Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John who wrote (65061)	1/24/2015 12:57:34 AM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Or tending to no ending, like the unbounded Mandelbrot or Julia Sets. Though its enough for me to think in terms of relativity of one (our) Galaxy with almost infinite aggregates of atoms & the emergent complexity we've seen happen here in our solar system. There is always the microcosm too, from there everything else emanates & what a cross section of planets we have to look at from Mercury to the freezing gas giants. Though theorizing about the end game of the universe is mindblowing, perhaps like the evanescing firework after the star burst? But no beginning or no ending, easiest to stick with relativity of our local space & be satisfied , there's enough drops in the oceans & rivers here to worry about...plus be a little thankful no black holes nearby. ;0) Someone just posted this today, its strangely provocative.

To: John who wrote (65061)	1/24/2015 5:17:11 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 69300

"How can something exist without a beginning?!?!?!?!" -g- Class? Does anybody have the answer to Johnny's question?! ;-) Damn good question! I do not, however, find it any more puzzling than the question of endings. Both concepts when applied to everything invite the same assumption--NOTHINGNESS. So how can there be nothingness? There probably can't. Intuitively, any before or after must exist as something--even in the absence of time and space as we (weakly) understand them. Therefore, I think that everything is something and "always" (smile) has been and that "nothing" is a mental construct that does not exist. Whatever is outside of space, time, this universe--or that...it is SOMETHING. This mitigates the anxiety of calling things "nothing" and tying our brains into knots, nuts, or whatever. So having solved that problem (smile) we need to stop asking how long something existed before part of it expressed as time particles or time waves or time outs. Time is a comparison. If we stop comparing--then time stops...for us. So emulate some people on this thread! Stop thinking and time will stand still for you, too! :-) So here is a serious question: If every single atom (and all her parts) stopped moving everywhere in all of existence--would there still be time? In other words, if time is some sort of actuality or field of any kind...then we ought to be able to figure it out. Otherwise, it is just the way the human mind understands motion/change. Of course, many would probably say that if all motion ABSOLUTELY stopped then all matter including space/time would have collapsed but I think that is begging the question. The fact of the matter is that if I were powerful enough to take every particle in existence and put them in the exact same position (and spin/movement) they were in (say) on your last birthday, then I would be back in time and eating cake and drinking Chivas with you. And all I would have done is move things--like setting up the snooker balls again--only more precise and on a slightly larger table. Hmmm...