What is matter?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 10:15 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
Age wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 1:34 pm

But I HAVE understood them. That is HOW I KNOW they are NOT sound and valid arguments, and thus are NOT worthy of even repeating them, for me NOR for ANY one else.
Could you please tell everybody my argument for mind and its irreducibility?
You will NOT repeat your arguments for me but you EXPECT me to repeat your arguments for you, right?

Also, as I said, your argument is NOT sound and valid, and therefore NOT worth repeating.

WHEN you formulate a sound and valid argument, then get back to us. We ALL would be VERY INTERESTED in SEEING 'that'.
Actually, there are two arguments here: (A) Argument for the necessity of mind and (B) Mind is an irreducible substance.

A: Consider a change in a system, X to Y. X and Y cannot lay on the same point since otherwise, everything is simultaneous instead of temporal therefore there is a gap between X and Y. In reality, X has to vanish in order to leave room for Y to take place. The gap however does not allow X turns into Y since there is no X between the gap. Therefore, there must be a mind that makes a connection between X and Y, namely experiencing X and causing Y.

B: Consider X that is reducible which means the existence of X depends on something else. We are dealing with a regress if we accept that all entities in the vertical chain of causation (by vertical I mean that something creates something else or the existence of something depend on something else) are reducible. Regress is not acceptable. Therefore, there must be something irreducible in the vertical chain of causality. This thing we call mind.

I know that you believe in nonsense regress and I cannot help you with this.
Age wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:10 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:10 pm

Okay.

So, what is 'matter' then, if it is NOT 'physical'?
What is physical to you?
ONCE MORE, you make the CLAIM, I ask you to CLARIFY, you then DETRACT and/or DEFLECT.

If, to you, 'matter' is NOT 'physical', then what IS 'matter'?

I will suggest, AGAIN, if one comes here, especially in a philosophy forum, making CLAIMS, then it would be best if they had the ACTUAL PROOF for their CLAIM BEFORE they make the CLAIM, itself.

What is 'physical', to me, is 'that', which can be smelt, felt, tasted, seen, or heard with the visible parts of the human body.
What does happen if there is no human? Would be there matter still?
Age wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:10 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm I already explained what is matter.
you CLAIM that 'matter cannot be anything but a collection of minds that interact via Qualia'.

you have NOT actually EXPLAINED what 'matter', itself, IS, EXACTLY, other than, OF COURSE, that 'matter' is NOT 'physical'.

Maybe if you provide some examples of so-called 'non physical matter', then this might help your BELIEFS and CLAIMS here.
Spiritual reality is not physical given your definition.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Walker wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 10:06 am
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
Walker wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:03 pm
Which is it? Mind, or minds?
There are minds.
viewtopic.php?p=620155#p620155
I believe in the number of universes that are bigger or equal to the number of minds. I have had spiritual experience since 15 years ago. I see things that people don't. How is that possible if there is one universe?

And I don't think that there is one mind that we share given my definition of mind: Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience and cause. Our experiences are simply different therefore there are minds.
Advocate
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: What is matter?

Post by Advocate »

[quote=bahman post_id=620181 time=1674309810 user_id=12593]
[quote=Advocate post_id=620101 time=1674247831 user_id=15238]
[quote=bahman post_id=620097 time=1674247158 user_id=12593]

What!?
[/quote]

It's a bunch of energy that came together and settled in such a way as to stay together for a while.
[/quote]
Why do they stay together to form matter?
[/quote]

That's a physical question, for physics. Philosophy has nothing to add.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Advocate wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 8:12 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:03 pm
Advocate wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 9:50 pm It's a bunch of energy that came together and settled in such a way as to stay together for a while.
Why do they stay together to form matter?
That's a physical question, for physics. Philosophy has nothing to add.
So you don't know. How could be sure that matter is a bunch of energy that came together!?
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:04 pm
Age wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 10:02 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
There are minds.
How many?
Infinity.
Okay. So there is no room for absolutely ANY thing else but these mind things correct?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:24 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:04 pm
Age wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 10:02 pm

