How to prove God's existence the way it's supposed to Part 1

[ThinkingSapien]

Not quite, alive is something the body IS, not something to be located somewhere in the body. Again, think about “tworoomhouseness” it isn’t something somewhere in the house, it is something the house IS.

This kind of reminds me of something I was reading in which a neuroscience was talking about localizing the areas of the brain responsible for certain functions. I think many have seen the the brain maps that draw very well defined borders on areas of the brain and label some mental activity (ex: emotion, motor control, speech processing, so on). But this author went onto say that these were oversimplified charts. In certain areas of the brain you find larger concentrations of neurons that participate in some mental activity but it doesn’t cleanly conform to the charts we make to represent the distribution. In general we can say that mental processing occurs in the neurosystem but the ability to localize starts to get “fuzzier” as one tries to get more precise.

To some degree trying to localize life precisely would be like trying to localize the Internet. Being a distributed system it’s not something that can be given a precise location; while individual entities that contribute the internet can be given a location (ex: computers, satellites, power plants, communication cables) no single one of these can be said to be where the Internet is, they can only be said to be said to be interacting with the Internet. Removing some of these members wouldn’t stop the Internet but may isolate components to their own smaller network or remove them from distributed computing all together. Which reminds me of the example of dismemberment given in an earlier message (though the problem of regeneration doesn’t carry over to this metaphor).

 

[Candide_West]

This kind of reminds me of something I was reading in which a neuroscience was talking about localizing the areas of the brain responsible for certain functions. I think many have seen the the brain maps that draw very well defined borders on areas of the brain and label some mental activity (ex: emotion, motor control, speech processing, so on). But this author went onto say that these were oversimplified charts. In certain areas of the brain you find larger concentrations of neurons that participate in some mental activity but it doesn’t cleanly conform to the charts we make to represent the distribution. In general we can say that mental processing occurs in the neurosystem but the ability to localize starts to get “fuzzier” as one tries to get more precise.

To some degree trying to localize life precisely would be like trying to localize the Internet. Being a distributed system it’s not something that can be given a precise location; while individual entities that contribute the internet can be given a location (ex: computers, satellites, power plants, communication cables) no single one of these can be said to be where the Internet is, they can only be said to be said to be interacting with the Internet. Removing some of these members wouldn’t stop the Internet but may isolate components to their own smaller network or remove them from distributed computing all together. Which reminds me of the example of dismemberment given in an earlier message (though the problem of regeneration doesn’t carry over to this metaphor).

Indeed. I read a great book about the inner workings of the brain some time ago - Consciousness Explained by Daniel Dennet. Its quite an old one now but a fascinating read if you haven’t and it’s something you’re interested in.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Indeed. I read a great book about the inner workings of the brain some time ago - Consciousness Explained by Daniel Dennet. Its quite an old one now but a fascinating read if you haven’t and it’s something you’re interested in.

I’ve not read it. Right now I am about half way through one of his books, but I’ll be sure to add this one to my reading queue. Thanks!

 

[Neverbeendead]

And so for tworoomhouseness you need two rooms put together so that it is called a house.
And so for bodyaliveness you need two dead parts put together so that it is called a living part.
So far your logic that says that both do not have anything to do with logic that goes over itself.
So let’s focus for a second on the memory of a living person. The place inside himself where he goes to find the information about let’s say what he was doing at new years eve 5 years ago.
The empty part inside a living person is a collection of empty subparts. In each of those completely empty subparts that information is not stored. Not even a fragment of that information because there is no information at all in there.
The full part inside a living person is a collection of full subparts. In each of those subparts that information is also not stored. Not even a fragment of that information because there is no information at all in there. It is always just a completely filled subpart in one solid state that hasn’t got information stored inside. There’s no information in it but what if there was? What if it could talk? What would it say?
It would say that it’s exactly the same information as in all the other subparts that are in one solid state so that the body only has one piece of information possible inside his memory.

In the same way the awareness, located as connected to its own memory inside the body, is also not inside the body with logic just by itself.

It’s like the information stored on a memory card of 10 GB that has been reformatted to two partitions of 5 GB. If a certain piece of info isn’t inside the first partition it’s by definition in the second of a memory card that has a certain piece of information on or in it.

 

[Candide_West]

And so for tworoomhouseness you need two rooms put together so that it is called a house.
And so for bodyaliveness you need two dead parts put together so that it is called a living part.

Not quite, for a living body you need the parts of the body arranged into a living body. Remember the two “parts” you defined aren’t actually dead, they are parts of a living thing, they are just not living things in themselves.*

So far your logic that says that both do not have anything to do with logic that goes over itself.

