[Hypocrism]

(Original post by King-Panther)
So there is an infinite number before the last digit of Pi, will we ever get to the last digit if this number is never ending and goes on forever? Do you agree?

Firstly, it is a fallacy to talk about the "last digit of pi". When you make an argument using a fallacy, you will of course find yourself getting fallacious results.

So, it it more accurate to say "will we ever be able to read all the digits of pi from the start" and obviously, the answer is no.

If you want to apply this to our argument, 3 represents the "first" universe, and after that there is an infinite number of universes before our universe

No. The string of universes going back infinitely never ends. Our universe is a defined point of reference - it is the finite end point of our theorized infinite string that came before us. However, pi is a string of digits going forward infinitely. Hence we can only make the comparison of 3 being our universe, as both are finite reference points, and the following digits being the string of universes before our own, as never-ending infinite sequences.

So you see, a more relevant question to ask is "can we reach '3' in pi". Obviously, we can. It's there. But that doesn't mean that pi is impossible! It doesn't mean that the 3 in pi cannot possibly exist! Only if you assume a theoretical ending point in the number will you come to that conclusion, and of course then you will find that, shock horror, since you have assumed (by accident of argument, of course) that there is an end to pi, you will follow this logically to determine there is an end, and by the logic you've shown, that pi cannot exist.

We cannot "count back" from the end of pi, because there is no end. To talk of doing so assumes an ending point and you will find that false ending point by your logic. In the same way, we cannot "count forward" from the beginning of the cycle, because there is no beginning. To talk of doing so assumes a starting point and you will find that false starting point by your logic. The only way to address this problem is to get yourself around the concept of infinity. Let's work with limits. A simple mathematical approach. We have x universes before us. Each lasts y amount of time. From the beginning, can all of the universes fit into the time?

The universes last xy time
We have obviously had xy time
xy=xy

So for any number of universes, we will "reach" our universe in xy time.

In the limit that the number of universes approaches infinity, the universes last xy=infinity time
We have had xy=infinity time
xy=xy

So, in the case that there have been infinite universes, we have had infinite time for them all to cycle. When two infinites encounter each other, they react in ways that are counter-intuitive when viewed from a traditional mathematical model. In infinite time, you can cycle through ANY number of universes, even an infinite number of universes. YES, this period of time is infinite. YES we have infinite numbers of universes before our own. NO, we cannot count them. NO, we cannot get back to any kind of origin no matter how far back we go. But none of this suggests logically that infinite regress is not possible. Before us is an infinite period of time, with a finite ending point and no finite beginning.

[yomomalomo]

(Original post by King-Panther)
...

There is a rather simple answer to your infinite regress problem. When do we ever reach our universe if there are an infinite number of ones before it?

In infinite time we reach our universe.

Don't like it? No problem - if you are going to use your philosophical definition for infinity (which we don't use in mathematics or science) then you equally have the problem of when did God make or start the universe? If God has existed for infinite time, then when did he make the universe? Because whenever he made the universe it would take an infinite amount of time before he decided to make it, so it would never be made.

In reality, your argument has no real grounding and is subject to so many problems that it can be used to disprove the infiniteness of a being (God in this case) as well as a universe. In some cases infinite regress even disproves itself!

Many arguments for or against can be flipped and used against each other rather easily. For example, theists always tell atheists that something cannot come from nothing (despite their being some research that might actually disprove this). If this is the case then how can God create the universe from nothing? Theists then change their opinion to say that God is timeless and thus separate from time and space and so is free from any natural law or "way" (using speculative translations and interpretations of original religious texts, almost all of which actually elude to the philosophical interpretation of infinity i.e no beginning or end - but still time or in time). The atheist can quite easily rebut that before the big bang time and space did not exist, thus cause and effect is thrown and the window so there did not have to be a cause for the existence of the universe.

