• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Just How Impossible is the Possible?

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
Debunking a myth is a fool's errand. As only a fool thinks that a myth is a fact. It's like debunking Star Wars. And as to what is possible or impossible, we humans don't have sufficient information to make that determination. So we are left with establishing probabilities based on the limited and subjectively derived information that we do have. And again, it's only the fool that thinks his reasoned probability is a fact of reality, because he is unable or unwilling to recognize his own limitations.

Thank you. How many people do you see floating in the air when yo go to your car? How many people do you see carrying oak trees on their backs? How many people have you encountered that have returned from the grave? Would it be safe to say that these events would have a high probability of being impossible? Why exactly would these events be impossible? Or, is this only based only "my limited subjectively derived information"? Why can't we have 20 foot men, or jumping elephants? Science. It is science that helps us to determine what is CURRENTLY possible, and what is CURRENTLY impossible. This information is not subjective, it is objective. If it was subjective, it wouldn't be science.

You are correct. Only a fool would confuse any myth as fact. But for those that think myths are facts, science has debunked them.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Would it be safe to say that these events would have a high probability of being impossible?
I don't know what is safe to say. I don't know what is possible or impossible. All I know is what I, personally, have experienced, and not experienced, and I have to base what I think is a probable or improbable experience, on that.
Science. It is science that helps us to determine what is CURRENTLY possible, and what is CURRENTLY impossible.
Only if the probabilities we are trying to ascertain fall within the mechanics of physicality as we perceive it. But many of the probabilities we humans ponder are not of that variety.
You are correct. Only a fool would confuse any myth as fact. But for those that think myths are facts, science has debunked them.
I don't think the people who believe myths are facts care what science has to say about it.
 
Last edited:

Etritonakin

Well-Known Member
The Laws of physics and math debunk Myths, Metaphysical, the Supernatural, Vampires and Zombies, Fairy Tales, Ghosts, Telekinesis, Telepathy, Clairvoyance, Psychics, Gods and sub-Gods, Astral Projections, Resurrections, Astrology, Faith Healers, Occultism, Spirituality, and Miracles. Not only do these made-up human constructs not exist in reality, but it is impossible for them to exist. If any one of these constructs did exist, it would be the end of the Universe as we know it. All the natural laws of Thermodynamics(Entropy/Enthalpy), Conservation of Energy, Inertia and angular momentum, the absolute constants(light, time, and temperature), all the fundamental components of matter and the four natural forces, would all simply collapse. Even if only one of these scientific principles were suspended or violated, the consequences would be obvious, and irreversible. For example;

For any ghost to be seen, it would need to be composed of some kind of matter. Matter that can absorb, reflect, or refract light energy(EM). All the different properties of matter and their fundamental building blocks are already known(CERN and LHC). A ghost would need to draw energy from somewhere or it would disappear immediately(2nd law of thermodynamics). To reappear would also require an energy source. Since it can float or pass through matter, it can't exert any force on anything. This is a violation of Newtons Motion laws, as well as Gravity).Therefore, its components must interact with each other differently than the Standard Model would suggest. This is impossible since all the properties of matter are accounted for(including the possibility of dark matter and supersymmetry) by the Standard Model. Since the Universe is still here, Ghost can't exist. Hence, why no verifiable objective evidence can exist.

The Metaphysical(philosophical), the paranormal, and the supernatural are not self-evident. They can't be established by any everyday experiences, or by any natural scientific investigation. These philosophical beliefs can't concern themselves with objective evidence, since no objective evidence exists. They must only concern themselves with exploiting the language, or challenging already established principles with language. They can never become established fact, or be deduced by using formal logic or mathematical reasoning. Especially, since all Metaphysical phenomena exist outside of our senses/experiences. Even an empiricist is not allowed to assert the truth of non-empirical constructs. There will always remain the problems with realism, representation, evidences, and especially with semantics. Challenges to Metaphysical Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) . Therefore, if the metaphysical, supernatural and spiritual worlds could exist, they would have no materialistic or practical value, except for those seeking answers that are "a priori" in nature.