Nope, logic can’t “go over itself” as far as I know.*

So let’s focus for a second on the memory of a living person. The place inside himself where he goes to find the information about let’s say what he was doing at new years eve 5 years ago.

Ok

The empty part inside a living person is a collection of empty subparts. In each of those completely empty subparts that information is not stored. Not even a fragment of that information because there is no information at all in there.
The full part inside a living person is a collection of full subparts. In each of those subparts that information is also not stored. Not even a fragment of that information because there is no information at all in there. It is always just a completely filled subpart in one solid state that hasn’t got information stored inside.*

Right, so once again memory is an emergent property of those parts of the brain which store memory working together. Once again, if we imagine we’ve shredded the brain down to a level where not even atoms exist we have destroyed the emergent properties (in this case memories).*

Again this makes sense as long as you don’t imagine that “memories” are objects in themselves which should be locatable.*

There’s no information in it but what if there was? What if it could talk? What would it say?
It would say that it’s exactly the same information as in all the other subparts that are in one solid state so that the body only has one piece of information possible inside his memory.

Right, because you just destroyed the information by obliterating the brain it was stored in.
*

In the same way the awareness, located as connected to its own memory inside the body, is also not inside the body with logic just by itself.

Excellent, yes, awareness is also an emergent property from the brain. Again, no problem as long as you remember that “awareness” isn’t an object to be located.

If you’re interested in finding out more about how “awareness” works and why it is the way it is, then the book I mentioned above by Daniel Dennet is an excellent read.*

It’s like the information stored on a memory card of 10 GB that has been reformatted to two partitions of 5 GB. If a certain piece of info isn’t inside the first partition it’s by definition in the second of a memory card that has a certain piece of information on or in it.

Ok, but in this case you haven’t destroyed the memory card by breaking it apart down to a subatomic level. In practical terms you’ve just changed the filing system a bit. The brain does this quite capably as well, and there are of course internal “partitions” after a fashion in the brain as well.*

If on the other hand you split your memory card into the "full " and “empty” parts again (destroying it utterly) you’ll find that all the data you put on there is lost as well.*

Again all this seems to make sense quite neatly.

 

[Neverbeendead]

The memory is also not defined inside the body with logic that does not go over itself.
The living body is the empty part plus the full part.
The empty part is a collection of empty subparts and the full part a collection of full subparts.
So what takes place inside a living body?
It’s a place where the full subparts can be seen moving if you have the right equipment to do so.
They are moving inside an empty area and each time they move they replace the empty part in front of them with themself and replace the part they just left behind them with emptiness (unless another full part just came moving in that spot).
Each subpart is dead because in one solid state so it’s a bumpercar thing going on inside the whole body.

Each dead bumpercar or each dead subpart is completely filled and in one solid state and is not aware of itself that it can only move forward in one straight line until something else changes its direction. The emptiness inside the body is not responsible for that because that’s where the full subpart travels through in one straight line inside the body.
So it’s dead bumpercars that you can see going on inside the living body. The word bumper is wrong because every outside surface of a full subpart is the hardest substance known to mankind because there’s not a single empty space inside it. But it’s okay in the context.
Dead bumpercars moving inside dead empty space.
That’s what goes on inside a living body and you say that the whole of these dead bumpercars moving around inside the body, through the remaining emptiness of that body until they hit another one, has the emergent property called to be alive without the need for logic to go over itself.
The memory inside that living body is not inside the empty part alone and not inside the full part alone but you say that it’s a mix of these dead bumpercars combined with the empty space they travel through.
Dead bumpercars moving in one straight line, not aware that that’s the only thing they can do, until another dead bumpercar changes its direction is responsible for what’s inside the memory of a living body and how new inforamtion will be added to that memory.
But information inside the memory is specific and not dependent on the only straight line every full subpart is able to travel until another full subpart changes the direction.
This specific information of the memory makes it so that some dead bumpercars need to be hanging perfectly still and in a certain configuration so that they become a binary sequence. When in one area two dead bumpercars are hanging still and in the next area with same volume only one dead bumpercar is hanging still you get the binary 0 1 sequence.
That’s the only way for dead bumpercars inside a living body to go to a situation where information is stored for what the information really is when you use your own logic that memory is the emergent property of empty subparts combined with full subparts inside the body.
And so that area in the body where you store the facts of your life is a place where you can go to to read the information correctly like all text, audio and video that you get on a computer from the binary sequences that are stored inside the memory.
But to read that information inside your body you need to use your combination of dead bumpercars and the empty space that goes along with it as your emergent property.
But the empty space cannot read the information there just like the dead bumpercars because they don’t have eyes, ears, nose, taste or feel or whatever is needed to read that binary sequence from the way some dead bumpercars are hanging still next to each other inside a place of the body.
And so the reason why awareness is able to check the memory inside the living body is because it’s being done with logic that goes over itself in the same way that life that takes place inside a living body can only be defined there with logic that goes over itself.