Rather than argue back and forth endlessly over whether a God exists or is disprovable, to me it makes far more sense to scrutinize each religion and its "message", seeing how relevant it is to us today. Determine the nature of a God that could exist. Observe whether the teaching is inerrant and consistent in its logic, morality, description of natural phenomena and the reasons for it. Find out if it can vastly improve our lives and bring humanity to a more harmonious existence through its true laws and ideals. That to me would be proof, though indirect, of some sort of TRUTH but it is something I have yet to come across.

[Pastaferian]

(Original post by Time Tourist)
The existence of God is not an empirical question but a transcendental one

I'm not sure why you say that, or why we should accept it. All we can say is that no one has ever proposed an empirical (testable, repeatable) way of proving the existence of a god. And as Christopher Hitchens said: "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence".

However, science is perfectly able to investigate things commonly associated with gods, fx the effectiveness (or otherwise) of petition prayers. Despite millions of dollars being spent on such research every year, no statistically significant evidence has yet been found that such prayers have any effect.

[AdamHarriis]

I watched something about the creation of the universe a couple weeks ago with Steven Hawking.
His conclusion was that God CANNOT exist.

Religion says that God existed before time began and started creating the universe...but Steven said that if God existed before time started ticking then there was no time for him to create the universe or do anything, so it is impossible for him to exist.

From that video though I came up with the conclusion that universes are made in black holes because in them everything is condensed into a tiny particle and then can expand rapidly which is basically the Big Bang

[Cringe]

You can't see light but it still exists, its just faster than you can see.

[paidakay]

NO.
Science mere..- let me stop here to avoid offending people, I have strong opinions against science.

I'll keep it short and sweet,
No science does not explain the existence of God.
This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my LT18i

[.eXe]

(Original post by Cringe)
You can't see light but it still exists, its just faster than you can see.

Did you really just say this?

[King-Panther]

(Original post by yomomalomo)
There is a rather simple answer to your infinite regress problem. When do we ever reach our universe if there are an infinite number of ones before it?

In infinite time we reach our universe.

O.k, if we use the same definition we use in mathematics, there was a first universe. We know something can't be created from nothing, therefore the first universe needed a creator...

Also, Pi never ends, so what is the last digit of Pi? Even if there was a starting universe, and there was an infinite (never ending, just like Pi) number of universes, when does this number end? just like Pi, when does it end?

Don't like it? No problem - if you are going to use your philosophical definition for infinity (which we don't use in mathematics or science) then you equally have the problem of when did God make or start the universe? If God has existed for infinite time, then when did he make the universe? Because whenever he made the universe it would take an infinite amount of time before he decided to make it, so it would never be made.

we've covered this before, space/time was created after the big bang... Physics, I would recommend studying it.

In reality, your argument has no real grounding and is subject to so many problems that it can be used to disprove the infiniteness of a being (God in this case) as well as a universe. In some cases infinite regress even disproves itself!

I agree, there can not be an infinite (never ending) number of universes before ours because we would never get here. Could you please explain that to Hypocrism, I've been trying to explain for several days now, LITERALLY!

Many arguments for or against can be flipped and used against each other rather easily. For example, theists always tell atheists that something cannot come from nothing (despite their being some research that might actually disprove this).

once again this has been covered earlier, you're talking about this particle/electrons that appear out of nowhere, which they do, but they fail to mention that energy is required for them to be created, energy is something, so not "something from nothing" which is something that can be known a priori as well as an analytical truth.

If this is the case then how can God create the universe from nothing?

God is not nothing...

Theists then change their opinion to say that God is timeless and thus separate from time and space and so is free from any natural law

Physics tells us space/time was create after the big bang, did you not know this? as well as the laws that govern the universe.

or "way" (using speculative translations and interpretations of original religious texts, almost all of which actually elude to the philosophical interpretation of infinity i.e no beginning or end - but still time or in time). The atheist can quite easily rebut that before the big bang time and space did not exist, thus cause and effect is thrown and the window so there did not have to be a cause for the existence of the universe.

once again, cause and effect is beyond a law and something that can be known a priori... LOGIC!