My personal belief, is that these were stories created by humans, to generally entertain other humans with a lot of time on their hands. So, to recap, NOTHING that exists within this Universe, can exist outside of the four fundamental forces of the Universe(EM, Gravity, Strong and Weak). NOTHING can be established as fact or certainty, without some additional amount of evidence. NOTHING that is composed of matter and energy, can ignore the four Laws of Thermodynamics, or escape its Entropy. NOTHING composed of matter, mass or momentum can travel faster than light, obtain absolute zero, or occupy zero space. NOTHING, can exist outside of any Quantum Field medium, established by the Quantum Standard Model of Fermions(Matter particles), and the Bosons(Force particles). Nothing on the macro-scale can escape the effects of Gravity, time and space, or the Laws of Motion. And, NOTHING can interact with something, without a medium/mechanism to facilitate that interaction(no medium/mechanism for clairvoyants, telepaths, empaths, or telekinesis). The only exceptions to anything that could violate the physical laws of nature, are the ideas and beliefs that we create using our mind. Since the basis for dis-belief is science, what is the basis for belief? The mind IS truly a terrible thing to waste.
The definitions of "supernatural" do include things beyond present understanding or belief of what is possible, or things which are natural, but to a higher degree or on a higher level. It does not necessarily mean UNnatural.

Resurrection, for example, is not at all impossible -but we ourselves are not yet able to do it.
If we are an arrangement of the natural (or emergent pattern, etc.) at any given point, then a record of that state and the ability to reproduce it would allow for resurrection.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you, but I think you're forgetting that your opinions aren't necessarily facts. How the heck does math debunk "resurrections," "fairy tales," or "ghosts?" :laughing:
 

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The Laws of physics and math debunk Myths, Metaphysical, the Supernatural, Vampires and Zombies, Fairy Tales, Ghosts, Telekinesis, Telepathy, Clairvoyance, Psychics, Gods and sub-Gods, Astral Projections, Resurrections, Astrology, Faith Healers, Occultism, Spirituality, and Miracles. Not only do these made-up human constructs not exist in reality, but it is impossible for them to exist. If any one of these constructs did exist, it would be the end of the Universe as we know it. All the natural laws of Thermodynamics(Entropy/Enthalpy), Conservation of Energy, Inertia and angular momentum, the absolute constants(light, time, and temperature), all the fundamental components of matter and the four natural forces, would all simply collapse. Even if only one of these scientific principles were suspended or violated, the consequences would be obvious, and irreversible. For example;

For any ghost to be seen, it would need to be composed of some kind of matter. Matter that can absorb, reflect, or refract light energy(EM). All the different properties of matter and their fundamental building blocks are already known(CERN and LHC). A ghost would need to draw energy from somewhere or it would disappear immediately(2nd law of thermodynamics). To reappear would also require an energy source. Since it can float or pass through matter, it can't exert any force on anything. This is a violation of Newtons Motion laws, as well as Gravity).Therefore, its components must interact with each other differently than the Standard Model would suggest. This is impossible since all the properties of matter are accounted for(including the possibility of dark matter and supersymmetry) by the Standard Model. Since the Universe is still here, Ghost can't exist. Hence, why no verifiable objective evidence can exist.

The Metaphysical(philosophical), the paranormal, and the supernatural are not self-evident. They can't be established by any everyday experiences, or by any natural scientific investigation. These philosophical beliefs can't concern themselves with objective evidence, since no objective evidence exists. They must only concern themselves with exploiting the language, or challenging already established principles with language. They can never become established fact, or be deduced by using formal logic or mathematical reasoning. Especially, since all Metaphysical phenomena exist outside of our senses/experiences. Even an empiricist is not allowed to assert the truth of non-empirical constructs. There will always remain the problems with realism, representation, evidences, and especially with semantics. Challenges to Metaphysical Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) . Therefore, if the metaphysical, supernatural and spiritual worlds could exist, they would have no materialistic or practical value, except for those seeking answers that are "a priori" in nature.

