| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bun bun
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| maniac_wolfman wrote: | | WheelsOfConfusion wrote: | | Well it's more about whether dimensions "exist" or not. THAT's the philosophical part. I usually considered them more like qualities than things. |
I always felt that dimensions, as well as time, are merely a human construct we overlay against the universe in an attempt to make sense of the world around us. The universe operates fine without such quantifiers.
Spluh. |
Er. No? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
maniac_wolfman
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 628
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fhqwhgads
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 1337
Location: sfcaus
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quentin Robert DeNameland wrote: | Folks, as you can see for yourself, the way this clock over here is behaving, time is an affliction!
Now this might be cause for alarm among a portion of you as from a certain experience, I tend to proclaim:
The eons are closing! |
_________________
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 589
Location: Don't look up! (Damn pigeons...)
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ahh, the very existence of dimensions. Nice consideration. I say, if they exist then consider them all; if they don't then they don't matter. 
Wheels, if dimensions don't exist, except as a perceptual quality, then neither should other qualities, such as length, finiteness, duration, etc. I don't consider my experiencing the qualities to be proof they exist, but it sure is compelling... 
_________________
| Halen wrote: | | The reason that "people actually see the points people make" = "people agree with me" is because I. Am. Right! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mouse
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 15622
Location: under the bed
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i really like death's take on schroedinger's cat:
| Quote: | "If I understand it right, you don't know if the cat's dead or alive until you look at it."
"THINGS WILL HAVE COME TO A PRETTY PASS, ALBERT, IF I DID NOT KNOW WHETHER A THING WAS DEAD OR ALIVE WITHOUT HAVING TO GO AND LOOK." |
_________________
aka: neverscared! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 10512
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
???
how can you imagine dimensions not existing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11222
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Flion wrote: | | Wheels, if dimensions don't exist, except as a perceptual quality... |
I don't mean like "they're all in your head," I meant as a quality of physical things in the way that charge or mass are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Tom
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WheelsOfConfusion wrote: | | Flion wrote: | | Wheels, if dimensions don't exist, except as a perceptual quality... |
I don't mean like "they're all in your head," I meant as a quality of physical things in the way that charge or mass are. |
is molecular structure, then, different from charge and mass in some specific way, in terms of a physical quality? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11222
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I do not parse your question, sir. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Tom
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
"mass" and "charge", by your tell, are qualities of a physical thing that share that share some commonality...
...does "molecular structure" share that commonality, or is it a different sort of quality? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11222
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So, if I understand you right, you are implying that things like "mass and charge" are qualities of individual particles whereas things like "Molecular structure" or "length" cannot be pinned down as such? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Tom
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
pinned down? maybe not.
i'm exploring a thought - maybe that molecular structure has a relationship that is more complex than just the how it interacts with the individual particles; possibly it interacts with "space".
which has implications for the existance of space itself and by extention, dimension.
but it might be cyclical reasoning as stated, so i want to come at it from your angle...
so, in that light -- is molecular structure a "quality" in the same sense as mass or charge, or is it somehow a different type of quality, or a different thing altogether? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11222
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Major Tom wrote: | pinned down? maybe not.
I'm exploring a thought - maybe that molecular structure has a relationship that is more complex than just the how it interacts with the individual particles; possibly it interacts with "space". |
Or it could be an emergent property from the "spaciness" of the particles and other qualities at work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Tom
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
well, i'm not thinking about the source of molecular structure, but maybe i should?
so, to take a step back -- is molecular structure a quality of a physical thing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 11222
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Of a molecule, maybe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