 

[Candide_West]

*The memory is also not defined inside the body with logic that does not go over itself.

Sorry no idea what the whole thing about logic going over itself is intended to mean.*

The living body is the empty part plus the full part.

…arranged to make a living body.

The empty part is a collection of empty subparts and the full part a collection of full subparts.
So what takes place inside a living body?

All the normal functions of life which are inside that body.*

Again careful not to make the error of treating those “parts” of yours as if they actually exist. They are not in any way distinct “parts” of the body.*

They are moving inside an empty area and each time they move they replace the empty part in front of them with themself and replace the part they just left behind them with emptiness (unless another full part just came moving in that spot).

Well kinda, but of course this is occurring millions of times per second in every one of the billions of cells in every persons body. Are you really going to try to model a macroscopic organism like a human from the properties of the internals of sub-atomic particles?*

Even trying to model something (relatively) huge like a single cell based on the properties of atoms is mindblowingly difficult because there are just so many atoms in there to model. Trying to model a macroscopic organism (billions or trillions of cells) from the motion of component parts of elements of subatomic particles (billions per cell) seems… Well, unlikely to succeed.*

Each subpart is dead because in one solid state so it’s a bumpercar thing going on inside the whole body.

Nope, each part is a part of a living thing, it is just not a living thing in itself. It is not sensible to call them “dead”.

… The emptiness inside the body is not responsible for that because that’s where the full subpart travels through in one straight line inside the body.

Afraid this doesn’t work at the scale you’re talking about here. When youre talking about*the internal workings of protons and neutrons etc you need to be thinking in terms of quantum mechanics. The movements of these sub-components only actually exist as probability waveforms. So they do not have a defined path of motion as such.

every outside surface of a full subpart is the hardest substance known to mankind because there’s not a single empty space inside it. But it’s okay in the context.*

Well, it’s not ok, because the things you’re talking about aren’t physical objects, and they don’t behave like them. I can provide examples of you like?

Dead bumpercars moving inside dead empty space.
That’s what goes on inside a living body and you say … has the emergent property called to be alive.

As for living things being made up of cells, which are made up of atoms, which are made up of protons, neutrons and electrons, which are made up of quarks and gluons, which are made up of the things you’re talking about. Yes that’s right.*

Interestingly as well at each of the above stages there are emergent properties. By which I mean that:

• a proton has properties which it’s quarks individually do not.*
• An atom behaves in ways that the protons, neutrons and electrons which make it up wouldn’t if they were separated out.

Etc.

But information inside the memory is specific and not dependent on the only straight line every full subpart is able to travel until another full subpart changes the direction.

Nope, remember the scale you’re talking about here, the things you are talking about are subcomponents of parts of protons. Modelling their movement like this according to Newtonian mechanics just doesn’t work.

This specific information of the memory makes it so that some dead bumpercars need to be hanging perfectly still and in a certain configuration so that they become a binary sequence. When in one area two dead bumpercars are hanging still and in the next area with same volume only one dead bumpercar is hanging still you get the binary 0 1 sequence.*

Afraid not. For a starter what you’re talking about here is computer memory not neural networks. The mechanics are completely different to what happens in the brain. I’m sure I can dig out some online sources if you’re interested. But the information is more like a set of connections between points than 0’s and 1’s in a filing cabinet.*

Secondly the scale is all wrong, the “binary bits” you are talking about are objects made up of many atoms, while the “bumper cars” you’re talking about are millions of times smaller than a single atom. And if they stopped “moving” they would cease to be the things they are.*

But the empty space cannot read the information there just like the dead bumpercars because they don’t have eyes, ears, nose, taste or feel or whatever is needed to read that binary sequence.

Ok, it looks like you’re thinking in terms of the old Cartesian theatre model of how the brain works. It doesn’t work like that even if we were talking in the right scale (cellular level, many billions of times bigger than the quantum scale of your “bumper cars”). I can suggest a reading list if you like?

And so the reason why awareness is able to check the memory inside the living body is because it’s being done with logic that goes over itself in the same way that life that takes place inside a living body can only be defined there with logic that goes over itself.

