• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

You will never have the knowledge which excludes the universal laws of nature

exvirgin said:
In simple mathematics, division indicates the ratio between two numbers a' and b'. So, any number when divided by zero has been termed undefined to prevent arguments and complications. However, in complex mathematics division by zero is possible.
Click to expand...

The reason that the result of a division by zero is undefined is the fact that any attempt at a definition leads to a contradiction.

Therefore, your assertion that EVERYTHING has divisibility is a fallacy. You argue above, extensively, that "zero" or "nothing" is an observeable "something" and that, therefore, divisibility does apply to it, yet this cannot be shown in a mathematical equation without contradiction. For example:

To begin with, how do we define division? As you state above, the ratio r of two numbers a and b:

r=a/b
is that number r that satisfies a=r*b.

Well, if b=0, (i.e., we are trying to divide by zero) we have to find a number r such that r*0=a. (1)

But r*0=0
for all numbers r, and so unless a=0 there is no solution of equation (1).

Now you could say that r=infinity satisfies (1).
That's a common way of putting things, but what's infinity? It is not a number! Why not? Because if we treated it like a number we'd run into contradictions. Ask for example what we obtain when adding a number to infinity. The common perception is that infinity plus any number is still infinity.
 
Last edited:
FluffyNinja said:
The reason that the result of a division by zero is undefined is the fact that any attempt at a definition leads to a contradiction.

Therefore, your assertion that EVERYTHING has divisibility is a fallacy. You argue above, extensively, that "zero" or "nothing" is an observeable "something" and that, therefore, divisibility does apply to it, yet this cannot be shown in a mathematical equation without contradiction. For example:

To begin with, how do we define division? As you state above, the ratio r of two numbers a and b:

r=a/b
is that number r that satisfies a=r*b.

Well, if b=0, (i.e., we are trying to divide by zero) we have to find a number r such that r*0=a. (1)

But r*0=0
for all numbers r, and so unless a=0 there is no solution of equation (1).

Now you could say that r=infinity satisfies (1).
That's a common way of putting things, but what's infinity? It is not a number! Why not? Because if we treated it like a number we'd run into contradictions. Ask for example what we obtain when adding a number to infinity. The common perception is that infinity plus any number is still infinity.
Click to expand...

If you search for divisibility, you will find it everywhere in everything.
It implies that,
nothing excludes divisibility.
Nothing (your zero) excludes divisibility!!
Is that okay
 
exvirgin said:
If you search for divisibility, you will find it everywhere in everything.
It implies that,
nothing excludes divisibility.
Nothing (your zero) excludes divisibility!!
Is that okay
Click to expand...
No, actually it is not okay.
You have also failed to show that "zero" in fact = "nothing" (as you put it). We have a numerical symbol which is used to represent "quantity zero" and it indeed has a value (or non-value) as your earlier analogy to anti-matter eludes. Science, both mainstream and yours, is unable to show that the value of zero = nothing.
Well, I have searched for divisibility in zero (as have a slew of mathematicians) and I have yet to find it and you have yet to either prove that it is possible or that the quantity "zero" is mathematically non-existent.

I realize that you represent the Intellectual Development Foundation and that you believe that you have reached some Universal Truth with you poem on Divisibility portraying it as the "God of Science." Sadly, I fail to see how your observations can live up to this claim if you cannot provide a mathematical equation or empirical case study to show how divisibility applies to the quantity "zero." Your "philosophy" appears to be nothing more than a re-hashing of the early Greek thinkers Thales, Anaximander, Leucippus, Democritus, and Plato as they sought to find the ultimate end to divisibility in matter. :shrug:
 
FluffyNinja said:
No, actually it is not okay.
You have also failed to show that "zero" in fact = "nothing" (as you put it). We have a numerical symbol which is used to represent "quantity zero" and it indeed has a value (or non-value) as your earlier analogy to anti-matter eludes. Science, both mainstream and yours, is unable to show that the value of zero = nothing.
Well, I have searched for divisibility in zero (as have a slew of mathematicians) and I have yet to find it and you have yet to either prove that it is possible or that the quantity "zero" is mathematically non-existent.

I realize that you represent the Intellectual Development Foundation and that you believe that you have reached some Universal Truth with you poem on Divisibility portraying it as the "God of Science." Sadly, I fail to see how your observations can live up to this claim if you cannot provide a mathematical equation or empirical case study to show how divisibility applies to the quantity "zero." Your "philosophy" appears to be nothing more than a re-hashing of the early Greek thinkers Thales, Anaximander, Leucippus, Democritus, and Plato as they sought to find the ultimate end to divisibility in matter. :shrug:
Click to expand...

I hold the view that THE UNIVERSE WILL NEVER BECOME NOTHING.
CAN THE UNIVERSE BECOME NOTHING?
Therefore, I still believe that DIVISIBILITY IS THE UNIVERSAL LAW.
 
exvirgin said:
I hold the view that THE UNIVERSE WILL NEVER BECOME NOTHING.
CAN THE UNIVERSE BECOME NOTHING?
Therefore, I still believe that DIVISIBILITY IS THE UNIVERSAL LAW.
Click to expand...

The universal laws can be invalidated only if the universe becomes nothing. Can the universe become nothing?
 
