Looking for some Philosophy Links

Feeling important isn't the implication. There are only a finite number of building blocks and we are made of the same stuff. In our known universe, that probably won't change because the ability to reach other galaxies will never come, there are only a few "raw materials" to make everything. Add in a few unknowns and it doesn't change the fact that there are only a small number of items that can be arranged to make any form within a few 100,000 light years from us. But arranging those into certain electromagnetic properties, then molecules, then complex molecules and then binding those together in an infinite amount of ways makes everything unique in its form. No two objects can be the same. Importance and relevance are not, but I could argue that if we are indeed the ONLY beings capable of analyzing their existence then we would indeed be important and special. The knowledge that we are all made "from" the matter of stars is indeed true. We have already proven that. The force that holds us together is electromagnetism and gravity (there are 2 other as well, strong and weak). Now say in the future the ability comes to make an exact copy of me (like a Star Trek teleporter). That does not negate the fact that I, the unique body, existed. That new insignificant being will only be an exact copy for a very brief instance, that is until the forces and the environment of our C universe start to act on it, moving the particles in unique fashion.

Then you agree !

:D

But the same stuff may not be what we think it is now...we may find new " stuff " over the next 2400 years if we're still around. And the stuff we think that makes us up now may be found to be part of other stuff.

Essentially you haven't said anything in opposition to what I said...except that you still think there is a specialness to the human product. And that is the way all thinking creatures are designed to think...and the reason we have conjured up all sorts of religions and ideologies...it is natural to think of ourselves as special...but that doesn't make it true.

But you have said one thing that I am really surprised and impressed by...because it is rarely said and even less believed..." finite number of building blocks " !
This, again, is a very old philosophical argument...that the universe is finite, and that is why it must constantly re-cycle itself...because nothing is added or taken away from it...so it must constantly re-new itself. The old philosophers argued that there are many universes, like many galaxies, and are themselves only a part of something even larger. Something that "is" infinite and cannot be understood by us. That we live in but one of many universes. That a universe expands and contracts...as the Buddhists call it...the involution and evolution of the worlds. Which is not possible if a universe was infinite in itself.

I didn't say the universe is finite. I said there is a finite amount of "stuff" out there. We could find other forms of matter we have not discovered based on what we are able to "sense" But it wouldn't be much more. Otherwise the entire notion that we are all made of the same stuff would fall apart, if there is say another table of elements we discover in another galaxy then, we are NOT made of the same stuff at all. And we are indeed very unique.

//EDIT as for the Universe, there is good evidence that it will never close in on itself. As science progresses things are learned and then shifted. For instance in the 3rd grade I was appalled at the fact that our sun could someday explode. That is now false. It stands to reason that if this universe exists, another one could but they would never touch one another. It wouldn't be the same as another dimension.

By saying " finite number of building blocks " the implication of a finite universe is there.

We could easily discover many new things that apply to everything...I'm sure people would have scoffed at the idea of DNA if it was presented 100 years ago. Who knows what 2400 years would bring...or even another 100. But that " everything is merely differentiations of the same thing "is, at present, neither proven nor disproved...and probably won't be for quite some time....as I have said.

And I doubt we will discover another table of elements..just undiscovered items of extreme interest that will once again revolutionize the way we think things work. I don't think we're near the end of knowing...I think science is just beginning and has a very long way to go.

Just co-existing universes in something infinite...as galaxies co-exist in our universe.
;)

Everything falls back upon the two original statements that I made:

1. That everything is differentiations of the same thing.

2. That everything is alive.

Quote:

---

By saying " finite number of building blocks " the implication of a finite universe is there.

---

The implication is the Universe good very easily go on forever and not have an end.

It could...but we've, that is you and I, have already established long ago that space itself has substance...therefore if things are finite ( which is the only logical conclusion that one can arrive at if things re-cycle themselves...for if things could be added or taken away re-cycling would be contradictory...and very unnecessary ) then space must be too...having "mass"...which it does.

For if you apply the same rules...of scientific fact as we understand it...everything that has "mass" occupies a finite space...a rock has mass, we have mass, planets have mass, and space has mass...and the same rules apply to all things that have mass...they are finite. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Egaladeist
..for if things could be added or taken away re-cycling would be contradictory...and very unnecessary ) then space must be too...having "mass"...which it does.

For if you apply the same rules...of scientific fact as we understand it...everything that has "mass" occupies a finite space...a rock has mass, we have mass, planets have mass, and space has mass...and the same rules apply to all things that have mass...they are finite. ;)

---

If this is the case, we need to disprove that law of physics that states matter cannot be created or destroyed.

As for your finite space theory, you cannot state that all things have mass if there are things you have never seen nor studied. Science has yet to prove or disprove if neurtinos have mass. Theoretically they do not. This would be a logical reason behind their behavior.
when it comes down to analyzing size, you're pretty much guessing once you get outside of our visible sector of the universe. Everything that humans know about space~size~relationship is based on a close minded mathematical frame of reference.

All things do not have mass. Even if you discount the space between particles, which is not "Space" as in the heavens, sky, the cosmos. It is space, as in the absence of anything. I stated that space (the cosmos) was not empty. Meaning there are particles floating around in it but they have space (nothing) between them and even space in the particles themselves. I would push my finger right through this keyboard because the space in between the particles of the plastic and my flesh are so imense they would pass through one another, unmolested. If not for the magnetic fields holding them at bay.

So there is empty space. But ok, even if you discount the space between particles, there are particles and fields of energy that do not have mass. One arguable point is... light. Which is a constant in our perceivable universe subscribing to Einstein's relativistic view.

(Egal = this is not my original answer I told you I accidently deleted. Still haven't gotten the inspiration for that)

Funny... I was just thinking about PMing you yesterday about that...then I thought the thread probably already has those flashing dates...so why resurrect it.

Whenever you're ready, RoadClosed...you know where to find me. :D :)