How many?
Infinity.
Okay. So there is no room for absolutely ANY thing else but these mind things correct?
Mind does not occupy any room.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:03 pm
Advocate wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 9:50 pm
bahman wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 9:39 pm
What!?
It's a bunch of energy that came together and settled in such a way as to stay together for a while.
Why do they stay together to form matter?
'Matter' exists, ALWAYS. Between ALL 'matter', or as some of you would say, between EVERY 'particle of matter' there is a 'space', or 'place', of NO 'matter'. 'Space' allows 'matter' to move FREELY, until 'matter' bumps into, or interacts, with 'itself', which is what causes, or creates, energy. 'Matter' stays 'together', for a while, forming what are sometimes referred to, or called, 'objects', or 'physical objects' because of 'magnetism', itself.

ALL 'objects', however, are made up of BOTH 'physical matter' AND 'space'. Some 'objects' only last, or remain, for a finite 'time', while some last, or remain, eternally.

Now, if ANY one does NOT YET KNOW which 'object' is forever, and which 'objects' are not, then please let us, that is; IF you would like to become in-form-ed as well.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6660
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by Iwannaplato »

bahman wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 9:30 pm I believe in a new version of substance dualism that reality is made of two substances, minds (I have an argument for mind and I can share it with you if you are interested), and Qualia. Mind is an irreducible substance (I have an argument for irreducibility of mind and I can share it with you if you are interested) with the ability to experience and cause. Qualia is a reducible substance and it is the subject of experience and causation. Given these, matter cannot be anything but a collection of minds that interact via Qualia. Here we are left to explain what force and mass are: Mass is nothing but a sort of Qualia that resists change in motion. Force is nothing but a sort of Qualia that carries momentum and energy. Two objects, therefore, interact with each other through the exchange of Qualia.
Why retain ideas that like momentum and energy in qualia? It would be more like a dream of momentum and energy than what we refer too, if incorrectly according to your model, as those things.

Matter=minds and qualia, it seems. But if these are both matter why is it a substance dualism?

What is the word matter adding to the two substances you have labelled q and m?
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm
Age wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 10:15 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
Could you please tell everybody my argument for mind and its irreducibility?
You will NOT repeat your arguments for me but you EXPECT me to repeat your arguments for you, right?

Also, as I said, your argument is NOT sound and valid, and therefore NOT worth repeating.

WHEN you formulate a sound and valid argument, then get back to us. We ALL would be VERY INTERESTED in SEEING 'that'.
Actually, there are two arguments here:
I do NOT care if there are two arguments here, two hundred arguments here, two million arguments here, or two trillion arguments here, and this is because if ANY argument is NOT sound AND valid, then, as I keep reminding you, those arguments are NOT worth repeating.

And, as I also keep reminding 'you', "bahman", your arguments, as they stand, are NOT sound AND valid.

Or, do 'you' ACTUALLY BELIEVE that your OWN arguments are sound AND valid?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm (A) Argument for the necessity of mind and (B) Mind is an irreducible substance.
1. 'Trying to' argue FOR the necessity of some 'thing', like God or mind for example, is just 'trying to' argue FOR 'that', which one ALREADY BELIEVES exists, but which they have NO ACTUAL PROOF of NOR for.

2. 'Trying to' argue FOR A 'thing' as being a so-called 'irreducible substance' but which also there is an infinite amount of, besides being just plain old ABSURD, is just Truly ILLOGICAL as there would NOT ANY room for absolutely ANY thing ELSE.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm A: Consider a change in a system, X to Y. X and Y cannot lay on the same point since otherwise, everything is simultaneous instead of temporal therefore there is a gap between X and Y. In reality, X has to vanish in order to leave room for Y to take place. The gap however does not allow X turns into Y since there is no X between the gap.
But there is NO so-called 'gap'. you only BELIEVE there is because you are NOT looking at the WHOLE Picture. you are ONLY looking at the Picture from a narrowed or limited perspective. Thus you are only seeing individual pixels, and NOT the WHOLE Picture. Or, in other words, you are just seeing the individual trees, and NOT the WHOLE Forest.