Rather than argue back and forth endlessly over whether a God exists or is disprovable, to me it makes far more sense to scrutinize each religion and its "message", seeing how relevant it is to us today. Determine the nature of a God that could exist.

I think you need to read my earlier posts.

Observe whether the teaching is inerrant and consistent in its logic, morality, description of natural phenomena and the reasons for it. Find out if it can vastly improve our lives and bring humanity to a more harmonious existence through its true laws and ideals. That to me would be proof, though indirect, of some sort of TRUTH but it is something I have yet to come across.

Once again read my previous posts, they go back a few pages, then reply.

[King-Panther]

(Original post by AdamHarriis)
I watched something about the creation of the universe a couple weeks ago with Steven Hawking.
His conclusion was that God CANNOT exist.

Religion says that God existed before time began and started creating the universe...but Steven said that if God existed before time started ticking then there was no time for him to create the universe or do anything, so it is impossible for him to exist.

From that video though I came up with the conclusion that universes are made in black holes because in them everything is condensed into a tiny particle and then can expand rapidly which is basically the Big Bang

If God created the universe, he created everything we know, directly or indirectly, (time, space, gravity, concepts and so forth). Therefore the very concept of creation was created by God, the very idea that something can be created and brought into existence was created by God, so to apply this to god is a fallacy (just like space/time).

Something can't be created from nothing is something that can be known using a priori reasoning as well as being an analytical truth. Therefore the universe requires a creator, something to bring it into existence.

However, one may ask, who created God. If God did have a creator, who created him, and then who created him and then who created him, and so on, this will go on forever, and because it goes on forever we would never get here because there would be infinite regress, but the fact we are here is a testimony that this question "who created God" is a fallacy. To get here, we have to start from somewhere, something created this universe, and by using occam's razor, God is the simplest and most logical explanation.

[King-Panther]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
Firstly, it is a fallacy to talk about the "last digit of pi". When you make an argument using a fallacy, you will of course find yourself getting fallacious results.

So, it it more accurate to say "will we ever be able to read all the digits of pi from the start" and obviously, the answer is no.

you seem to forget that just because the word in mathematics is used, doesnt mean it has the same meaning, without beginning and end.

So, if infinity (never ending) applies to Pi, why does your number of never ending universes before ours end? remember 3 is in the beginning of the series in Pi, there is a never anding number after it. So, if 3 is our universe and there is a never ending number before it, how do we get here if that number never ends?

No. The string of universes going back infinitely never ends. Our universe is a defined point of reference - it is the finite end point of our theorized infinite string that came before us. However, pi is a string of digits going forward infinitely. Hence we can only make the comparison of 3 being our universe, as both are finite reference points, and the following digits being the string of universes before our own, as never-ending infinite sequences.

no, Pi is going forward, your argument is going back..... If there was a never ending number of universes before ours, would this number end? if not, then we would not get here, if it does, then it is not infinite (never ending). 3 is the beginning in Pi, do you deny this, and there is a never ending number AFTER it, therefore we never get to the end... but our universe would be the ending, not the beginning like in Pi.... so if we there is a never ending number before 3, would we get here if that number never ends?

actually, let make make this easier, 3 is our universe... there is an infinite number after 3 in Pi? the opposite to our universe were there is an infinite number before ours, as you have suggested? how can we get to 3 if there is an infinite (never ending) number before it? You're suggesting we've come to the end of Pi, as you admitted above, it never ends.

even with a beginning in Pi (3) we can't get to the end, so how do you suggest we get here if there is a never ending number before our universe?

Basically if we started at the other end, would we ever get to 3 (our universe) when there is a never ending number of universes before 3 (our universe) ?


3 is the BEGINNING of Pi, there is a never ending number AFTER pi, and as you know we will never get to the end as Pi is endless, LIMITLESS!

3 is our universe, the END of a never ending (infinite) number of universes leading up to our universe, as you have suggested.

just like Pi doesnt have an end, why have you given our universe an end (3)?

