For the context of the following comments please click on the hyperlinks above them.
(Responding to a comment by Giauz Ragnarock about multiple universes and multiple big bangs.)
Universe should mean Universe. Not one of an aggregate of mini universes.
Why is it so hard for people to approach Singularity? Or, it’s stand-in Entirety.
It is the same problem we have with God. We insist he has a beard. So all the beardless ones must be false.
Or because some gods have beards and some don’t, there is no God.
There is Infinity as Singularity, and there is the infinity/finity dyad resulting from the potentiality of the first.
The former can NOT be comprehended in the usual way. But, most certainly has not gone away.
I find this well worth looking into.
Pofarmer – “Because perhaps singularity and infinity aren’t the correct way to think about the issue at hand.”
All other paths lead to endless “big-endian/little-endian” squabbles.
The very essence of issues in general.
Giauz Ragnarock – “Thanks for the reply (by the way, fellow (?) atheist/naturalist here, so some of your comment was a bit puzzling).”
Perhaps because I wasn’t arguing. Sorry for the confusion.
Though I do not like to linger long on the theist/non-theist aspects of this. (Beards or not, etc.)
Yes, nature is a good starting point. All speculation of “supernatural” is just silly. The real thing already extends to the horizon and beyond.
Another good starting point is “Here and Now”. What is THAT!?
Or, who am I? Who is asking the question? Who entertains the various answers as they arise?
Harry H. McCall – responding to Kevin Osborne – “Unless you can come up with a better definition of faith / belief, you and I are not on the same level.”
And what level do you imagine yourself to have ascended too there Harry?
A man with wax poured into his ears is not the apex of humanity.
Just a man with wax in his ears.
That question is for your own consumption. I’m not sticking around for one of your tirades. I just saw John Hurt in “1984” and that’s enough despair and double-speak for one day.
Kevin Osborne responding to Harry H. McCall – ” The reason for circular reasoning, by the way, is that is the setup inside this place, which is why there are so many circles. To step out is to understand straight lines.”
Remind me to show you the phenomena of periodicity in Fibonacci sequences. (appears when you reduce the sums to single digits.)
Exactly what you just said.
Demonstrated directly from nature but only after WE limit the number of numeric symbols to say 10, 12, 60 or 10,000. i.e. not infinite.