Again, no idea what you mean by logic going over itself. But hopefully I’ve answered your questions here.

 

[Neverbeendead]

It will be interesting to see what the remake of fantastic voyage will look like.
They put a team in a submarine, shrink the submarine, inject it in the body where the team starts its mission towards the tumor they have to destroy.

Your theory that Newton does not apply on a very small scale does not impress me.
I know it has been proven in reality that Newton does not apply there but they always forget to mention that it is because logic goes over itself to make an impossibility possible.
Even Einstein said about quantum physics that god does not play with dice.

If a was to shrink you with a very big factor and able to do more incredible things like that you would believe that the moon you see is just the moon while you would not know that it is a very tiny particle under someone’s nail.

But let’s shrink you with a factor that makes you conclude that an average sized full subpart of a living body, that you are now sitting on, has the size and shape of a zeppelin. Now you are sitting on this full subpart in one solid state and for now its travelling through empty space straight forward while the coast still looks clear.
And then you can read my previous post again while you have a front row seat.

 

[Candide_West]

It will be interesting to see what the remake of fantastic voyage will look like.
They put a team in a submarine, shrink the submarine, inject it in the body where the team starts its mission towards the tumor they have to destroy.

Yes, sounds like w fun film, as was the original but remember that science fiction is a form of fiction.
*

Your theory that Newton does not apply on a very small scale does not impress me.

It’s not “mine” and it’s been demonstrated to be correct for nearly 50 years. You simply cannot employ Newtonian physics at this scale.*

I know it has been proven in reality that Newton does not apply there but they always forget to mention that it is because logic goes over itself to make an impossibility possible.

No, it’s because that’s how physics works on this scale. Logic is a reasoning device used by humans. What do you mean by saying it “goes over itself”??? This makes no sense and means nothing to me.*

Even Einstein said about quantum physics that god does not play with dice.

Well yes, he was a lifelong opponent of quantum theory, even though he was one of its parents. He was ultimately proved wrong. I should probably also note that Einstein used the word God to refer to “the laws of the universe” which he passionately believed were all ultimately deterministic.
*

If a was to shrink you with a very big factor and able to do more incredible things like that you would believe that the moon you see is just the moon while you would not know that it is a very tiny particle under someone’s nail.

Er, ok.

But let’s shrink you with a factor that makes you conclude that an average sized full subpart of a living body, that you are now sitting on, has the size and shape of a zeppelin. Now you are sitting on this full subpart in one solid state and for now its travelling through empty space straight forward while the coast still looks clear.

Well no, it doesn’t. Because at this scale there is no such thing as a solid object. The “zeppelin” isn’t a solid object, it isn’t an object at all in the classical sense. It’s just a probability cloud of places that it was, could have been, is, could be, will be and could be in the future. Importantly these probabilities interact with each other (even though they are different probabilities of the same object).

As for the “empty” space, well that isn’t empty either. For a starter there is the probability cloud of the “object” itself. For a second there are probability cloud of all the other “objects” which are around. And for a third there are other “virtual” particles appearing and disappearing all the time. Heck, even “empty” space itself is bumpy and bubbly at this scale.*

All of these things interact with each other non-deterministically.

And then you can read my previous post again while you have a front row seat.

Ok, I think I do indeed have a front row seat. And fingers crossed you now see why Newtonian mechanics doesn’t work at this scale.*

 

[ThinkingSapien]

As for the “empty” space, well that isn’t empty either. For a starter there is the probability cloud of the “object” itself. For a second there are probability cloud of all the other “objects” which are around. And for a third there are other “virtual” particles appearing and disappearing all the time. Heck, even “empty” space itself is bumpy and bubbly at this scale.*

Also once you get down to smaller scales then there are other manifestations of the forces of fundamental interaction to consider. Electrostatic repulsion between atoms is going to put limits on how dense some one can make something (I’m interpreting “remove the empty spaces” as compression, as that is the only physical interpretation of this phrase that I can think of). If one managed to go past those limits and “remove more free space” then you’d have some form of nuclear fusion. Though if it were possible to compress something like this most life forms of which I can think would experience asphyxiation, hemorrhaging, and other problems that tend interfere with life sustaining activities.

