Author |
Topic: religion (Read 23616 times) |
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender: 
Posts: 13730
|
 |
Re: religion
« Reply #125 on: Nov 9th, 2009, 2:44am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
on Nov 8th, 2009, 3:41pm, BenVitale wrote:| What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object? |
|
An immovable object would need to have infinite mass. So aside from the fact that it cannot exist, it would warp space to such an extent that time would stop, if not do something weirder.
Likewise an irresistible force cannot exist, because it would likewise have to be infinite. Therefore if it does work over any distance the energy involved is infinite. And energy being equivalent to mass, it warps space to such an extent that time stops.
Since it takes time for anything to happen, and given that time stops when these concepts are involved, nothing happens.  
|
|
 IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
    
Gender:
Posts: 2874
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #126 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 11:38am » |
Quote Modify
|
By definition, if an object is immovable, there is no force that can be applied to it without it resisting it - equally, if you have an irresistible force, it will move any object to which it is applied.
Even in cosmologies where you don't need infinities to have irresistible forces or immovable objects, the two can only co-exist as long as they never collide...
And, of course, infinite power doesn't necessarily mean being able to do logically inconsistent things - being able to produce arbitrary, non-negligible amounts of energy in zero time means you supply infinite power over that time - but doesn't enable you to create something too heavy to lift...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #127 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 12:00pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Any force can be resisted by an equal but opposite force; so an irresistible force cannot exist.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Vondell
Junior Member
Gender:
Posts: 78
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #128 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 1:15pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 6th, 2009, 5:31am, Grimbal wrote:
If God could solve the problem, whatever it was, without letting his son die, but didn't, then he wanted him to die and that makes him bad.
|
|
He could've. But a different solution would have taken away free will.
|
|
IP Logged |
Why is it that people ask for my two cents worth, and then only offer me a penny for my thoughts?
That deal sucks!
|
|
|
Vondell
Junior Member
Gender:
Posts: 78
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #129 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 1:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
As far as the irresistable force/immovable object paradox, I've always considered it a logic question...not whether or not such concepts could exist in reality.
Anyway, since one can't move, or be moved, by the other...wouldn't they essentially destroy each other thereby cancelling out each. Just because something can't be moved, that doesn't mean it can't be destroyed.
Thoughts?
|
|
IP Logged |
Why is it that people ask for my two cents worth, and then only offer me a penny for my thoughts?
That deal sucks!
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #130 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 2:27pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 12th, 2009, 1:37pm, Vondell wrote:| , I've always considered it a logic question ... |
|
Read the Irresistible force paradox
As an exercise in logic. The answer is either:
(a) True
(b) False
(c) Undecidable or unanswerable
I believe the answer to be (c)
An immovable object <==> infinite mass and create a singularity
An unstoppable force <==> infinite energy
In a finite universe, infinite energy does not exist.
In the universe as we know it, there are no irresistible forces and immovable objects.
But, if we imagine a universe A which allows irresistible forces, it won't allow any immovable objects.
Otherwise we have a contradiction.
And, if we imagine a universe B which allows an immovable object, this universe won't allow an irresistible force.
Again, we would face a contradiction.
So, we cannot have both irresistible forces and immovable objects.
So, an irresistible force cannot meet an immovable object.
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
ThudnBlunder
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
The dewdrop slides into the shining Sea
Gender:
Posts: 4489
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #131 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 2:33pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 12th, 2009, 1:37pm, Vondell wrote:As far as the irresistable force/immovable object paradox, I've always considered it a logic question...not whether or not such concepts could exist in reality.
|
|
But doesn't classical logic tend to be insufficient for dealing with infinities, eg. transfinite numbers, singularities, etc?
|
|
IP Logged |
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.....................................................................er, if that's all right with the rest of you.
|
|
|
Vondell
Junior Member
Gender:
Posts: 78
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #132 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 2:44pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I agree that the scenario is pretty much impossible. (Personally, I allow the possibility for anything to exist/happen however improbable.) But, the question is a "what if?" It does not require that the objects/events in question actually exist...just that thought is exercised on the question itself.
For example..."If you could have any superpower, what would it be?"
Some would answer with a given "power," while others would answer, "superpowers do not exist, therefore the question is irrelevant." It's the question, not the reality.
It's a "what if" scenario. IF the laws of physics were bent/broken for just a moment, what would the outcome be?