There are OTHER faults and flaws in your ATTEMPT here also, but I have said enough already to SHOW what I want here.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm Therefore, there must be a mind that makes a connection between X and Y, namely experiencing X and causing Y.
This is your argument in SIMPLE FORM.

A child turns into an adult, but this HAS TO happen at DIFFERENT times, so there MUST BE a mind.

Or,

P1. X, a child, becomes Y, an adult.
P2. X, a child, has to vanish in order for Y, an adult, to become, exist, or to take place.
C. Therefore there must be a mind.

Will you EVER explain HOW this even LOGICALLY follows? HOW do you JUMP to this 'conclusion', besides, of course, you ALREADY BELIEVE 'there MUST BE a mind'?

Also, you CLAIM that 'everything' can NOT lay on the same point because otherwise 'everything' is simultaneous, and would NOT be of temporal. As I have ALREADY partly explained, 'Everything' IS simultaneous, and WITHOUT 'gap', whereas, OBVIOUSLY, EVERY 'thing' (besides thee Universe, Itself) IS 'separated', WITH 'gap', and of limited existence, temporally AND spatially.

But you can NOT YET SEE 'this', the Forest, because you are ONLY looking at, and thus can only SEE, individual 'things', trees.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm B: Consider X that is reducible which means the existence of X depends on something else.
I have ALREADY suggested numerous times ADDING in ACTUAL EXAMPLES, as this MIGHT HELP YOU. Now, do you PURPOSELY NOT ADD IN EXAMPLES, because you have NOT READ what I have been suggesting, or because you just do NOT want to do what I SUGGEST, or because if you ACTUALLY DID, then this would REFUTE your OWN CLAIMS and BELIEFS here, or do you NOT ADD IN EXAMPLES for some other reason?

Oh, and by the way, I CAN ACTUALLY PROVE, what you are so desperately 'trying to' prove here, but this can ONLY BE DONE IN and WITH ACTUAL sound AND valid arguments. And, as I keep reminding you, 'your arguments', as they stand, are NOT YET sound AND valid, AT ALL.

WHY do NOT just OPEN UP a bit, and MOVE ALONG, instead of just RE-REPEATING the EXACT SAME things that you have been, and which OBVIOUSLY are NOT working for you?

Oh, and by the way, NOT ALL X's are reducible. But, if you want to refer to reducible X's, then so be it.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm We are dealing with a regress if we accept that all entities in the vertical chain of causation (by vertical I mean that something creates something else or the existence of something depend on something else) are reducible. Regress is not acceptable.
LOL 'regress' is ONLY 'unacceptable' TO 'you', and this is because, TO 'you', "bahman", 'you' look AT 'regress' from ANOTHER LIMITED, DISTORTED, or NOT, REAL WAY.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm Therefore, there must be something irreducible in the vertical chain of causality. This thing we call mind.
'you', "bahman", call this 'thing' 'mind'. WE do NOT call this 'thing' 'mind'. WE use the 'Mind' word to refer to ANOTHER 'Thing', is this UNDERSTOOD, BY 'you', "bahman".

REMEMBER it is 'you' who is here 'TRYING TO' form arguments and prove some 'thing', which 'you' ALREADY BELIEVE is ABSOLUTELY and IRREFUTABLE TRUE.

'We', on the other hand, ALREADY KNOW what IS ACTUALLY ABSOLUTELY and IRREFUTABLY True, and, as such, have NO NEED to 'TRY TO' prove ANY 'thing' here.

'We' are just WATCHING and OBSERVING what 'you', human beings, DO and DID Wrong, in the days when this IS and WAS being written.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm I know that you believe in nonsense regress and I cannot help you with this.
LOL Well CLEARLY what 'you' THINK 'you' KNOW is OBVIOUSLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, AND Incorrect, which helps EXPLAIN WHY 'you' are SO Wrong and have such CLEARLY SO DISTORTED views.

