coordinate is fixed, it by definition cannot be changed. That does not mean that an obj...
A good argument to me is the absence of any posited immaterial realm that makes any difference. A more thorough argument might go like this: If an imm...
This difference in the spatial position at different temporal positions is movement though. It has to be at issue! I see. Yes. The temporal coordinate...
It's not my definition, blame Galileo! :rofl: But there is no problem. It does not describe effects of motion, it describes motion. An effect of the m...
Okay, sorry. Ignoring the parenthetical, sure, yes. I assume by "3D" part you mean spatial coordinates. This is the same as saying "All positions of a...
Sure, there could be an immaterial monism, a tri-ism, a quadism... Whether materialism is likely right must be assessed on its own terms. You will fin...
Right, I think I see what you're saying. If the path of the 4D object could be written as something like P(x,y,z,t), i.e. whether the object is presen...
Yes, absolutely. I am free to choose, that is: I am the agent selecting the course of action of whatever potential actions occur to me, and to realise...
But that isn't relevant. You are asking why materialism is popular today. The observation that dualist philosophy is useless and under-defined, while ...
No, because motion is differences of spatial positions over corresponding differences in temporal positions, and both spatial and temporal positions a...
Well there's a couple of ridiculous things there. The first is the straw man that changes in position between different times in the past describe a v...
Correct. There's no concept of having a temporal velocity through time in classical kinematics. It does not preclude the possibility, it's just an irr...
Probably because its adherents have figured out that insisting on imagined things is not a compelling argument for believing in them. When faced with ...
In another defense of God, who is to say that sinning causes Him finite harm? Perhaps every flirtation with rival gods causes him eternal agony? Would...
As I'm sure you know, that was not a derivation. What's been drawn is an analogy. In defining their religion, the Buddhists have incorporated a kind o...
(A) is a question of cost. We can get living humans to wherever a space elevator might go, it just ain't cheap. (B) - (C) is a question of time, linke...
Time to me is frequency seen inside-out and from a distance. Consider a universe containing a single, unchanging, rigid, simple ball. What is time? Th...
After the brilliant responses of and , it seems a shame to give a straight-faced one, but you're edging into Heidegger territory, . Heidegger held ack...
:up: Also a good argument for it being contradictory for something to be both omnipotent and omniscient, which is an extreme case of the OP. If such a...
Comments