Philosophical Questions: Why is space freezing cold?

[freesoulhope]

Before you make the assumption that I am thick, and say something like,

“There’s not enough heat in the universe dummy!”

This principle is already obvious to everyone, and it is not what I’m talking about.

What i want you to do is ask your self the question.

“Why should it be cold in the first place that it should need “suns” to bring warmth?”

What is cold? Why can’t it be warm in definition?

It’s cold, in relation to what? Why should it be a foundation to a universe with out suns.

I’m not sure if you will understand what I’m saying; it’s hard enough to put it in to words. But, the perfect “contrast” of the universe is what I’m talking about here.

Something that I particularly want to ask an atheist as well as theist, since it seems pretty abstract to me that a Godless universe should work on such a metaphorical or “perfectly contrasting level”.

Yes it’s cold because there’s no heat; but what is “cold” that it should be a consequence to the lack of heat? Is it a particle like light?

The same question with light and dark. What is darkness that it should be an opposite or be opposed to light? Why such a well contrasting colour; why such well contrasting demensions in a pointless universe? Why so well contrasted for our “visual” definition of reality? Why could it not be that a lack of light should demand orange, or blue or pink? Why black? What is it?

I think when asking "does a creator exist?” we should take in to consideration these concepts as well. What do you think? peace.

 

[promethius95945]

I’m not sure what exactly what you’re getting at… perhaps this is confusion over applying a highly philosophical question to a highly scientific situation and expecting a metaphysical response to what is simply a physical phenomenon: space is cold because it is massless and without mass there is nothing to hold the energy that we think of as heat.

I think what you’re trying to get at is that cold is essentially a No-thing like evil… that cold is actually the ABSENSE of heat.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

freesoulhope:

What is darkness that it should be an opposite or be opposed to light?

A similar question came up on Truthstalkers thread about Good and Evil. Is Evil only the absence of Good. And let’s not get onto that tangent. But, other than the current physics definition of black being the absence of light, can black being anything else?

Can black be something in its own right?

Thoughts?

freesoulhope:

why such well contrasting demensions in a pointless universe?

The point being that well-contrasting dimensions have a point and that the pointiness of well-contrasting dimensions has a philosophical momentum (vector) which might result in the whole universe having a point (vector)?
:hypno: :extrahappy:

A metaphor, in other words?

Note that I tweak the notion of ‘point’ to mean not one event in physics or in philosophy but rather a direction in physics or philosophy. Hence ‘vector.’

freesoulhope:

Why so well contrasted for our “visual” definition of reality?

Aha! Caught ya! We’re going down the
therefore I am.I observe road again, aren’t we? I like that. Back to the flexiverse.

freesoulhope:

Why could it not be that a lack of light should demand orange, or blue or pink?

Visible light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The spectrum manifests in waves. Some waves are shorter than others. The short ones are blue. The long ones are red. There are shorter ones and longer ones.

freesoulhope:

Why black? What is it?

Black is the absence of light.

freesoulhope:

I think when asking "does a creator exist?” we should take in to consideration these concepts as well. What do you think? peace.

There are probably enough questions in the OP for five threads, but they are good questions. Let’s see what folks have to say.

:bounce:

 

[john_doran]

Before you make the assumption that I am thick, and say something like,

“There’s not enough heat in the universe dummy!”

This principle is already obvious to everyone, and it is not what I’m talking about.

What i want you to do is ask your self the question.

“Why should it be cold in the first place that it should need “suns” to bring warmth?”

What is cold? Why can’t it be warm in definition?

this is a scientific question. heat is defined as mean molecular kinetic energy; i.e. heat is constituted by molecular motion. the more molecular motion there is in a thing, the hotter it is. conversely, the less molecular motion there is, the colder that thing is.

as a result, space, as you know, is very empty, which means that the mean molecular kinetic energy for any given volume of space is going to be very low (averaging in all the other (mostly EM) energy that is zipping around (e.g. in the form of photons)).

this is a simplified explanation, of course, but captures the basics without going into the nitty-gritty details (ideal gases, boltzmann’s law, translational motion, etc.).

 

[freesoulhope]

I’m not sure what exactly what you’re getting at… perhaps this is confusion over applying a highly philosophical question to a highly scientific situation and expecting a metaphysical response to what is simply a physical phenomenon: space is cold because it is massless and without mass there is nothing to hold the energy that we think of as heat.

I think what you’re trying to get at is that cold is essentially a No-thing like evil… that cold is actually the ABSENSE of heat.

I cant explain what im im thinking; at least to the extent that it will make any kind of coherant sense; thats not to say that i have an arguement anyway.

sorry for wasting your time peace

 

[Ani_Ibi]

sorry for wasting your time peace

Don’t give up. There are some other questions inherent in the OP. I set them out in my previous post. Those questions are quite amenable to a philosophical discussion.

 

[freesoulhope]

Can black be something in its own right?

Thoughts?