How about you now EXPLAIN what 'regress' IS EXACTLY, TO you, and WHY you BELIEVE, WHOLEHEARTEDLY, that 'regress' is PURE NONSENSE?

THEN, you might like to EXPLAIN HOW absolutely EVERY 'thing' CAME from absolutely NO 'thing'. Which, OBVIOUSLY, IS PURE NONSENSE TO 'US'.

BUT, if you do NOT even TRY TO EXPLAIN this, then that is OKAY as 'we' ALREADY KNOW WHY you CAN NOT.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:10 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
What is physical to you?
ONCE MORE, you make the CLAIM, I ask you to CLARIFY, you then DETRACT and/or DEFLECT.

If, to you, 'matter' is NOT 'physical', then what IS 'matter'?

I will suggest, AGAIN, if one comes here, especially in a philosophy forum, making CLAIMS, then it would be best if they had the ACTUAL PROOF for their CLAIM BEFORE they make the CLAIM, itself.

What is 'physical', to me, is 'that', which can be smelt, felt, tasted, seen, or heard with the visible parts of the human body.
What does happen if there is no human? Would be there matter still?
I ask 'you', "bahman", What IS 'matter' if 'matter' is NOT 'physical', AND these two questions is the answer 'you' GIVE. Can 'you' REALLY NOT SEE the ABSURDITY and RIDICULOUSNESS here?

'you' WANT TO CLAIM that 'matter' is NOT 'physical', SO STAND BY THIS CLAIM and inform 'us' of what 'matter' IS EXACTLY if NOT 'physical'.

As for your two CLARIFYING questions here, posed to me, what does happen if there is NO human IS 'what happens'. Just like WHEN there IS human, what does happen, IS 'what happens'.

And the answer to your question, 'Would there still be matter', if there were NO human, then the answer would be, OBVIOUSLY there would be ANY way for A human to KNOW, FOR SURE, but considering the Fact that there MUST OF BEEN 'matter' BEFORE human beings evolved into Existence, then the answer would HAVE TO BE a resounding, Yes.
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:11 pm
Age wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:10 pm
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm I already explained what is matter.
you CLAIM that 'matter cannot be anything but a collection of minds that interact via Qualia'.

you have NOT actually EXPLAINED what 'matter', itself, IS, EXACTLY, other than, OF COURSE, that 'matter' is NOT 'physical'.

Maybe if you provide some examples of so-called 'non physical matter', then this might help your BELIEFS and CLAIMS here.
Spiritual reality is not physical given your definition.
Have I even given MY definition?

If yes, then WHERE, EXACTLY?

And, WHEN have I EVER used the term 'spiritual reality'?

Maybe if you just STOP 'trying to' DEFLECT and just FOCUS ON and STAY ON the ACTUAL QUESTIONS that I pose TO 'you' then we could ACTUALLY get somewhere.

Now, you CLAIM that 'matter' can NOT be absolutely ANY 'thing' but 'a collection of minds that interact via Qualia', which INFERS that 'minds' exist ETERNALLY. Now, you ALSO CLAIM that 'matter' is NOT 'physical'. So,

1. What IS 'matter', EXACTLY, if NOT 'physical'?

2. What ARE 'minds', EXACTLY, which, supposedly, exist 'eternally'?

If you CAN NOT or WILL NOT CLARIFY these two questions, then WHY do you even bother coming into this forum CLAIMING 'things' here?
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by promethean75 »

i have no idea what matter is, but i can tell u this. if u find something that has a signature but is so incredibly small that u can't examine it to see if it is composed of reducible parts... u might have your 'fundamental' stuff. but u might not. just cuz u can't divide it into properties doesn't mean whatever gave that signature isn't built of smaller components. so i dunno.