My personal belief, is that these were stories created by humans, to generally entertain other humans with a lot of time on their hands. So, to recap, NOTHING that exists within this Universe, can exist outside of the four fundamental forces of the Universe(EM, Gravity, Strong and Weak). NOTHING can be established as fact or certainty, without some additional amount of evidence. NOTHING that is composed of matter and energy, can ignore the four Laws of Thermodynamics, or escape its Entropy. NOTHING composed of matter, mass or momentum can travel faster than light, obtain absolute zero, or occupy zero space. NOTHING, can exist outside of any Quantum Field medium, established by the Quantum Standard Model of Fermions(Matter particles), and the Bosons(Force particles). Nothing on the macro-scale can escape the effects of Gravity, time and space, or the Laws of Motion. And, NOTHING can interact with something, without a medium/mechanism to facilitate that interaction(no medium/mechanism for clairvoyants, telepaths, empaths, or telekinesis). The only exceptions to anything that could violate the physical laws of nature, are the ideas and beliefs that we create using our mind. Since the basis for dis-belief is science, what is the basis for belief? The mind IS truly a terrible thing to waste.
The funny thing is you forgot to mention extra-terrestrials, which could counterfeit all these things for the fun of it.
 

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
The funny thing is you forgot to mention extra-terrestrials, which could counterfeit all these things for the fun of it.

Thank you for your response. Nothing about the existence of Aliens or Extraterrestrials violates any of the natural or physical laws. Just like our own human existence, it was just a matter of probability. Using the Drake equation can determine the probability of our earth being visited by aliens. By this probability equation, either earth will never be visited by aliens due to our accelerated expansion rate, or we are already standing knee-deep in the little green monsters. Since we are not wading through aliens, Occam's Razor applies.

So, no I didn't fail to mention the possibility of extraterrestrials. Their existence would not be impossible. Their existence would only be improbable.
 

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you, but I think you're forgetting that your opinions aren't necessarily facts. How the heck does math debunk "resurrections," "fairy tales," or "ghosts?" :laughing:

Thank you for your response. My opinions are not necessarily fact, but the laws of physics and math are as close to certainty as anyone can get. The laws in math is the language that is used in physics. It is the physics that makes it impossible for any ghost, fairy tale, or any resurrection to exist, or have occurred. The math is used to explain the physics. Everything on this planet, and everything off this planet, all follow the same basic rules in science, cause and effect. There are no exceptions. If there was just one violation or exception to any of the cardinal rules in science, the ramifications would be obvious and destructive. Do you know of any exceptions to any established rules in science? I'm not saying that these paranormal things cannot exist. I am saying that they cannot exist within our 4 dimensional reality. And, science is the reason why.
 

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
The definitions of "supernatural" do include things beyond present understanding or belief of what is possible, or things which are natural, but to a higher degree or on a higher level. It does not necessarily mean UNnatural.

Resurrection, for example, is not at all impossible -but we ourselves are not yet able to do it.
If we are an arrangement of the natural (or emergent pattern, etc.) at any given point, then a record of that state and the ability to reproduce it would allow for resurrection.

Thank you for your response. Because we label something as being beyond our understanding or belief, doesn't mean that its degree of certainty can somehow become more certain. Just because we create or assign levels of realities or what is possible, does not mean that these constructs are true. Why people are not floating in the air is explained by science, not because we lack some level of understanding, or level of perception. Is it possible for everyone on the planet to become a millionaire? Yes, if the top 10% would share their wealth. Would you say that would be possible, or impossible?

If you knock over a chessboard and the pieces are scattered everywhere, will this event reset time, create energy, and return to its ordered position? No, because entropy does not work in reverse(2nd law of Thermodynamics). When anyone dies, they are returning to the disordered state of the Universe. For us not to die and maintain an ordered state, we need to use energy. Hence, we are an open system. The dead has no way to use energy. Without energy no work can be done, and no order can be maintained. Therefore resurrections are impossible. In all of human existence, there have been 10 documented cases of so-called resurrections. In all of these cases the person was never completely dead, and simply survived(recovered). 10 out of 7.6 Billion people. Not to mention the 100+ Billions that have already died on the planet, and are still dead. This means that there is a 1.315 x e-19%, chance that a resurrection could occur. Nothing contradicts clear scientific data. If something did, it simply could not exist within our reality.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
The Laws of physics and math debunk Myths, Metaphysical, the Supernatural, Vampires and Zombies, Fairy Tales, Ghosts, Telekinesis, Telepathy, Clairvoyance, Psychics, Gods and sub-Gods, Astral Projections, Resurrections, Astrology, Faith Healers, Occultism, Spirituality, and Miracles. Not only do these made-up human constructs not exist in reality, but it is impossible for them to exist. If any one of these constructs did exist, it would be the end of the Universe as we know it. All the natural laws of Thermodynamics(Entropy/Enthalpy), Conservation of Energy, Inertia and angular momentum, the absolute constants(light, time, and temperature), all the fundamental components of matter and the four natural forces, would all simply collapse. Even if only one of these scientific principles were suspended or violated, the consequences would be obvious, and irreversible. For example;