So you see, a more relevant question to ask is "can we reach '3' in pi". Obviously, we can. It's there.

no, thats because thats the number we start from, what you're supposing is there is an infinite number before 3, not after!

ut that doesn't mean that pi is impossible! It doesn't mean that the 3 in pi cannot possibly exist! Only if you assume a theoretical ending point in the number will you come to that conclusion, and of course then you will find that, shock horror, since you have assumed (by accident of argument, of course) that there is an end to pi, you will follow this logically to determine there is an end, and by the logic you've shown, that pi cannot exist.

No, because in this series, Pi is the beginning and not the end! Do you deny that Pi is the beginning and not the end result, the end result would be the end digit!

so if we started at the other end of Pi, would we reach 3, because thats what you're suggesting, there is a never ending number of universes before ours, not after! Pi, starts at 3, and its never ending after that, do you deny this?


3 is the BEGINNING of Pi, there is a never ending number AFTER pi, and as you know we will never get to the end as Pi is endless, LIMITLESS!

3 is our universe, the END of a never ending (infinite) number of universes leading up to our universe, as you have suggested.

just like Pi doesnt have an end, why have you given our universe an end (3)?

We cannot "count back" from the end of pi, because there is no end

exactly, thats what I'm trying to tell you!

To talk of doing so assumes an ending point and you will find that false ending point by your logic

.

no, its you who is saying there is a never ending number of universes before ours, with Pi there is a never ending number after it.... like I said, if we started at the end, would we reach 3 (our universe)?

In the same way, we cannot "count forward" from the beginning of the cycle, because there is no beginning.

in Pi there is (3), like i mentioned the use of the word differs in mathematics...

To talk of doing so assumes a starting point and you will find that false starting point by your logic. The only way to address this problem is to get yourself around the concept of infinity. Let's work with limits.

limits, when infinity is limitless?

A simple mathematical approach. We have x universes before us. Each lasts y amount of time. From the beginning, can all of the universes fit into the time?


The universes last xy time
We have obviously had xy time
xy=xy

So for any number of universes, we will "reach" our universe in xy time.

In the limit that the number of universes approaches infinity, the universes last xy=infinity time
We have had xy=infinity time
xy=xy

lets sick to Pi, because infinity is not limited, it is limitless......

3 is the BEGINNING of Pi, there is a never ending number AFTER pi, and as you know we will never get to the end as Pi is endless, LIMITLESS!

3 is our universe, the END of a never ending (infinite) number of universes leading up to our universe, as you have suggested.

just like Pi doesnt have an end, why have you given our universe an end (3)?

So, in the case that there have been infinite universes, we have had infinite time for them all to cycle.

infinite time never ends, you're suggesting it has ended!

When two infinites encounter each other, they react in ways that are counter-intuitive when viewed from a traditional mathematical model. In infinite time, you can cycle through ANY number of universes, even an infinite number of universes. YES, this period of time is infinite. YES we have infinite numbers of universes before our own. NO, we cannot count them. NO, we cannot get back to any kind of origin no matter how far back we go. But none of this suggests logically that infinite regress is not possible.

so we have had an infinite number of universes before ours, just like Pi has an infinite number after 3.... can we get to the end of Pi? so how can we get to the end of the infinite number before ours?

if we can have an infinite number before our universe (ours beiing the end), then Pi must also end.

Before us is an infinite period of time, with a finite ending point and no finite beginning.

remember use in mathematics is different, its not without a beginning and end.

we know Pi has a beginning... but it never ends....

so our universe is 3 (finite ending point), although Pi is the opposite, but for argument sake, we start at the other end ( with no finite beginning), how are we going to get here?

[E.Blackadder]

(Original post by King-Panther)
God is the simplest and most logical explanation.

simple is a frame of reference. god is an easy explanation to understand, but that doesn't mean it is the simplest explanation. we are limited in our abilities. but at least from past experience we've learnt that every time we have used god as an explanation for natural phenomena we have been wrong. so is it really the most logical? or are we just falling back on our limited abilities and cognitive biases?