how u know you've gotten your fundamental particle is when u can't break it apart without anihilating it. if u can break it apart and u get individual signatures, well then u didn't have anything fun da mental and the ship of Theseus is only its parts after all.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:18 pm
Walker wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 10:06 am
bahman wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 4:55 pm
There are minds.
viewtopic.php?p=620155#p620155
I believe in the number of universes that are bigger or equal to the number of minds.
'you' are absolutely FREE to BELIEVE absolutely ANY thing of your choosing, but WHY BELIEVE some 'thing' that 'you' have NO actual proof for?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:18 pm I have had spiritual experience since 15 years ago. I see things that people don't. How is that possible if there is one universe?
That is possible just due to the fact that you just LOOK AT and SEE 'things' DIFFERENTLY, and NOT because there are MANY Universes.

'We', OBVIOUSLY, SEE 'things' that 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, did NOT, just like 'you', people, SAW 'things' that previous people did NOT. But this in NO way means that there is more than One Universe.

Also, is there a human being who has NOT had so-called 'spiritual experiences'?

If yes, then WHO are they, EXACTLY?
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:18 pm And I don't think that there is one mind that we share given my definition of mind: Mind is an irreducible substance with the ability to experience and cause. Our experiences are simply different therefore there are minds.
Once again you are absolutely FREE to think, or BELIEVE, whatever you like. However, what you wrote here ALSO does NOT logically follow. your conclusion, AGAIN, does NOT follow on from what you wrote before it. From what I am observing you are, ONCE MORE, just saying and writing just about ANY thing that you perceive or hope backs up and supports what you ALREADY BELIEVE is true.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:42 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:24 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:04 pm
Infinity.
Okay. So there is no room for absolutely ANY thing else but these mind things correct?
Mind does not occupy any room.
I NEVER said, NOR even suggested, that 'mind' occupies ANY room.

In fact I said, AND meant, if 'minds' are infinite in amount, as you CLAIM they are, then there would NOT be ANY absolutely room, for absolutely ANY thing else.
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:03 pm
Advocate wrote: Fri Jan 20, 2023 9:50 pm

It's a bunch of energy that came together and settled in such a way as to stay together for a while.
Why do they stay together to form matter?
'Matter' exists, ALWAYS.
No, matter has existed since the beginning of time. You believe in regress that by definition is unreachable but can be reached. That is nonsense.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm Between ALL 'matter', or as some of you would say, between EVERY 'particle of matter' there is a 'space', or 'place', of NO 'matter'. 'Space' allows 'matter' to move FREELY, until 'matter' bumps into, or interacts, with 'itself', which is what causes, or creates, energy.
Any sort of matter has a lifetime which means that it would be destroyed given enough amount of time. Matter does not bump into itself.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm 'Matter' stays 'together', for a while, forming what are sometimes referred to, or called, 'objects', or 'physical objects' because of 'magnetism', itself.
No, that shows that you don't understand anything. Not all form of matter has magnetism, pi-meson has spin zero!
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm ALL 'objects', however, are made up of BOTH 'physical matter' AND 'space'. Some 'objects' only last, or remain, for a finite 'time', while some last, or remain, eternally.
No, all objects are only made of physical matter. Objects are embedded in space.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm Now, if ANY one does NOT YET KNOW which 'object' is forever, and which 'objects' are not, then please let us, that is; IF you would like to become in-form-ed as well.
What you are talking about?
User avatar
bahman
Posts: 8791
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: What is matter?