Besides, where would we be now if "what if's" were never explored?
|
|
IP Logged |
Why is it that people ask for my two cents worth, and then only offer me a penny for my thoughts?
That deal sucks!
|
|
|
Vondell
Junior Member
Gender:
Posts: 78
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #133 on: Nov 12th, 2009, 2:47pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 12th, 2009, 2:33pm, ThudanBlunder wrote:
But doesn't classical logic tend to be insufficient for dealing with infinities, eg. transfinite numbers, singularities, etc? |
|
That's why a definite answer can't be agreed upon. It's an attempt to define/answer something we can't/don't fully understand.
|
|
IP Logged |
Why is it that people ask for my two cents worth, and then only offer me a penny for my thoughts?
That deal sucks!
|
|
|
JiNbOtAk
Uberpuzzler
Hana Hana No Mi
Gender:
Posts: 1187
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #134 on: Nov 13th, 2009, 3:41am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 5th, 2009, 12:56pm, BenVitale wrote:| What was Jesus' “incentive” to go on the cross? |
|
Err..correct me if I'm wrong, but did Jesus had any choice in the matter ?
In my opinion, God being omnipotent does not mean God can do anything and everything. Aside from the example that Grimbal gave, there are other limitations to what God cannot do. Basically, God could (or as some might say, should) only do Godly things.
|
|
IP Logged |
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #135 on: Nov 13th, 2009, 12:13pm » |
Quote Modify
|
We could define Economics, incentives as:
Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources.
We live a life defined by scarcity, Jesus' promise (the promise of heaven if you chose to believe in him) was to transform scarcity into into a world of abundance.
An incentive is any factor (financial or non-financial) that enables or motivates a particular course of action ... It is an expectation that encourages people to behave in a certain way.
Here's a perspective I found in Time magazine:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,898431,00.html
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #136 on: Nov 13th, 2009, 12:29pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 13th, 2009, 12:13pm, BenVitale wrote:| http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,898431,00.html |
|
Quoting the article: "If this supernaturalistic event [Jesus ressurection] did not take place, as unbelievers hold, it requires a natural explanation"
Does an event that did not take place really require any explanation?
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Vondell
Junior Member
Gender:
Posts: 78
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #137 on: Nov 13th, 2009, 1:15pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I believe it means "What happenned to His body if He were not resurrected?"
But, it seems as if most of the information in the article is taken largely out of context.
As far as faking His death on the cross, consider that most people condemned to die by crucifixion had their hands and feet bound to the cross with rope. Jesus had His hands and feet 'nailed' to the cross. Not to mention He had already been beaten and lashed prior (and was too weak to even carry His own cross.) After His death, the 2 others with them had their legs broken so that they could not support themselves any longer, but His side was pierced which would contribute to considerable blood loss.
After His death, the priests and Pharisees were worried that the disciples would steal Jesus' body in order to fulfill the resurrection, so they went to Pilate and had the tomb sealed and guarded to prevent such an occurrence.
|
| « Last Edit: Nov 13th, 2009, 9:25pm by Vondell » |
IP Logged |
Why is it that people ask for my two cents worth, and then only offer me a penny for my thoughts?
That deal sucks!
|
|
|
Grimbal
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 7527
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #138 on: Nov 22nd, 2009, 3:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
Is there any evidence that Jesus actually resurrected?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2874
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #139 on: Nov 22nd, 2009, 7:13am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 22nd, 2009, 3:23am, Grimbal wrote:| Is there any evidence that Jesus actually resurrected? |
|
There's a handful of eye-witness accounts that were written down (according to current thinking as reported on Wikipedia) within a few decades of the event that have Jesus walking and talking after his death.
It's hard to think of any other kind of evidence that would be expected to exist if someone really did come back to life a couple of thousand years ago. Even if someone were to reliably come back from the dead today, it's hard to think of any evidence that we could leave that would convince sceptics in a future where no-one resurrects...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #140 on: Nov 22nd, 2009, 7:16am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 22nd, 2009, 3:23am, Grimbal wrote:| Is there any evidence that Jesus actually resurrected? |
|
That depends on what you allow/define as evidence. Clearly there is the Bible, and it is evidence in the sense that it gives (some) people a reason to think that the world is one way rather than another. Whether it is compelling evidence (in an argumentation-theoretic or scientific way), I would say not.