Side note: One thing that bothered me about the “Fantastic Voyage” and “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” is while the shrinking technology reduced the space between one’s atoms it didn’t actually remove atoms. That means the miniaturized bodies still had the same mass and weight. Having all that weight in such a small “footprint” I can only imagine the pressure from all that weight being concentrated in a small spot would be high enough for the mini sub containing the adults would be high enough to overcome the rigidity of the human into which it was injected and they would fall straight through the person, the operating table, and possibly into the building’s concrete and the earth below it. There’s a number of other necessary break downs of reality for those scenarios to work, many of which are not all together unrelated to the “removing empty spaces” action described in earlier messages.

 

[Neverbeendead]

It’s about a guy who can do something that hasn’t been done yet.
He can make a robot which is smaller than himself. He makes it so small that he was still able to make an amplifier for the robot so that the robot could still stream video to the guy.
But the guy made the robot so that the robot can also do what the guy did.
To make a robot which is smaller than himself. He makes it so small that he was still able to make an amplifier for the robot so that the robot could still stream video to the first robot.
Then you get after many made robots a robot that is in front of a full subpart inside the living body while that part has the size of the moon for the robot and his camera compared to when we look at the moon.
And he films it and streams it so that the stream goes from one amplifier to the next to end up with the guy who takes a look at the footage.
He sees a movie about a cameraman who is filming an object the size of the moon.
And so that movie is not about particles and their probabilities of being there. It’s a movie about an object the size of the moon that just doesn’t completely disappear to reappear because we can also not make movies about objects the size of the moon that just disappear to reappear.
And so you can read my two previous posts again because they are still correct just like all my other posts.

 

[Candide_West]

It’s about a guy who can do something that hasn’t been done yet.
He can make a robot which is smaller than himself. He makes it so small that he was still able to make an amplifier for the robot so that the robot could still stream video to the guy.

Yes, I know what the film is about (it’s a kind of submarine as I remember). Of course as ThinkingSapien already noted its not even remotely possible, but fun to think about.*

But the guy made the robot so that the robot can also do what the guy did.
To make a robot which is smaller than himself. He makes it so small that he was still able to make an amplifier for the robot so that the robot could still stream video to the first robot.
Then you get after many made robots a robot that is in front of a full subpart inside the living body while that part has the size of the moon for the robot and his camera compared to when we look at the moon.

But again, it’s not even remotely possible, because you can’t make complex objects like robots which are millions of times smaller than atoms. Because to make even simple robots like the nano bots which are now being developed you need many atoms together.*

Needless to say that making something out of atoms which is smaller than an atom isn’t possible.

And he films it and streams it so that the stream goes from one amplifier to the next to end up with the guy who takes a look at the footage.

He sees a movie about a cameraman who is filming an object the size of the moon.

Ok, firstly I’d like you to understand why*“seeing” isn’t possible at this scale. Imagine you are that cameraman for the moment, drifting in space near the moon, initially you are completely blind because there is no light around. Then a single photon (the smallest unit in which light can exist) arrives. It’s about the same size as the moon you’re trying to film. It hits it at 300,000km/ second and they both instantaneously rocket off into the distance.

Of course you can’t see this, because light (objects like that moon that just arrived and took your target moon away) is the stuff you see with. In fact you need to capture many of those moon sized objects to see anything meaningful. Obviously in order to do that you need to be vastly bigger, you need eyes the size of several atoms to be able to even detect if there is light or there is not. If you want any kind of “picture” you need eyes that are thousands or millions of atoms.

However, for the sake of the hypothetical, if “seeing” was possible at this scale, then yes, you’d see objects appearing and disappearing continuously.*

And so that movie is not about particles and their probabilities of being there. It’s a movie about an object the size of the moon that just doesn’t completely disappear to reappear because we can also not make movies about objects the size of the moon that just disappear to reappear.

No, because at that scale things do appear and disappear continuously. They aren’t solid objects but exist as probability waveforms etc etc. While at our scale things don’t appear and disappear and solid objects are for all practical purposes solid.*

So it makes no sense to say that things that are sub parts of quarks can’t do x because objects made of trillions of atoms can’t do x.*

You can keep pretending that physics isn’t the way it is if you like. But don’t expect me to agree with you and don’t expect a “proof” built on incorrect physics to hold any water.

As I said, it you’re interested in learning more about quantum mechanics I can recommend some good books. For that matter I can probably dig out some online material to help you get your head around it if you like?*

And so you can read my two previous posts again because they are still correct just like all my other posts.

Nope, same errors again, but this time with misunderstandings about quantum physics mixed in as well.*

 

[Neverbeendead]

The mistake in your theory is that when you put an imaginary awareness in a much bigger scale or dimension than ours that’s what you would say in its name about the so little people like us:
The people who are living in a place so small compared to mine are living at such a small scale that they are not only their body but also waveforms so that they will see themselves and others disappear and reappear and will all go crazy living like that.