For any ghost to be seen, it would need to be composed of some kind of matter. Matter that can absorb, reflect, or refract light energy(EM). All the different properties of matter and their fundamental building blocks are already known(CERN and LHC). A ghost would need to draw energy from somewhere or it would disappear immediately(2nd law of thermodynamics). To reappear would also require an energy source. Since it can float or pass through matter, it can't exert any force on anything. This is a violation of Newtons Motion laws, as well as Gravity).Therefore, its components must interact with each other differently than the Standard Model would suggest. This is impossible since all the properties of matter are accounted for(including the possibility of dark matter and supersymmetry) by the Standard Model. Since the Universe is still here, Ghost can't exist. Hence, why no verifiable objective evidence can exist.

The Metaphysical(philosophical), the paranormal, and the supernatural are not self-evident. They can't be established by any everyday experiences, or by any natural scientific investigation. These philosophical beliefs can't concern themselves with objective evidence, since no objective evidence exists. They must only concern themselves with exploiting the language, or challenging already established principles with language. They can never become established fact, or be deduced by using formal logic or mathematical reasoning. Especially, since all Metaphysical phenomena exist outside of our senses/experiences. Even an empiricist is not allowed to assert the truth of non-empirical constructs. There will always remain the problems with realism, representation, evidences, and especially with semantics. Challenges to Metaphysical Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) . Therefore, if the metaphysical, supernatural and spiritual worlds could exist, they would have no materialistic or practical value, except for those seeking answers that are "a priori" in nature.

My personal belief, is that these were stories created by humans, to generally entertain other humans with a lot of time on their hands. So, to recap, NOTHING that exists within this Universe, can exist outside of the four fundamental forces of the Universe(EM, Gravity, Strong and Weak). NOTHING can be established as fact or certainty, without some additional amount of evidence. NOTHING that is composed of matter and energy, can ignore the four Laws of Thermodynamics, or escape its Entropy. NOTHING composed of matter, mass or momentum can travel faster than light, obtain absolute zero, or occupy zero space. NOTHING, can exist outside of any Quantum Field medium, established by the Quantum Standard Model of Fermions(Matter particles), and the Bosons(Force particles). Nothing on the macro-scale can escape the effects of Gravity, time and space, or the Laws of Motion. And, NOTHING can interact with something, without a medium/mechanism to facilitate that interaction(no medium/mechanism for clairvoyants, telepaths, empaths, or telekinesis). The only exceptions to anything that could violate the physical laws of nature, are the ideas and beliefs that we create using our mind. Since the basis for dis-belief is science, what is the basis for belief? The mind IS truly a terrible thing to waste.

Interesting.
A scientist is no longer able to say honestly something is impossible. He can only say it is improbable. But he may be able to say something is impossible to explain in terms of our present knowledge. Science cannot say that all properties of matter and all forms of energy are now known.
- Professor John R. Brobeck of the University of Pennsylvania

Has science discovered everything? Then that's the end of science. RIP,
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
OK.... I guess I didn't know that. So what is Dark Matter and Dark Energy? I must have missed the memo on that.

What's 96 Percent of the Universe Made Of? Astronomers Don't Know
...and other matter.
Mind rhythms
By Hemai Parthasarathy

WELL over half a century ago, neurologists found that by placing electrodes on the scalp they could record the electrical signature of the brain at work. Most of the time they saw a random hotchpotch of signals-the combined activity of hundreds of thousands of brain cells. But they were astonished to find long stretches when this mess of activity became ordered into a pattern of elegant rhythmical waves. Ever since, scientists have wondered whether the secrets of our thoughts, perceptions and even consciousness itself might be hidden in the patterns of our brain waves.

