Everything that exists.
A World Without Men?
Re: A World Without Men?
Okay, so to you is the big bang and your great, great grandfather a part of the 'Universe', because obviously both of them do NOT 'exist', when this is being written?
See, to be able to PROVE to you just how the Universe, Itself, is ACTUALLY infinite and eternal, we have to SEE and FULLY UNDERSTAND what you SEE and UNDERSTAND, and how you ACTUALLY SEE those 'things', from your perspective.
Re: A World Without Men?
Well, the theory that the past is real, is called the growing block universe. To anyone roughly a hundred light years away, with a suitably powerful telescope, they will be able to watch my great, great grandfather. Everything that has ever happened is visible from some part of the universe, so in that respect, it is part of the universe.
A variation of the growing block universe is the theory that the block of everything that will ever happen already exists. What we experience as time is not matter rearranging itself, it is rather us drifting through an eternal, and perhaps infinite block.
Re: A World Without Men?
I do NOT do 'theory', so the first part is completely moot, to me.uwot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 11:40 amWell, the theory that the past is real, is called the growing block universe. To anyone roughly a hundred light years away, with a suitably powerful telescope, they will be able to watch my great, great grandfather. Everything that has ever happened is visible from some part of the universe, so in that respect, it is part of the universe.
The second part here you seem to be going completely off track. I more or less just asked you if you define the Universe as being those things that 'exists', then this could be interpreted as only everything that 'exists' at a given moment. Also, and by the way, are you suggesting that what has happened before the big bang is visible as well as that what is beyond the observable universe is also visible?
But this is all just ANOTHER GUESS about what COULD BE TRUE, which OBVIOUSLY does NOT necessarily have ANY thing to do with what is ACTUALLY True.
Let us keep this VERY SIMPLE so that we can speed the process up. When you said, "Everything that exists", did you mean 'everything that has existed, is existing, and will exist?
If no, then what do you actually mean?
Re: A World Without Men?
So, the Universe can ONLY exist when the 'you' exists, correct?
Because everything is ONLY existing when one is existing.
Re: A World Without Men?
Well, this universe can only exist when I exist. A universe in which I don't exist would be a different universe.
You can argue that the current state of the universe depends on my existence, but if I didn't exist, everything that exists would be everything that exists in this universe minus me.
Re: A World Without Men?
Well that is clearly one very self-centered perception of things. Or, that is ACTUALLY very, and irrefutably, True, except that there could NEVER EVER be "another Universe". Also, it all depends on who and what the 'I' IS, EXACTLY, here, which 'you' are referring to.
So, we are back to where we started with trying to work out how 'you' define the 'Universe' word, EXACTLY?
Re: A World Without Men?
Okay, and what currently exists, HERE-NOW, as a whole, is infinitely and eternally long. As this could NOT be ANY others way.
Re: A World Without Men?
Because of what the Universe is fundamentally made up of.
Again, because of what the Universe is fundamentally made up of, and, also because of the way the Universe actually works.
Re: A World Without Men?
And what might that be?
Easy to say; much harder to prove. What is your proof?
Re: A World Without Men?
'Matter', and, 'distance' or 'space', around matter.
And, the way these two interact with each other, or behave together, has to have been happening forever and has to be extending out infinitely.
Anyway one looks at this, this HAS TO BE this way.
But this is NOT hard to prove AT ALL. In fact it REALLY is very simple and very easy. This is because the proof already just naturally exists itself.
It is NOT 'my proof'. The Universe does NOT need 'my proof' NOR 'me' to prove it. Thee Universe proves Itself.
No matter what way ANY one wants to LOOK, what thee Universe, fundamentally and essentially, is made up of and how It behaves will ALWAYS remain the SAME.
The 'proof' just lays within being able to LOOK and SEE 'things' for WHAT and HOW they EXACTLY ARE.
Re: A World Without Men?
The idea that the universe is composed of matter and empty space is wrong. We know this, because we routinely create matter out of 'empty space' by hitting it really hard, as happens in particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider. As you are keen to remind us, it is possible that we human beings make all sorts of assumptions that misdirect out beliefs, but atom smashers do not make assumptions and they very clearly show that Einstein was right about E=mc2 and that you really can make matter from energy - kinetic energy in this instance, or movement in plain English.
Suppose I grant you that the universe is composed of "'Matter', and, 'distance' or 'space', around matter", what about the way they interact proves eternity and infinity?
Except that when we actually do look, we discover that it isn't that way.