OP i dont really get what point your trying to make with your shifty riddles and word games
 
exvirgin said:
The universal laws can be invalidated only if the universe becomes nothing. Can the universe become nothing?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. You tell me? Can we prove or disprove that it DID NOT originate from "nothing"? Or that through eventuality it will return to "nothing"? Is the Universe infinite or does it have finite boundaries? All we have are theories and formulae that work from our limited perspective of what is "real" and "observeable". If the answer is "infinite" then this creates contradiction not continuity. If the answer is "finite" then what lies beyound the Universal "boundary"? "Nothing"? Something? Parallel universe where our laws apply inversely? Can we truly know? The only Universal Truth is the fact that we are yet unable to prove nor to understand all Universal Truths. Doesn't mean we should stop searching though. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
SE102 said:
Can my thoughts affect the universe around me?
Click to expand...
Yes. My thoughts tell my hand to pick up a pen and write some of my thoughts down and send them somewhere. It could ultimately have a major impact on the world.
 
FluffyNinja said:
I'm not sure. You tell me? Can we prove or disprove that it DID NOT originate from "nothing"? Or that through eventuality it will return to "nothing"? Is the Universe infinite or does it have finite boundaries? All we have are theories and formulae that work from our limited perspective of what is "real" and "observeable". If the answer is "infinite" then this creates contradiction not continuity. If the answer is "finite" then what lies beyound the Universal "boundary"? "Nothing"? Something? Parallel universe where our laws apply inversely? Can we truly know? The only Universal Truth is the fact that we are yet unable to prove nor to understand all Universal Truths. Doesn't mean we should stop searching though. :shrug:
Click to expand...

We may not know the entire universe. Yet, we can know the universal laws. Nothing can exclude the universal laws. Universal laws can be found everywhere and everything in the universe.

What is between you and me? How do we understand each other? We understand each other only through the univesal laws.
We have not seen each other. Yet, we understand each other. How?
 
exvirgin said:
We may not know the entire universe............................... Universal laws can be found everywhere and everything in the universe.
Click to expand...

Do you even realize that you are creating contradiction here? So, what I hear you saying is, on the one hand we do not know the entire universe, but on the other hand, your (and I do emphasize YOUR) "universal laws" can be found everywhere and in everything in the Universe?

If we do not know the entire Universe, how can we "know" that your Universal Laws apply to EVERYTHING in it? Has your mind somehow trancended your human body and the scope of human understanding? There simply are NO "Universal Laws" that can be applied to every aspect of the Universe - if we do not know or understand the entire construct of the Universe. Perhaps you've gotten your students hooked on this false logic, but to me you sound as if you may have recently been under the influence of some really good stuff. :shrug:
 
FluffyNinja said:
Do you even realize that you are creating contradiction here? So, what I hear you saying is, on the one hand we do not know the entire universe, but on the other hand, your (and I do emphasize YOUR) "universal laws" can be found everywhere and in everything in the Universe?

If we do not know the entire Universe, how can we "know" that your Universal Laws apply to EVERYTHING in it? Has your mind somehow trancended your human body and the scope of human understanding? There simply are NO "Universal Laws" that can be applied to every aspect of the Universe - if we do not know or understand the entire construct of the Universe. Perhaps you've gotten your students hooked on this false logic, but to me you sound as if you may have recently been under the influence of some really good stuff. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Simple Question:
Don't we have the capacity to generalize the particulars?
Can't we distinguish the universal laws from the history of science?

It is something like saying that I do not agree with the speed of light is a constant because we cannot verify it in a true sense!
 
Last edited:
:devil:exvirgin, i need your asistance in the basement..come my dear take my hand
 
exvirgin said:
Simple Question:
Don't we have the capacity to generalize the particulars?
Can't we distinguish the universal laws from the history of science?

It is something like saying that I do not agree with the speed of light is a constant because we cannot verify it in a true sense!
Click to expand...

Is it impossible to prove the divisiblity of the universe?
We are all the parts of the universe. How can we be parts of the universe if the universe is indivisible?
 
Last edited:
exvirgin said:
I hold the view that THE UNIVERSE WILL NEVER BECOME NOTHING.
CAN THE UNIVERSE BECOME NOTHING?
Therefore, I still believe that DIVISIBILITY IS THE UNIVERSAL LAW.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. And posting in all caps doesn't make you more believable.
 
exvirgin said:
Will the universe become nothing?

When will the universe become nothing?

How will the universe become nothing?

Could you explain?
Click to expand...

There are those who believe in spontaneous generation. Can it be proven.....no. Can it be disproven......no.
Can we prove that the universe began as "nothing"?.......no. Can we disprove it?.....no.
Will the Universe eventually revert back to "nothing"? (implode on itself, if you will) Who knows?

All we have is speculation, theory, and conjecture based on our own limited understanding of what the construct of the Universe is.
 
FluffyNinja said:
There are those who believe in spontaneous generation. Can it be proven.....no. Can it be disproven......no.
Can we prove that the universe began as "nothing"?.......no. Can we disprove it?.....no.
Will the Universe eventually revert back to "nothing"? (implode on itself, if you will) Who knows?

All we have is speculation, theory, and conjecture based on our own limited understanding of what the construct of the Universe is.
Click to expand...

Can't we perceive the universe in which we exist?
 
exvirgin said:
Can't we perceive the universe in which we exist?
Click to expand...
We can perceive at least some of it. There are many aspects of it, however, which are beyond our current abilities to perceive. For example: What lies on the "other side" of black holes? Or, What lies beyond the outer boundaries of our Universe? Or, are there indeed even "boundaries" as we perceive them or could they be simply "barriers" to alternate Universes?

The point is, our Universal Laws will only hold up to the Universe as we currently perceive it (within limitation). We cannot yet know that these Laws will stand the test of time and our future scope of perception. It was once believed that Light Energy followed Universal Laws as it travelled through space - constant speeds, direction, etc. After the discovery of Black Holes and their influence on Light Energy, these Laws had to be re-evaluated?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom