what was before anything was.

[jackles]

shows ya thinkin relative .

[Blaggard]

no, what was on second

-Imp

Your mum? Mind you she was one you could always get to 4th base with.

Your mum jokes the pillar of both civilisation and your mum, but then as we all know your mum does like an erection.

shows ya thinkin relative .

You're still obsessing over this stuff jackles which is fine, but I don't genuinely believe you really know what you are talking about.

[jackles]

blagsy(popularist) yes i do.

[Blaggard]

Speak English blags? What?

[jackles]

blags before was was nothing moved.then the bigbang and something was moving inside nothing.and the beings that evolved in that moving something call the non moving thing time and space.(relativity)

[Blaggard]

blags before was was nothing moved.then the bigbang and something was moving inside nothing.and the beings that evolved in that moving something call the non moving thing time and space.(relativity)

Jackles no offence but this made even less sense than your last post. If you can talk English, I would appreciate it; usually I can sort of tell what you are talking about, and no I am not saying this for effect, I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about here. What?

[jackles]

what i am saying is that the dynamics of the big bang came from nothing.time and space are nothing as seen by and observer in the dynamics of the big bang.nothing keeped its status in something as relativity and time and space are expressions of nothing relative to mass.

[Blaggard]

Ok that at least I understood, but have you established your axiom of something came from nothing, because in terms of eternity, something always was, and you can't use something from nothing arguments if you just start from axioms, the irony is of course apparent. If something came from nothing is an axiom, then if I make a conjecture based on something that hence follows, why is that conjecture even necessary? Something came from nothing is a self defeating argument which leads nowhere.

What about if it always was, what then? Something endlessly coming from something, which might appear to be nothing, what then?

[jackles]

not sure how your seeing it blags.but i am not saying that something came from nothing as in non existance.what i am saying is nothing is the non action state of something.but nothing always keeps its status as real existance and is god to the action expression which is something.

[the Hessian]

not sure how your seeing it blags.but i am not saying that something came from nothing as in non existance.what i am saying is nothing is the non action state of something.but nothing always keeps its status as real existance and is god to the action expression which is something.

It is sooooo hard to understand what you are saying, but for whatever reason I'm feeling Spinoza here. So let me ask you if you recongize what you are saying in him?

Proposition 1: A substance is prior in nature to its affections.
Proposition 2: Two substances having different attributes have nothing in common with one another. (In other words, if two substances differ in nature, then they have nothing in common).
Proposition 3: If things have nothing in common with one another, one of them cannot be the cause of the other.
Proposition 4: Two or more distinct things are distinguished from one another, either by a difference in the attributes [i.e., the natures or essences] of the substances or by a difference in their affections [i.e., their accidental properties].
Proposition 5: In nature, there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute.
Proposition 6: One substance cannot be produced by another substance.
Proposition 7: It pertains to the nature of a substance to exist.
Proposition 8: Every substance is necessarily infinite.
Proposition 9: The more reality or being each thing has, the more attributes belong to it.
Proposition 10: Each attribute of a substance must be conceived through itself.
Proposition 11: God, or a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which expresses eternal and infinite essence, necessarily exists.
Proposition 12: No attribute of a substance can be truly conceived from which it follows that the substance can be divided.
Proposition 13: A substance which is absolutely infinite is indivisible.
Proposition 14: Except God, no substance can be or be conceived.

[Impenitent]

no, what was on second

-Imp

Who was on second.

no, Who's on first.

-Imp

[jackles]

ok hessian like the word substance .nonlocality existed and created local substance by spliting its self into a dynamic expression of its self.therefor the relativity in the dynamics of the local substance that was formed is the real sizeless mover in the sizelike energy substance.in other words nonlocality is the relativity in the changing energy status of the substance which is an event.the substance event is a localised illusion created and moved by nonlocality as an expression of its self as relativity.

[the Hessian]

lol, nevermind. it was a stupid question.

[jackles]

ok any time yas wants to know about the begining of time please ask.regs jackles .ha ha

[Blaggard]

Meh my your mum joke got deleted, clearly someone somewhere doesn't get humour. It's a you mum joke! It's not really referring to your mum, I've never met your mum, I don't and couldn't possibly have meant the comments I said, it's just a burn! It's not even offenisve, hell when someone makes a your mum joke at me, the first thing I don't think is well hold on my mother, is a pure skinny and siantly woman, I must get all up in arms and flip out like some tard: it's just a joke. Honestly some people just don't get humour. This PC shit has to stop, and it has to stop now. Some people need to get over that faux offended shit.

To them I say well your mum obviously wasn't that offended by you, she probably should have been.

And to further make a point, what's worse some numpty who only engages by writing trite one sentence meaningless crap at everyone like they think they are the Kwisats Hadderach, or a harmless joke? I'll let you decide, I know what I'd chose. Delete the lazy posters with no interest in doing philosophy. Fight the banality people.