The question of why we have brain waves-and what they tell us about how we think-is as hotly debated today as it was when the patterns were discovered. Researchers can see slow “alpha” waves in scalp recordings when the brain is relaxed, and “theta” and “delta” rhythms while we sleep. But the meaning, and even the existence, of faster “gamma” rhythms in the alert brain is highly controversial.

The problem is that you can’t see these faster rhythms directly. They are so well hidden in the noise of other brain activity that researchers have to uncover them by mathematically breaking up the scalp electrode trace-the electroencephalogram or EEG-into its component frequencies. And once you’ve uncovered a rhythm, how do you know it is anything more than an artefact of the technique, or a meaningless by-product of neurons that are wired together into networks?

But many researchers are now coming round to the idea that these brain waves are for real, and far from meaningless. The latest suggestion is that the rhythms could be …
 

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
OK.... I guess I didn't know that. So what is Dark Matter and Dark Energy? I must have missed the memo on that.

What's 96 Percent of the Universe Made Of? Astronomers Don't Know

Thank you again. No one knows exactly what dark matter and dark energy is. That would mean that we'd need to know what both are composed of. What we do know is what it does, and that it must exist. What it does can be observed, predicted, measured, and explained. Basically dark energy provides the energy that accelerates the expansion of the Universe. It also seems to create new matter. Dark matter is the matter that must exist, because the gravity of all the visible matter is just not enough to form galaxies and other complex structures. We know that dark matter exists because it bends light and interacts with Gravity. We simply don't know what kind of matter it is composed of. Hope this helps.
 

Truly Enlightened

Well-Known Member
Why do you say thank you when you obviously don't understand what i'm trying to say? Your statements regarding reality are metaphysical statements.



You are constructing a straw man and trying to knock it down. It's not really working. You should probably read on the subject. You are essentially using metaphysics in an attempt to discredit all metaphysics.

I'll give you a wikipedia link:

Metaphysics - Wikipedia

What you seem to have trouble with, is particular metaphysical concepts. Not metaphysics. This is what i'm trying to tell you.



I think in your quest for objectivity you have misunderstood both what i'm saying, and my motivations.



This is an assumption about reality. You make a definite claim regarding reality. Specifically, you are presenting a metaphysical concept: An inquiry into the very nature of reality itself.

Thanking you for your response has nothing to do with understanding your posts. You have taken the time to respond, and I'm thanking you for doing so. In the future I won't do so. Rather than keep playing the accusation, equivocation, and terminology games, maybe you can deposit an equation or concept that represents anything that is Metaphysical/Metaphysic specific? Maybe you can directly equate any aspect of the Metaphysical/Metaphysics to the materialistic/physical reality. Maybe you can deposit any practical Metaphysical/Metaphysic application that can augment or enhance our understanding of any natural phenomena? Finally, what method of Inquiry is used to integrate the metaphysical/metaphysics with the scientific method of inquiry?

I don't understand how any statements I make relating to science, is somehow a metaphysical statement. If I say that the laws of physics can't be violated or changed, you say this is a metaphysical statement. If I say that energy can't be created, and is a property of matter, you say this is another metaphysical statement. What exactly is a non-metaphysical statement? Or, will you again refer me to more definitions, and more interpretations?

This is an assumption about reality. You make a definite claim regarding reality. Specifically, you are presenting a metaphysical concept: An inquiry into the very nature of reality itself.

This is just gibberish. We make definite claims about reality everyday. We make assumptions about reality all the time. If we didn't we wouldn't survive for very long. Imagine what would happen if we didn't make assumptions about time, height, distances, weight, or speed. What do you think would happen of we made the wrong assumptions. Fortunately, we are the product of evolution, and not the product of anything metaphysical.
 