[King-Panther]

(Original post by E.Blackadder)
simple is a frame of reference. god is an easy explanation to understand, but that doesn't mean it is the simplest explanation. we are limited in our abilities. but at least from past experience we've learnt that every time we have used god as an explanation for natural phenomena we have been wrong. so is it really the most logical? or are we just falling back on our limited abilities and cognitive biases?

example?

no, it is the most LOGICAL, if not what else?

[E.Blackadder]

(Original post by King-Panther)
example?

no, it is the most LOGICAL, if not what else?

don't know, as i said our limitations might make it impossible for us to know or even come up with an alternate hypothesis.

but what we do know is that our limitations in the past have lead us to believe god(s) is directly responsible for natural phenomena (disasters, famine, disease etc) and then later we have been shown to be wrong. if you follow the logic then it is entirely feasible to accept that the god hypothesis might be wrong this time too.

[King-Panther]

(Original post by E.Blackadder)
don't know, as i said our limitations might make it impossible for us to know or even come up with an alternate hypothesis.

what limitations? are you trying to apply the scientific method to God?

but what we do know is that our limitations in the past have lead us to believe god(s) is directly responsible for natural phenomena (disasters, famine, disease etc) and then later we have been shown to be wrong. if you follow the logic then it is entirely feasible to accept that the god hypothesis might be wrong this time too.

That would depend on how you understand God, the christian west idea of God is not the only understanding of God.

[E.Blackadder]

(Original post by King-Panther)
what limitations? are you trying to apply the scientific method to God?

no, i mean limitations in powers of reasoning and imagination. in the same way the concept of god can't really be explained to a monkey, a far more ideal concept might not be explainable (or imagined) by us. psychology has shown us many times that our cognitive abilities are far from being capable of perceiving reality correctly or objectively.

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by King-Panther)
x

I can't reply to all the repetitive arguments in your post. The themes where you've misunderstood are:

1) Infinity does not necessarily have no beginning AND no end. Its definition is a number which cannot be counted. Hence it can either have no beginning, OR have no end, OR both.

2) When we are comparing pi and our infinite chain of universes, we imagine to reverse pi and our universe is 3. Then there's an infinite chain of numbers before 3 just like there's an infinite chain of universes before our own. The ending of both of these chains is finite.

3) You keep making the same error of saying "imagine we start at the infinite end" which you CANNOT DO! If you assume there is a starting point, you will find one erroneously. This whole time, I have been trying to show you that this is what you are doing wrong, approaching the idea of infinity incorrectly, and yet, you reply each time with the same arguments that I've already shown you why they are incorrect.

The whole idea behind the post was to show that in a number with an infinite chain at one end and a finite termination at the other end, the finite termination DOES exist. Pi shows this.





Intuition does NOT apply in this argument. You will not understand it intuitively. I don't understand it intuitively. It doesn't make sense. But by logic, we know there is nothing preventing there being an infinite cycle, not by your argument in any case.

[Ayshizzle]

(Original post by King-Panther)
oh really it is alcoholic, so im assuming you've tasted this wine because thats how you know. oh right, yeah I forgot they sold shloer in the arabian desert 1400AD, how silly of me.

Indeed, how could Muhammad have known that non- alcoholic wine would have existed in the future?

And no, wine is not a simile, otherwise the verses would say that there are rivers of wine-like stuff, not wine.

[PandyAndy]

[Cringe]

(Original post by .eXe)
Did you really just say this?

Light helps you to see other things. You can't see it directly. Just like how we can see the moon as reflection of light rays from the sun. I've never seen a light ray, have you?

[.eXe]

(Original post by Cringe)
Light helps you to see other things. You can't see it directly. Just like how we can see the moon as reflection of light rays from the sun. I've never seen a light ray, have you?

Here: http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imag...s/visible.html

Read the first sentence. (It's from nasa so don't say it's inaccurate)