Post by bahman »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:59 pm
bahman wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 9:30 pm I believe in a new version of substance dualism that reality is made of two substances, minds (I have an argument for mind and I can share it with you if you are interested), and Qualia. Mind is an irreducible substance (I have an argument for irreducibility of mind and I can share it with you if you are interested) with the ability to experience and cause. Qualia is a reducible substance and it is the subject of experience and causation. Given these, matter cannot be anything but a collection of minds that interact via Qualia. Here we are left to explain what force and mass are: Mass is nothing but a sort of Qualia that resists change in motion. Force is nothing but a sort of Qualia that carries momentum and energy. Two objects, therefore, interact with each other through the exchange of Qualia.
Why retain ideas that like momentum and energy in qualia?
That is needed to explain the interaction between two objects. An object cannot move another object if the Qualia that they exchange does not contain momentum.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:59 pm It would be more like a dream of momentum and energy than what we refer too, if incorrectly according to your model, as those things.
What do you mean?
Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:59 pm Matter=minds and qualia, it seems. But if these are both matter why is it a substance dualism?
It is substance dualism since there are two underlying substances that make everything including matter, those two substances are mind and Qualia.
Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:59 pm What is the word matter adding to the two substances you have labelled q and m?
Everything is made of Mind and Qualia only, that is underlying reality. We, however, experience different categories of objects around ourselves, such as the chair that you are sitting on right now, or the cup of coffee that I am drinking from, these are nothing but mind and Qualia though, but they are chunks of minds and Qualia that persist to exist having certain properties.
Age
Posts: 20204
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What is matter?

Post by Age »

bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm
bahman wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 3:03 pm
Why do they stay together to form matter?
'Matter' exists, ALWAYS.
No, matter has existed since the beginning of time.
LOL
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm You believe in regress that by definition is unreachable but can be reached.
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm That is nonsense.
YES. What you SAY and CLAIM here is PURE NONSENSE because there is absolutely NO truth AT ALL to it.
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm Between ALL 'matter', or as some of you would say, between EVERY 'particle of matter' there is a 'space', or 'place', of NO 'matter'. 'Space' allows 'matter' to move FREELY, until 'matter' bumps into, or interacts, with 'itself', which is what causes, or creates, energy.
Any sort of matter has a lifetime which means that it would be destroyed given enough amount of time.
LOL
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm Matter does not bump into itself.
you SAY 'this' BECAUSE you BELIEVE 'matter' is NONE 'physical'. OF COURSE 'non physical' 'things' could NOT 'bump' into itself.
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm 'Matter' stays 'together', for a while, forming what are sometimes referred to, or called, 'objects', or 'physical objects' because of 'magnetism', itself.
No, that shows that you don't understand anything.[/quote]

Okay. To "bahman" 'I' do NOT understand absolutely ANY 'thing' AT ALL.
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm Not all form of matter has magnetism, pi-meson has spin zero!
Is 'pi-meson' AN 'object'?

If no, then READ the ACTUAL WORDS that I wrote. I SAID 'matter' stays 'together' FORMING 'objects' BECAUSE OF 'magnetism', itself. I NEVER SAID, 'ALL forms of matter HAS 'magnetism'.

But if 'pi-meson' IS AN 'object', then what does the 'pi-meson object' look like, EXACTLY?
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm ALL 'objects', however, are made up of BOTH 'physical matter' AND 'space'. Some 'objects' only last, or remain, for a finite 'time', while some last, or remain, eternally.
No, all objects are only made of physical matter.
WHAT?

you SAID and CLAIMED ABOVE that 'matter' is NOT of 'physicality'. Now you are SAYING and CLAIMING that ALL 'objects' are ONLY made of 'physicality'.

Are you AWARE of just HOW MANY TIMES you end up CONTRADICTING "your" 'self' in this forum "bahman"?

Also, and by the way, to you, absolutely EVERY 'object' IS ONLY made up of 'physical matter', right? Like 'tables' and 'watermelons' for example, right?
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm Objects are embedded in space.
'Embedded' as in, FIXED FIRMLY and DEEPLY, right?
bahman wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:14 pm
Age wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 9:44 pm Now, if ANY one does NOT YET KNOW which 'object' is forever, and which 'objects' are not, then please let us, that is; IF you would like to become in-form-ed as well.
What you are talking about?
That was ONLY for those WITH ANY CURIOSITY, in regards to my CLAIM that SOME 'objects' ARE FOREVER while SOME 'objects' ARE FINITE. BUT, you, OBVIOUSLY, MISSED that part.
Post Reply