A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

what if paradox



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 17th 04, 05:26 PM
kjakja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default what if paradox

Nothing is something. It is easy to believe there was always something
because nothing exists and is something.

Even the finite chance of you being alive is so enormous that some
need to assign divinity to ease their minds. Think of the lottery odds
of you existing from the uncountable events within events, solar system
creation to sperm and egg and beyond. Your life is sacred because
of this "lottery" win not because of someone's plan.




Ads
  #2  
Old November 17th 04, 05:48 PM
Luigi Caselli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"kjakja" ha scritto nel messaggio
. com...
Nothing is something. It is easy to believe there was always something
because nothing exists and is something.

Even the finite chance of you being alive is so enormous that some
need to assign divinity to ease their minds. Think of the lottery odds
of you existing from the uncountable events within events, solar system
creation to sperm and egg and beyond. Your life is sacred because
of this "lottery" win not because of someone's plan.


For a better explanation see http://www.simulation-argument.com
or for an easier reading
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...358588,00.html

No need of a "lottery" win in this case...

Luigi Caselli


  #3  
Old November 17th 04, 06:31 PM
Benign Vanilla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"kjakja" wrote in message
. com...
Nothing is something. It is easy to believe there was always something
because nothing exists and is something.

Even the finite chance of you being alive is so enormous that some
need to assign divinity to ease their minds. Think of the lottery odds
of you existing from the uncountable events within events, solar system
creation to sperm and egg and beyond. Your life is sacred because
of this "lottery" win not because of someone's plan.


Then again, in a Universe of this size and time...anything is possible, and
probably likely.

BV.


  #4  
Old November 17th 04, 08:35 PM
Luigi Caselli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Benign Vanilla" ha scritto nel
messaggio ...

"kjakja" wrote in message
. com...
Nothing is something. It is easy to believe there was always something
because nothing exists and is something.

Even the finite chance of you being alive is so enormous that some
need to assign divinity to ease their minds. Think of the lottery odds
of you existing from the uncountable events within events, solar system
creation to sperm and egg and beyond. Your life is sacred because
of this "lottery" win not because of someone's plan.


Then again, in a Universe of this size and time...anything is possible,

and
probably likely.


Universe is a very small place and is far too young to say that anything is
possible or likely...
The only way to justify our reality is thinking to infinite universes, and
we live just in the right one.
Otherwise the only other solution is that we live in a simulation...

Luigi Caselli


  #5  
Old November 18th 04, 05:21 PM
Phil Aypee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi,

To say any universe is small (or young or any other comparative
quality) is only meaningful if there is a yardstick. In this
universe, in my mind, there is none yet for itself, let alone
others.

But if there are such yardsticks available in science then
please tell me what they are.

Take care,
Phil.

"Sleep quicker,
we need the beds."

http://www.philaypee.co.uk
  #6  
Old November 19th 04, 09:16 AM
Luigi Caselli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Phil Aypee" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi,

To say any universe is small (or young or any other comparative
quality) is only meaningful if there is a yardstick. In this
universe, in my mind, there is none yet for itself, let alone
others.

But if there are such yardsticks available in science then
please tell me what they are.


Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and in this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely in some of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000 possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every 10-20 times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli


  #7  
Old November 19th 04, 10:37 AM
nightbat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

nightbat wrote

Luigi Caselli wrote:

"Phil Aypee" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi,

To say any universe is small (or young or any other comparative
quality) is only meaningful if there is a yardstick. In this
universe, in my mind, there is none yet for itself, let alone
others.

But if there are such yardsticks available in science then
please tell me what they are.



Luigi
Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and in this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely in some of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000 possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every 10-20 times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli


nightbat

The yard sticks are observed co peer confirmed one Universe Phil
and step out of the sci fi no evidence box Luigi for a moment. Try
thinking in terms of one scientifically observed immense Universe
permitting many many ticket galaxies.


the nightbat

  #8  
Old November 19th 04, 11:06 AM
Ray Vingnutte
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:37:19 -0500
nightbat wrote:

nightbat wrote

Luigi Caselli wrote:

"Phil Aypee" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi,

To say any universe is small (or young or any other comparative
quality) is only meaningful if there is a yardstick. In this
universe, in my mind, there is none yet for itself, let alone
others.

But if there are such yardsticks available in science then
please tell me what they are.