Darkstorn

This shows how unique i am.
Thanking you for your response has nothing to do with understanding your posts. You have taken the time to respond, and I'm thanking you for doing so. In the future I won't do so. Rather than keep playing the accusation, equivocation, and terminology games, maybe you can deposit an equation or concept that represents anything that is Metaphysical/Metaphysic specific? Maybe you can directly equate any aspect of the Metaphysical/Metaphysics to the materialistic/physical reality. Maybe you can deposit any practical Metaphysical/Metaphysic application that can augment or enhance our understanding of any natural phenomena? Finally, what method of Inquiry is used to integrate the metaphysical/metaphysics with the scientific method of inquiry?

I would very much like to discuss this. This is an interesting subject. But, i have no wish to debate with someone who refuses to understand what i'm debating. I have no intention to defend your straw man version of it. I'd much rather defend the real thing.

For this reason, if you want to discuss with me, you better read the link i gave you. Otherwise i'm arguing with someone who doesn't know what he's arguing about.

You've misunderstood everything i said basically. I already gave you "an equation or concept that represents anything that is Metaphysical/Metaphysics specific." You didn't understand this.

This is why i gave you the link.

I don't understand how any statements I make relating to science, is somehow a metaphysical statement. If I say that the laws of physics can't be violated or changed, you say this is a metaphysical statement.

No. I'm not saying that. You're literally refusing to understand what i'm saying.

If I say that energy can't be created, and is a property of matter, you say this is another metaphysical statement.

No. I'm not saying that. You're literally refusing to understand what i'm saying. I'm saying what it means to be "property" is a metaphysical statement.

What exactly is a non-metaphysical statement? Or, will you again refer me to more definitions, and more interpretations?

The assumptions we make about reality are irrelevant. It is only the evidence that we can present that is relevant.

I highlighted the parts of a previous argument you did. The highlighted parts are the ones that deal with metaphysics rather than the scientific method. You are using your opinions and mistaking them for objective facts.

How do you define what's relevant? What does relevant mean? That's the area of metaphysics.

Metaphysics - Wikipedia

And you definitely need more definitions and more interpretations. Right now you have just one, yours. And it's a straw man.

This is just gibberish. We make definite claims about reality everyday. We make assumptions about reality all the time. If we didn't we wouldn't survive for very long. Imagine what would happen if we didn't make assumptions about time, height, distances, weight, or speed. What do you think would happen of we made the wrong assumptions. Fortunately, we are the product of evolution, and not the product of anything metaphysical.

:rolleyes: Earlier i said every time we make an assumption about reality, we're using metaphysics. You said making assumptions about reality is irrelevant. Now, apparently assumptions about reality can help us survive for example? How is that irrelevant? How is this you not putting out two contradicting arguments?

If you don't understand what i'm arguing for, i will not debate with you. I'm a methodological naturalist, agnostic atheist and a Buddhist. You seem to think i'm a creationist for some reason. Maybe you should stop assuming things about reality?

Maybe you should focus on learning about the things you are trying to argue? I'll repeat once more: You have a problem with one particular metaphysical model. One i don't agree with even. You think merely because i'm arguing with you, i'm holding some wild beliefs about the supernatural.

I'm not. I'm correcting a factual mistake you're doing. The only practical difference between you and i is that i know what metaphysics means and you don't.

If you have trouble understanding that, we're done here.

/E: As far as metaphysics goes: You showed just how impossible it is to make you see anything beyond your personal bias.

/E2: I added some stuff. I don't really want to contribute to your misunderstanding. But i need to reiterate it still: You are misunderstanding both what i'm trying to say, and my motivations.
 
Last edited:

PureX

Veteran Member
Thank you for your response. Nothing about the existence of Aliens or Extraterrestrials violates any of the natural or physical laws. Just like our own human existence, it was just a matter of probability. Using the Drake equation can determine the probability of our earth being visited by aliens. By this probability equation, either earth will never be visited by aliens due to our accelerated expansion rate, or we are already standing knee-deep in the little green monsters. Since we are not wading through aliens, Occam's Razor applies.

So, no I didn't fail to mention the possibility of extraterrestrials. Their existence would not be impossible. Their existence would only be improbable.
Actually, only their visitation would be improbable. Their existence is quite probable, although it's puzzling that we have not detected their 'noise', yet. But then again, all this probability is based on our own limited experience being projected as "law" onto the rest of the universe.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I tend to agree with you, but I think you're forgetting that your opinions aren't necessarily facts. How the heck does math debunk "resurrections," "fairy tales," or "ghosts?" :laughing:


Depends a lot on the fairy tale or he resurrection claim.