The sci-fi shrinking method in fantastic voyage is a specific one because the smaller they get the less weight they all have.
But it is an educational one.
Let’s say that the shrinking factor of this method is now 2 and that this 2 relates only to the height of a person. A person shrinked like that before you now has half his height and you know that his weight has become less. It’s calculatable but much easier if you just weigh him.
Now let’s say that this shrinking method with factor 2 is being done by an imaginary force that can do this with every existing object inside our infinite space.
Then we would all have half the height we used to have and less weight than we used to have but we would be unable to be aware of that because as far as we are concerned absolutely nothing has changed.
This factor 2 method of shrinking doesn’t change a single thing about our lives because we can’t detect a change (the only thing that really changed was that infinite space gained some empty space and lost some weight or matter inside itself) and is a rule.
If this imaginary force did it again so that everything now is a fourth of its height that same rule that shrinking with this method and factor 2 will not change a thing for the people not anly can but must be applied.
Even when the height of ourselves is at a factor where we are in such a small scale where you say that newton no longer applies.
When this imaginary force uses a method of shrinking every object that exists in infinite space in a split second and to us everything still looks the same after this split second you now say that newton does not apply anymore.
We will immediately start to see people disappear and reappear before us because they are just a probability as we will see the sun disappear and reappear from time to time because that is also just a probability and that is also good stuff for a sci-fi movie but not for a movie where only logic takes place and not logic that goes over itself to make an impossibility possible.

 

[Neverbeendead]

Something obvious but unmentioned in my previous post about a method of shrinking done by an imaginary force:
It shrinks all objects that exist in infinite space at the same time until a person has half his height so that they all have half their height.
It also does this by drawing an imaginary cube that contains every existing object in infinite space.
That way you can relate to the shrinking process like when you are holding a movie canvas right in front of a movie projector. Because when you step backwards with the movie canvas the movie on it becomes bigger and when you walk forward with the movie canvas in a specific way everything shrinks in a perfect and centered way.

Meaning that when every object in infinite space has been shrinked with a certain method like that, the ruler you are holding has also become smaller but still lets you believe that your height has not changed just like all other rulers let you believe that all know distances between all known objects have not changed.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Now let’s say that this shrinking method with factor 2 is being done by an imaginary force that can do this with every existing object inside our infinite space.
Then we would all have half the height we used to have and less weight than we used to have but we would be unable to be aware of that because as far as we are concerned absolutely nothing has changed.

Only several queues would give it away, such as instruments that are dependent on the speed of the propagation of waves, shifts in pitches of objects that make sounds, the change in the boiling temperature of water because of the reduced air pressure, reduced acceleration due to gravity since the earth would have less mass, and severely reduced luminosity of the sun and other stars (mass is a significant factor in the processes that occur in the sun). People shrunk in this manner would run into some of the same problems as the exponentially shrinking von Neumann machines in the earlier example.

It’s fun to think about, but I don’t see that it supports the “life exists in empty space” hypothesis.

If this imaginary force did it again so that everything now is a fourth of its height that same rule that shrinking with this method and factor 2 will not change a thing for the people not anly can but must be applied.

Do that 6 more times and the sun no longer has enough mass to perform sustained hydrogen fusion.

 

[Candide_West]

The mistake in your theory is that when you put an imaginary awareness in a much bigger scale or dimension than ours that’s what you would say in its name about the so little people like us:
The people who are living in a place so small compared to mine are living at such a small scale that they are not only their body but also waveforms so that they will see themselves and others disappear and reappear and will all go crazy living like that.*

Right, that’s why there are no people living in the subatomic world (that and the fact that life couldn’t evolve in an environment where things only exist as probability waveforms and appear and disappear all the time).*

And it’s still not my theory. It’s called quantum mechanics and it’s the theory which has allowed a very great many of the scientific advances of the last 50 years (including the amazing advances in computing, such as the one you’re using right now).

The sci-fi shrinking method in fantastic voyage is a specific one because the smaller they get the less weight they all have.
But it is an educational one.
Let’s say that the shrinking factor of this method is now 2 and that this 2 relates only to the height of a person. A person shrinked like that before you now has half his height and you know that his weight has become less. It’s calculatable but much easier if you just weigh him.

