Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tack]

You're exactly right.


Doesn't feel good, does it?

[Vester]

335,510,752 meters per second.

It's fairly accurate, when you take account that THE ORBIT BETWEEN MOON AND EARTH HAS NOT BEING CALCULATED YET.

And... You know, in 600 AD, there is no mathematicians, at least in Arabia.

China would like to have a word with you.

[Neruz]

You're exactly right.


Doesn't feel good, does it?

Doesn't bother me, when i'm dead, i'll be dead, i won't be in a position to care anymore, will i?

[Firnagzen]

335,510,752 meters per second.

It's fairly accurate, when you take account that THE ORBIT BETWEEN MOON AND EARTH HAS NOT BEING CALCULATED YET.

And... You know, in 600 AD, there is no mathematicians, at least in Arabia.

China would like to have a word with you.

*cough*

[Dae]

Ampersand, I don't really understand your point. Sure, your math is probably irrefutable (I haven't checked, but I trust you), but the original point was just to show that a piece of Qu'ran described God as distant from Earth, and that information took time to reach him, though it moves at such speed that there is observable time-dilation.
The point was to show God as distant and not acting directly. The fact that speed of light is talked about isn't that big a deal. As far as I know, every speed implies time-dilatation, but I doubt that across the entire world the average joe has a deep understanding of the relativity theory.

In fact, that verse (wherever it comes from originally) is quite interesting.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Off topic, Mike, I find interesting that you took time to rethink part of your religious education. I usually see religions as philosophical guides that you're not bound to. Ideally, you should document about them all, consider their point of view, take what looks most right here and there, come up with your own ideas when none fits you, etc. Perhaps religious books were made for people who didn't have time (or motivation) to think, sort of a philosophical ready-to-wear, and was misused and misunderstood as a vision of the one and only truth.

The universe as a distraction for God isn't a new idea, but a fascinating one. Asimov wrote about it in "The last answer", for example.
Speaking about soul, conscience or whatever you call it, perhaps it is immaterial and uses the brain and nervous system as an interface with the material world.
Other people think every conscience is part of a sort of super-conscience, so we are all linked in a way, through this super-conscience. I use to represent it as a big ethereal cloud with sort of tentacles linked to our brains when I need to have an image it, but of course it's not even trying to be exact. Yet we would be like puppets. And now that I think of it, if I made up a simulation with sentient beings, I would have a "sentientManager" class that would care of, well, sentient beings.

The aspect of the universe as a simulation would gain even more weight if time was proven as discreet, as in ticking. Then a "tick" would match a processor cycle I guess. I haven't followed this question lately, but I think that due to Planck time being the smallest time interval bearing a meaning, we tend toward discreet time.

[Neruz]

The ovbious question is of course "If the 'soul' (as good a term as any) is seperate from the mind, why does damaging the mind impair cognitive processes?"

[Ampersand]

Ampersand, I don't really understand your point. Sure, your math is probably irrefutable (I haven't checked, but I trust you), but the original point was just to show that a piece of Qu'ran described God as distant from Earth, and that information took time to reach him, though it moves at such speed that there is observable time-dilation.
The point was to show God as distant and not acting directly. The fact that speed of light is talked about isn't that big a deal. As far as I know, every speed implies time-dilatation, but I doubt that across the entire world the average joe has a deep understanding of the relativity theory.

In fact, that verse (wherever it comes from originally) is quite interesting.

My point was primarily to halt the spread of this peculiar meme that the speed of light is accurately described in the Quran. It is not. Whenever a false statement is posited, it should be corrected. I don't know about you, but I want as many true things in my head and as few false things in my head as possible. I act to further that.

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

Ampersand, I don't really understand your point. Sure, your math is probably irrefutable (I haven't checked, but I trust you), but the original point was just to show that a piece of Qu'ran described God as distant from Earth, and that information took time to reach him, though it moves at such speed that there is observable time-dilation.
The point was to show God as distant and not acting directly. The fact that speed of light is talked about isn't that big a deal. As far as I know, every speed implies time-dilatation, but I doubt that across the entire world the average joe has a deep understanding of the relativity theory.

In fact, that verse (wherever it comes from originally) is quite interesting.