In the same way there is a plenty of evidence for Santa Claus; such as getting gifts at Christmas. But there are many other reasons not to believe it, and the evidence there is for him can be explained in other ways as well. Christmas gifts can both be evidence for Santa and for your parents' generosity and love.
However, aside from the bible, I don't believe there is a lot of (independent) corroborating evidence.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #141 on: Nov 22nd, 2009, 7:29am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 22nd, 2009, 7:13am, rmsgrey wrote:| Even if someone were to reliably come back from the dead today, it's hard to think of any evidence that we could leave that would convince sceptics in a future where no-one resurrects... |
|
If by "skeptic" you mean someone dead set on disbelieving it, then yes; they could always prefer to believe there was some conspiracy out to mislead them (but such people really aren't skeptics).
If you had pathology report by a reliable physician that someone died, and other reports of a later date that the person was alive, and an explanation by experts how that happened, then I think any reasonable skeptic would be able to value such expert evidence for what it is.
If we had independent witness accounts, of say Roman soldiers, that 1) saw Jesus had died, and 2) (possibly others) that saw him at a later date, then that would do much to substantiate the claims he came back from the dead, or at least did something very much like it. But as far as I know his name doesn't even come up in any Roman records, let alone with such details.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #142 on: Nov 22nd, 2009, 1:05pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 22nd, 2009, 7:16am, towr wrote:
In the same way there is a plenty of evidence for Santa Claus; such as getting gifts at Christmas.
... |
|
That reminds me of the Curry's paradox or Lob's paradox
If a man with flying reindeer has delivered presents to all the good children in the world in one night, then Santa Claus exists
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #144 on: Jul 16th, 2011, 11:01am » |
Quote Modify
|
Lionel Tiger: The Brain Creates Religion
Lionel Tiger means that it is a neurochemical process.
"Believing in God generates soothing "juices" in the brain that make us feel good."
http://bigthink.com/ideas/20159
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 16th, 2011, 11:01am by Benny » |
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
rmsgrey
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 2874
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #145 on: Jul 17th, 2011, 5:48am » |
Quote Modify
|
The brain also has mechanisms for percieving colours, tastes, straight lines, edges, words, faces, etc, etc, etc...
Therefore, nothing has a face!
Or maybe not... But any invoking of the "God-spotter" region of the brain as an argument for the non-existence of gods has to account for the difference between that mechanism and the various mechanisms that exist to detect those aspects of the world that are generally accepted as real - or else it becomes an argument that faces don't exist...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ThudnBlunder
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
The dewdrop slides into the shining Sea
Gender:
Posts: 4489
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #146 on: Jul 17th, 2011, 2:19pm » |
Quote Modify
|
BenVitale, are you differentiating between 'religion' and 'believing in God'?
If so, perhaps 'believing in God' could be renamed 'religion, but not as we know it (Jim)'. LOL
|
| « Last Edit: Sep 12th, 2011, 1:28pm by ThudnBlunder » |
IP Logged |
THE MEEK SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.....................................................................er, if that's all right with the rest of you.
|
|
|
khuram4u
Newbie
Gender:
Posts: 46
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #147 on: Oct 27th, 2011, 4:15pm » |
Quote Modify
|
this is very serious and sensitive question. You should be good at research to know the reality. there are many religions and views but The God is only one.
In fact, people made this a complex issue due to misguide and wrong interpretation.
Well, go and research your self, i would simply say. if i explained my opinion, to say this is right religion and that is wrong, then i am afraid many of us will hurt.
I must say only one is true else are the wrong interpretations.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
JiNbOtAk
Uberpuzzler
Hana Hana No Mi
Gender:
Posts: 1187
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #148 on: Oct 31st, 2011, 11:56pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Nov 22nd, 2009, 3:23am, Grimbal wrote:| Is there any evidence that Jesus actually resurrected? |
|
I know this is an old issue, it got me thinking, for Jesus to be resurrected, he would need to die on the cross.
Is there any evidence of that ?
|
|
IP Logged |
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: religion
« Reply #149 on: Nov 1st, 2011, 10:32am » |
Quote Modify
|
Well, we do know that plenty of people have been crucified and died as a result, even if we lack evidence for most individuals it happened to. It's problematic enough to find solid evidence Jesus existed at all; all we have to go on are writings put down long after he supposedly died.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print