But if you take away half his weight then you have actually removed half his body. You don’t need a magical shrink ray to achieve this, a chainsaw will do the job.*

The “challenge” (by which I mean impossibility in reality) in these films is to reduce the size of something WITHOUT removing any atoms (in other words without just removing parts of the person.*

For the sake of the argument, I’ll assume that your magical shrink ray somehow does this safely. (even though it would in doing so destroy all atomic structures in reality).

Now let’s say that this shrinking method with factor 2 is being done by an imaginary force that can do this with every existing object inside our infinite space.
Then we would all have half the height we used to have and less weight than we used to have but we would be unable to be aware of that because as far as we are concerned absolutely nothing has changed.

Incorrect, a great many things would have changed. Like birds would all drop out of the sky (their weight has halved, but the surface area of their flight surfaces has quartered, so only birds which can carry double their body weight would even be able to get off the ground).*All our clocks would tell the wrong time and computers would stop working as well, (I can explain in detail if you like but it’s a bit complex).

Oh and there’d be a few other minor things like the sun swelling up like a beach ball and the earth changing its orbital path and burning to a crisp.*

This factor 2 method of shrinking doesn’t change a single thing about our lives because we can’t detect a change (the only thing that really changed was that infinite space gained some empty space and lost some weight or matter inside itself) and is a rule.
If this imaginary force did it again so that everything now is a fourth of its height that same rule that shrinking with this method and factor 2 will not change a thing for the people not anly can but must be applied.

Incorrect, it will continue to have radical effects with each change in scale. If you struggle with this idea get a weight and a string, swing it over and back and measure the number of times it swings in say 10 seconds.*

Then half the weight, half the length of the string and measure the number of swings in 10 seconds again. You’ll find it is significantly higher.*

Even when the height of ourselves is at a factor where we are in such a small scale where you say that newton no longer applies.

Incorrect, as the size continues to shrink the effects will rapidly becomemore serious. Long before people get down to this size the electromagnetic forces inside atoms will have torn the protons out of the nucleus, and electrons from their orbits. Nothing could possibly survive.

When this imaginary force uses a method of shrinking every object that exists in infinite space in a split second and to us everything still looks the same after this split second you now say that newton does not apply anymore.

Correct, and we’ll all be dead too.

We will immediately start to see people disappear and reappear before us because they are just a probability as we will see the sun disappear and reappear from time to time because that is also just a probability and that is also good stuff for a sci-fi movie but not for a movie where only logic takes place and not logic that goes over itself to make an impossibility possible.

Well there wouldn’t be any people, there’s just be subatomic particles, but yes, they would then behave according to quantum mechanics.*

Still no idea what you mean by “logic that goes over itself to make an impossibility possible”. This seems like a meaningless statement to me.

 

[Candide_West]

Something obvious but unmentioned in my previous post about a method of shrinking done by an imaginary force:
It shrinks all objects that exist in infinite space at the same time until a person has half his height so that they all have half their height.
It also does this by drawing an imaginary cube that contains every existing object in infinite space.
That way you can relate to the shrinking process like when you are holding a movie canvas right in front of a movie projector. Because when you step backwards with the movie canvas the movie on it becomes bigger and when you walk forward with the movie canvas in a specific way everything shrinks in a perfect and centered way.

Meaning that when every object in infinite space has been shrinked with a certain method like that, the ruler you are holding has also become smaller but still lets you believe that your height has not changed just like all other rulers let you believe that all know distances between all known objects have not changed.

No worries, I guessed that was what you meant and assumed this in my reply above.

 

[Candide_West]

Only several queues would give it away, such as instruments that are dependent on the speed of the propagation of waves, shifts in pitches of objects that make sounds, the change in the boiling temperature of water because of the reduced air pressure, reduced acceleration due to gravity since the earth would have less mass, and severely reduced luminosity of the sun and other stars (mass is a significant factor in the processes that occur in the sun). People shrunk in this manner would run into some of the same problems as the exponentially shrinking von Neumann machines in the earlier example.

Surely acceleration due to gravity at ground level would have doubled? Because the acceleration is:

Gravitational constant x mass / distance squared.

Mass and distance have both decreased by factor of 2 (earth is half the radius as well as half the weight) so gravity at ground level doubles.

Happy to be shot down if I’m wrong.