Luigi
Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and in this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely in some of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000 possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every 10-20 times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli


nightbat

The yard sticks are observed co peer confirmed one Universe Phil
and step out of the sci fi no evidence box Luigi for a moment. Try
thinking in terms of one scientifically observed immense Universe
permitting many many ticket galaxies.


Those galaxies all bought the same ticket or done the same set of numbers. The numbers are all the same whichever galaxy your in.



the nightbat

  #9  
Old November 19th 04, 12:11 PM
nightbat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

nightbat wrote

Ray Vingnutte wrote:

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:37:19 -0500
nightbat wrote:

nightbat wrote

Luigi Caselli wrote:

"Phil Aypee" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
Hi,

To say any universe is small (or young or any other comparative
quality) is only meaningful if there is a yardstick. In this
universe, in my mind, there is none yet for itself, let alone
others.

But if there are such yardsticks available in science then
please tell me what they are.



Luigi
Small means that in our universe you can have only one reality.
So anything is not possibly and not likely. Life conditions are limited.

In a multiverse solution you can have infinite realities... and in this
theory you can say that (almost) anything is possibly or likely in some of
these universes.
And there's no need to claim that we won an incredibly unlikely lottery.
With infinite tickets someone (us) took the right one...

In the biggest lottery in Italy you have only 1 on 625.000.000 possibility
to win.
But selling millions of tickets every extraction someone every 10-20 times
wins.
If they sell only one ticket it's a bit more difficult to win...

Our universe fine tuning conditions are a lot more unlikely...
So you really need lots of tickets (universes)...

Luigi Caselli


nightbat

The yard sticks are observed co peer confirmed one Universe Phil
and step out of the sci fi no evidence box Luigi for a moment. Try
thinking in terms of one scientifically observed immense Universe
permitting many many ticket galaxies.


Ray
Those galaxies all bought the same ticket or done the same set of numbers. The numbers are all the same whichever galaxy your in.


nightbat

Perhaps the same present known applicable math numbers Ray, but
by no means always the same number potential particular real world
mixing and reducing applicable factors. For life to exist and evolve
requires exacting proper conditions perhaps not conducive in all
theoretical, observable, or possible galaxies, their formations,
including residing stars or planets. However your life analysis
propensity is correct, life begets life is true, where it science
possibly cause deduced originated is the question. All life preexistent
absent even in imaginary multiverse theory gives you the same answer on
both sides of dimensional evaluation or any possible applied
mathematical equation.

the nightbat

  #10  
Old November 20th 04, 03:38 AM
Southern Hospitality
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Benign Vanilla wrote:
"kjakja" wrote in message
. com...

Nothing is something. It is easy to believe there was always something
because nothing exists and is something.

Even the finite chance of you being alive is so enormous that some
need to assign divinity to ease their minds. Think of the lottery odds
of you existing from the uncountable events within events, solar system
creation to sperm and egg and beyond. Your life is sacred because
of this "lottery" win not because of someone's plan.



Then again, in a Universe of this size and time...anything is possible, and
probably likely.

BV.



If we use the drake equation and wittle it down so that the end answer
is 1, that's one place in each galaxy that harbors intelligent,
communicative life. How many galaxies are there in the universe? A
billion? More? Less? Is our civilization in it's existing state
considered a 'communicative' civilization? Or are we just one step below
that? Of course that's just one perspective.

Just because we have no proof of such a thing, it is not possible for
life to take on other forms in the universe such as planet sized ameoba
or energy based forms of life? If you really want to illustrate the
paradox here think of this: Our body is nothing more than a series of
chemical reactions. That kind of event happens so frequently in the
universe every nanosecond, where is the difference between the formation
of a solar system and the creation of a human being? The only
difference that I see is that one takes a billion years to form and the
other takes a few hundred thousand years to evolve. If intelligent life
can evolve in just a few hundred thousand years and our Universe is at
least 14 billion years old, what else has evolved in that time? In
relation to the universe, our civilization is a fraction of a picosecond
in it's age.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
re ashmore's paradox lyndonashmore Misc 35 April 4th 04 07:31 AM
The Fermi Paradox and Economics John Ordover SETI 126 November 19th 03 12:05 AM
Out of the Bubble, the Fermi Paradox Simon Laub SETI 0 September 19th 03 04:02 PM
Fondation on Olbers' Paradox telove Astronomy Misc 1 August 28th 03 12:09 AM
Foundation on Olbers' Paradox telove Astronomy Misc 0 August 26th 03 09:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.