The point being that well-contrasting dimensions have a point and that the pointiness of well-contrasting dimensions has a philosophical momentum (vector) which might result in the whole universe having a point (vector)?
:hypno: :extrahappy:

A metaphor, in other words?

Note that I tweak the notion of ‘point’ to mean not one event in physics or in philosophy but rather a direction in physics or philosophy. Hence ‘vector.’ Good thinking

Aha! Caught ya! We’re going down the
I observe therefore I am. road again, aren’t we? I like that. Back to the flexiverse.

Well contrasting demensions do have a point! thats the point! well done… i think?

Its kind of like, thinking of a colour that doesn’t exist, and in this lies something of what i am trying to get across.

Your the only person that has at least understood some of what i am getting across.

Peace.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Well contrasting demensions do have a point!

What do you think that point might be?

 

[I_Leatherman]

Before you make the assumption that I am thick, and say something like,

Is it something like;
heat v cold
light v dark
left handedness v right handedness
hmmm… like the universe & things are mirrored derorrim …

 

[promethius95945]

sorry for wasting your time peace

A waste of time? Not at all. I just think you’re focusing on a strange aspect of space and heat. Instead of focusing on the contrast between the heat of a star and the heat of an empty portion of space, perhaps you should expore the possible line of questioning behind why only masseous forms can contain heat energy… why it is that we need the mass created by God to survive…

 

[Ani_Ibi]

why only masseous forms can contain heat energy… why it is that we need the mass created by God to survive…

Thoughts? Anyone?

 

[freesoulhope]

Thoughts? Anyone?

I dont think we do need mass to survive; only if your bound by the laws that demand that you need mass to survive, does such a rule apply. I see reality much like a computor programer; in other words, an atom doesn’t act like an atom because its an atom; rather it acts like one because its been given that nature, program, command or instict, if your’d like. An atom, in its self and by its self, is as meaningless as it is nothing. It does not have its own value or power.

I believe God created the universe as it is, only to reflect the appearence of order and rationality; I suppose for the sake of rational beings, so that they could understand God. I see life as a metaphore.

 

[freesoulhope]

What do you think that point might be?

That something can only work or be active in this universe in relation to something else? I dont know the rest.

By the way, i have see this happen before in our present time continuem. I dont want to sound like a nutter, so i wont explain what i mean.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

freesoulhope:

That something can only work or be active in this universe in relation to something else?

Hopefully this is true and physics doesn’t break at some inconvenient junction out in space somewhere.

freesoulhope:

I dont know the rest.

Some of us are hoping that there isn’t a ‘rest.’ We’re hoping that physics is the round trip.

 

[MH84]

Before you make the assumption that I am thick, and say something like,

“There’s not enough heat in the universe dummy!”

This principle is already obvious to everyone, and it is not what I’m talking about.

What i want you to do is ask your self the question.

“Why should it be cold in the first place that it should need “suns” to bring warmth?”

**What is cold? Why can’t it be warm in definition? **

It’s cold, in relation to what? Why should it be a foundation to a universe with out suns.

I’m not sure if you will understand what I’m saying; it’s hard enough to put it in to words. But, the perfect “contrast” of the universe is what I’m talking about here.

Something that I particularly want to ask an atheist as well as theist, since it seems pretty abstract to me that a Godless universe should work on such a metaphorical or “perfectly contrasting level”.

Yes it’s cold because there’s no heat; but what is “cold” that it should be a consequence to the lack of heat? Is it a particle like light?

The same question with light and dark. What is darkness that it should be an opposite or be opposed to light? Why such a well contrasting colour; why such well contrasting demensions in a pointless universe? Why so well contrasted for our “visual” definition of reality? Why could it not be that a lack of light should demand orange, or blue or pink? Why black? What is it?

I think when asking "does a creator exist?” we should take in to consideration these concepts as well. What do you think? peace.

Maybe you can think of the “cold”, whatever the temperature is in a particular part of the universe, is the standard to measure temperature by. You seem to be thinking about what ‘warm’ is according to you point of view. For God, surely he wouldn’t need heat to warm the cold, but we do.

Your question is like asking "Why is a desert dry? Why do we need to add water to it to make the sand moist and fertile?;
or Why does my skin get darker in the sun? “Why does God bother to allow the sun to burn my skin, why doesn’t it just provied heat and light for me?”

You can go crazy thinking all this through?

Btw, How come I have never really noticed this Philosophy forum before?

 

[freesoulhope]

Your question is like asking "Why is a desert dry?
My question is based on the logical assumption that there is a reason for everything; and if we hold to that reasoning, we reach an “omega” point in nature, where the natural world cannot explain itself; it becomes “irreducible”, (not in the same way as behe) yet demands a logical explanation.
We can say that something has a nature of being, and because of that nature, it gives rise to other affects in the natural world; But a “raw foundational nature” such as the laws of physics, cannot be explain by the natural world that it governs, since in order for the natural world to exist, these things must be pre-requirements. Therefore, if we hold to the notion of there being a reason for everything, we are forced to look outside of nature, to a world of essense and forms.