My point was primarily to halt the spread of this peculiar meme that the speed of light is accurately described in the Quran. It is not. Whenever a false statement is posited, it should be corrected. I don't know about you, but I want as many true things in my head and as few false things in my head as possible. I act to further that.

>_>
<_<

[Neruz]

Ampersand, I don't really understand your point. Sure, your math is probably irrefutable (I haven't checked, but I trust you), but the original point was just to show that a piece of Qu'ran described God as distant from Earth, and that information took time to reach him, though it moves at such speed that there is observable time-dilation.
The point was to show God as distant and not acting directly. The fact that speed of light is talked about isn't that big a deal. As far as I know, every speed implies time-dilatation, but I doubt that across the entire world the average joe has a deep understanding of the relativity theory.

In fact, that verse (wherever it comes from originally) is quite interesting.

My point was primarily to halt the spread of this peculiar meme that the speed of light is accurately described in the Quran. It is not. Whenever a false statement is posited, it should be corrected. I don't know about you, but I want as many true things in my head and as few false things in my head as possible. I act to further that.

Even if it was, it doesn't actually mean anything.

[Firnagzen]

The ovbious question is of course "If the 'soul' (as good a term as any) is seperate from the mind, why does damaging the mind impair cognitive processes?"

Sorry Neruz, I'm on your side, but this is just too easy pickings: Perhaps the brain is an interface between  your body and the soul, so damaging it impairs cognitive processes.

[Ampersand]

The non physical can not, by definition of being non-physical, interact with a physical object. If it can interact with a physical object, it is testable, and can be evaluated scientifically.

[Neruz]

The ovbious question is of course "If the 'soul' (as good a term as any) is seperate from the mind, why does damaging the mind impair cognitive processes?"

Sorry Neruz, I'm on your side, but this is just too easy pickings: Perhaps the brain is an interface between  your body and the soul, so damaging it impairs cognitive processes.

Really? I would have thought it would merely damage the transmission of the information, rather than the processes themselves. The fact that it is possible to damage and destroy emotions, and that emotions can be enhanced, altered, created or suppressed with various chemicals and drugs (many of which the body uses all on it's little lonesome) suggests that the brain must be more than merely an interface.

For example: When i am drunk, i start thinking that bad ideas are really good ideas (amongst other things), if my brain were merely an interface for my real consciousness, that was seperate from my brain, why would putting alcohol in my blood impair my thinking? I can understand it imparing my senses, but my actual thoughts?

[Tack]

RANDOM PIECE OF EVIDENCE:

The guy who got a pole through his head and survived, but had a radical personality change from then on.

[Neruz]

Exactly.

And it wasn't that his personality was the same, but he was no longer able to 'transmit' it correctly, his personality itself actually changed. Damaging his brain in that manner changed his thought processes themselves.


This is what we would expect to see if the physical nervous system is in fact the consciousness, this is not what we would expect to see if the consciousness was seperate from the system.


The same goes for being Drunk: I should still recognise that the bad idea is a bad idea, but perhaps be unable to stop myself or something, the fact that my thought processes themselves change and that i think the bad idea is a good idea means that my actual consciousness itself has been affected by the alcohol, which again should not be possible if my consciousness is seperate from my nervous system.



Finally; there was nothing before, why should there be anything after?

[Dae]

Well it depends if your soul is what defines your personnality. Perhaps it's something that is necessary for thinking, but the body is necessary as well. Perhaps when the brain is damaged, it misinterprets what the soul does behind, whatever it does, and you're only conscious of the misinterpreted part. If a deed is done but no one can remember it and there is no evidence of it, it could as well never have been done, but it was. And you'll never know.
Or perhaps the damaged brain relays inexact information.

Another interesting question would be, even if there was a persistant soul, would we be defined more by the soul than the mind or the body ? Is it acting like a motor, a fuel, or is it our "existence" in its purest form begging for a body to "exist" ?
In other words, were you the reincarnation of someone else, would that person be you and you be that person ?

Going back to God, if you start thinking that the universe, in which space and time exist, is not infinite, then perhaps there is something behind the boudary. It's quite hard to imagine something without space or time.