If Nixon has made yet another comeback, there must be
some way to use math to show he is really there. Or not.

Like, say, zero people have seen him, and, some
larger number say his grave is undisturbed.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
The Laws of physics and math debunk Myths, Metaphysical, the Supernatural, Vampires and Zombies, Fairy Tales, Ghosts, Telekinesis, Telepathy, Clairvoyance, Psychics, Gods and sub-Gods, Astral Projections, Resurrections, Astrology, Faith Healers, Occultism, Spirituality, and Miracles. Not only do these made-up human constructs not exist in reality, but it is impossible for them to exist. If any one of these constructs did exist, it would be the end of the Universe as we know it. All the natural laws of Thermodynamics(Entropy/Enthalpy), Conservation of Energy, Inertia and angular momentum, the absolute constants(light, time, and temperature), all the fundamental components of matter and the four natural forces, would all simply collapse. Even if only one of these scientific principles were suspended or violated, the consequences would be obvious, and irreversible. For example;

For any ghost to be seen, it would need to be composed of some kind of matter. Matter that can absorb, reflect, or refract light energy(EM). All the different properties of matter and their fundamental building blocks are already known(CERN and LHC). A ghost would need to draw energy from somewhere or it would disappear immediately(2nd law of thermodynamics). To reappear would also require an energy source. Since it can float or pass through matter, it can't exert any force on anything. This is a violation of Newtons Motion laws, as well as Gravity).Therefore, its components must interact with each other differently than the Standard Model would suggest. This is impossible since all the properties of matter are accounted for(including the possibility of dark matter and supersymmetry) by the Standard Model. Since the Universe is still here, Ghost can't exist. Hence, why no verifiable objective evidence can exist.

The Metaphysical(philosophical), the paranormal, and the supernatural are not self-evident. They can't be established by any everyday experiences, or by any natural scientific investigation. These philosophical beliefs can't concern themselves with objective evidence, since no objective evidence exists. They must only concern themselves with exploiting the language, or challenging already established principles with language. They can never become established fact, or be deduced by using formal logic or mathematical reasoning. Especially, since all Metaphysical phenomena exist outside of our senses/experiences. Even an empiricist is not allowed to assert the truth of non-empirical constructs. There will always remain the problems with realism, representation, evidences, and especially with semantics. Challenges to Metaphysical Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) . Therefore, if the metaphysical, supernatural and spiritual worlds could exist, they would have no materialistic or practical value, except for those seeking answers that are "a priori" in nature.

My personal belief, is that these were stories created by humans, to generally entertain other humans with a lot of time on their hands. So, to recap, NOTHING that exists within this Universe, can exist outside of the four fundamental forces of the Universe(EM, Gravity, Strong and Weak). NOTHING can be established as fact or certainty, without some additional amount of evidence. NOTHING that is composed of matter and energy, can ignore the four Laws of Thermodynamics, or escape its Entropy. NOTHING composed of matter, mass or momentum can travel faster than light, obtain absolute zero, or occupy zero space. NOTHING, can exist outside of any Quantum Field medium, established by the Quantum Standard Model of Fermions(Matter particles), and the Bosons(Force particles). Nothing on the macro-scale can escape the effects of Gravity, time and space, or the Laws of Motion. And, NOTHING can interact with something, without a medium/mechanism to facilitate that interaction(no medium/mechanism for clairvoyants, telepaths, empaths, or telekinesis). The only exceptions to anything that could violate the physical laws of nature, are the ideas and beliefs that we create using our mind. Since the basis for dis-belief is science, what is the basis for belief? The mind IS truly a terrible thing to waste.

Interesting, intriguing ideas! My responses:

1) The converse is also logical, that is, if even one person, ever, had any kind of spiritual experience, materialist views are partial, incorrect.

2) Your thoughts disallow for entities/energy to appear here from other dimensions. I don't understand how rationalists can posit up to 11 dimensions than say nothing untoward can get here from there.
 
Top