 

[Neverbeendead]

When you have a completely filled cube of 2 to the third in volume and you shrink it like i described with a certain method to half its height the result is a completely filled cube of 1 to the third and that has not half the weight like you say but a fourth of the weight.
That’s why i wrote that sometimes it is easier to just weigh the person and i sometimes include myself.
And that’s just one of the many mistakes you wrote in your previous posts. Too much to mention.
Because you are failing to see everything i wrote.
Is it possible that i am in a room watching tv while everything is being expanded to double its height (the opposite of shrinking) at a constant speed, expanding that takes exactly 10 seconds, so that during those 10 seconds i can’t be aware of any type of change to reality?
The answer is yes. We begin with the example of a movie canvas and a movie projector.
We project a movie of a guy watching tv while standing up on a movie canvas. He’s on the left of the screen looking at a tv on the right of the screen.
Now we roll the movie canvas at a constant speed away from the movie projector so that ater 10 seconds the guy has double his height.
WHen you follow him and his environment during those 10 seconds you can see that it is impossible for him to detect a change in reality.
He became bigger but isn’t aware of that because everything became bigger.
He became bigger and needed a bigger type of oxygen to have the exact same experience but that also became bigger the way it was supposed to.
He became bigger and the pitch of his voice became a bit lower and louder and he needed a bigger room with bigger acoustics for his voice to stay the same and he got that.
He got everything he needed for him to conclude that nothing had changed.
This example ofcourse implies that not only everything you see on the screen expanded but also everything outside his room in every direction.
Or every existing object in infinite space.
Now when we do the opposite of this experiment, now roll the movie canvas back to where it came from at constant speed in 10 seconds the guy is also not able to detect any kind of change.
And you can use whatever kind of movie you like. People playing on the beach, watching the stars or anything else.
For the human race there is never a detectable change, not even during the shrinking or expanding.
And what is the real change?
As said before, an imaginary force draws an imaginary cube that contains every existing object in infinite space.
Now he shrinks this cube towards the centre of the cube so that everything in the cube gets shrinked in the way that has been described with movie canvas in the beginning of this post, nobody is able to detect any type of change during this shrinking and the cube perfectly centred in the middle has half the height after 10 seconds of constant speed.
What are the real changes now that one can imagine looking at these two imaginary drawn cubes?
-The infinite completely empty space outside the first cube remained comletely unchanged.
-If every existing object in infinite space together had a weight of 1 all these objects after 10 seconds together now have a weight of 0,25 or one fourth.
That means that inside the cube 3/4 of matter has vanished into nothing but that is because we are assuming an imaginary force that can do that.
-That means 3/4 of the place that that matter took now has become empty space inside the biggest cube.
-The location of every existing object in infinite space is no longer the same location after 10 seconds.
And as described in this post. The human race is forever convinced that this kind of shrinking did not happen because the tools to detect this are something the human race does not have. The human race does not have a camera on this imaginary cube to see the shrinking process.
And when this process with real changes is one that can’t be detected in any way during and after the shrinking the human race has its truth when it says that a happening like that is the equivalent of nothing happening.
And when it is the equivalent of nothing happening it doesn’t matter how far up or how far down this nothing happening goes.
So when this imaginary force is doing ‘nothing happening’ so far down that the size of a human is now so small that newton does not apply according to your theory, logic only says that still nobody is able to detect any kind of change.
While your logic says that in a case like that we would all be living amongst each other while we sometimes see a whole person disappear into nothing because he’s just a probabilty and later reappear, or a whole planet, or a whole star.
But if you use your logic like that in a movie you only get one about logic that goes over itself to make an impossibility possible.
Even when you said that there is a small scale in which the particles disappear to become a waveform and later reappear that is an example of logic going over itself to make an impossibility possible.
Because we take a particle like that that has a weight of 0,manymanyzeros1 gram and then it becomes disappeared particle called waveform of exactly 0 weight.
Or how 0,manymanyzeros1 = 0 and then you can easily write that 7 = 23 because then anything goes.

 

[Neverbeendead]

The thing is that you will read my previous post and still will not get a single thing of what i wrote so i also have to point out that it is better for you to adress something i’ve written before here. I have taken the topic to infinite space anyway.

It’s like the process called to count to infinity. You can never walk to somebody and say: I’ve done that because it’s a process that never ends. A similar process is our 3 Dimensional space in which we can move around. We will always have that to move around in because nobody can write down how a happening will make it so that one day we will no longer have that and what it will be that came in the place of what we had.
And when this 3 dimensional space will be usable forever by definiton because nothing can change that it means that there hasn’t been a point in history where something changed that. Then the age of this 3 dimensional space turns out to be infinite. If it had a voice it would say that it has already counted to infinity and it did but it just did not use logic alone for that. It also used logic that goes over itself to make an impossibility possible and a good one to start with in a topic with the same name as this one except for the number of the part. A topic where it’s about special things going on inside certain places as well.