The Sun Also Sets

[Dontaskme]

I NEVER mentioned absolutely ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'mirrors' NOR 'a mirror'.

But the poster you were replying to never implied you did mention anything about mirrors.

[Dontaskme]

I APOLOGIZE, PROFUSELY.

Please do not do that. I hate it when people discharge all over me. That privilege is reserved exclusively for my intimate lover only.

[Age]

I NEVER mentioned absolutely ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'mirrors' NOR 'a mirror'.

But the poster you were replying to never implied you did mention anything about mirrors.

NO, they may well NOT have.

BUT they were SAYING, that 'a mirror' is eternal as can be, but ALL 'the reflections' ARE 'transitory'. WHICH, some might take or infer to mean that what I was SAYING were also NOT ACTUALLY 'eternal' BUT ONLY 'transitory' AS WELL.

Which, OBVIOUSLY, 'they' ARE NOT.

So, I just made it VERY CLEAR that I NEVER said absolutely ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'mirrors'. Therefore, what was being SAID and CLAIMED in 'that sentence', which was in DIRECT response to what I SAID, and CLAIMED, REALLY DID have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH what I ACTUALLY SAID, and CLAIMED. Which, by the way, STILL STANDS.

[Age]

I APOLOGIZE, PROFUSELY.

Please do not do that. I hate it when people discharge all over me. That privilege is reserved exclusively for my intimate lover only.

I APOLOGIZE, PROFUSELY.

Please do not do that.

What, apologize?

I hate it when people discharge all over me.

But I did NOT do 'that'.

you CLAIMED that I MISINTERPRETED above here. So, all I DID was JUST APOLOGIZE, ONLY. That is; IF I DID MISINTERPRET you above here.

BUT if you call 'apologizing' 'discharging', and you HATE IT when people 'discharge' ALL of 'you', then, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE, PROFUSELY, for doing what 'you' HATE.

Oh, wait up, HOW can I say, I AM Truly SORRY, for doing what you HATE people doing?

That privilege is reserved exclusively for my intimate lover only.

Okay. But are you talking ABOUT 'apologizing' now, or some 'thing' ELSE?

Because if it some 'thing' else, then I did NOT do 'that' even a tiny, little bit, let alone ALL OVER 'you', "dontaskme".

[Dontaskme]

I NEVER mentioned absolutely ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'mirrors' NOR 'a mirror'.

But the poster you were replying to never implied you did mention anything about mirrors.

NO, they may well NOT have.

BUT they were SAYING, that 'a mirror' is eternal as can be, but ALL 'the reflections' ARE 'transitory'. WHICH, some might take or infer to mean that what I was SAYING were also NOT ACTUALLY 'eternal' BUT ONLY 'transitory' AS WELL.

Which, OBVIOUSLY, 'they' ARE NOT.

So, I just made it VERY CLEAR that I NEVER said absolutely ANY 'thing' ABOUT 'mirrors'. Therefore, what was being SAID and CLAIMED in 'that sentence', which was in DIRECT response to what I SAID, and CLAIMED, REALLY DID have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH what I ACTUALLY SAID, and CLAIMED. Which, by the way, STILL STANDS.

It doesn't even matter anyway. People make claims about things all the time and usually understand perfectly the claims they are making, else they would rarely make them public. So it matters not whether they are misinterpreted by others, the point is, if everyone understands what they are saying, then there is nothing that can come between their understanding to undermine that understanding anyway, in other words, to misunderstand what to others is their own unique perfect understanding is futile and pointless, unless there is full agreement with what is being read. Not to confuse what is being read by what is being written. As there are many authors writing their understandings here, but there is only one reader that we can all agree on.

[Gary Childress]

I WILL WAIT to SEE how 'you' DEFINE the word 'paradox' here, FIRST.

Will this work as a definition of the word paradox?

A paradox is a logically self-contradictory statement or a statement that runs contrary to one's expectation. It is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true premises, leads to a seemingly self-contradictory or a logically unacceptable conclusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox

If matter is neither created nor destroyed and everyone was to live forever, where would the matter eventually come from to create more humans?

If every living being (let alone just human beings) in the universe were preserved in some shape or form (say even just preserving all the conversations we have on the Internet over the course of time), it would continually take up more and more matter and energy to preserve more such information as both new beings are created and old beings create more and more information. Or if it is only old beings who want to preserve information and stop new beings from arriving, then eventually, it will use up all the matter and energy in the universe to preserve that information. And if we prevent new beings from arriving, who is going to till the soil and grow crops so that the old generation can continue? If the old generation creates a completely automated world that services them (without the need of new arrivals to work), then how long can the old generation preserve its memories and information without using up all the matter in the universe?

Or is it not the case that matter and energy are neither created nor destroyed?

[Dontaskme]

Oh, wait up, HOW can I say, I AM Truly SORRY, for doing what you HATE people doing?

Why are you sorry?

I understand my own philosophical understanding, just as you do with yours. So whether other people do or do not resonate and/or agree with what I personally understand, does not bother me one iota, I simply do not care for sorry's especially prefuse ones.

[commonsense]

I believe the sun will descend in the west tonight. I believe this because that is what has always happened.

The sun has never done that and never shall.
And it does not matter what you believe.

Would you have preferred it if I had said that the image of our sun appears to descend in the western sky, and always has in my lifetime?

[commonsense]

The reason WHY there were SO MANY people, like this one, who make CLAIMS, BUT, when CHALLENGED and/or QUESTIONED, FAIL ABSOLUTELY to back up and support 'their CLAIMS', and thus "themselves", IS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

Do 'you', "commonsense", even UNDERSTAND what I WAS SAYING, and CLAIMING?

If yes, then HOW, in and WHAT WAY, has what "gary childress" SAID and WROTE here got TO DO WITH what I SAID and WROTE?

Will you even BEGIN TO EXPLAIN here?

No and no

WHICH IS FURTHER 'evidence' that people like this one here REALLY DID NOT HAVE A CLUE what they talked ABOUT, and STATED.

I JUST SAID, SO, this reply of YOURS could be taken as YOU have ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF, AT ALL, whereas IRREFUTABLE PROOF that 'Life', 'Existence', AND the Universe ARE ETERNAL EXISTS.
"gary childress" JUST ASKED, What proof is there that life, existence, and the universe are eternal?


I JUST REPLIED, The physical and logical IMPOSSIBILITY that they could not be.

That there is some kind of border or limitation to those 'Things' here is solely made up by 'human thought' and 'thinking', itself, and a big reason WHY 'you', human beings, do 'this' is because 'you' have 'a beginning', and thus 'began', so 'you' IMAGINE EVERY 'thing' ELSE MUST OF ALSO.

Now if absolutely ANY one would like to share what they think or BELIEVE is 'evidence' for ANY of those 'Things' NOT being eternal and/or infinite, then please do. Then we can delve into WHERE and WHAT the DISTORTION/S and/or MISINTERPRETION/S ARE, EXACTLY.

And then "gary childress" ASKED four questions, which REALLY did NOT have MUCH AT ALL to do WITH what I ACTUALLY SAID, and MEANT.

That’s your opinion. Death is my proof.

[Sculptor]

I believe the sun will descend in the west tonight. I believe this because that is what has always happened.

The sun has never done that and never shall.
And it does not matter what you believe.

Would you have preferred it if I had said that the image of our sun appears to descend in the western sky, and always has in my lifetime?

No because that would also be wrong. The sun is not moving with respect to the day at all. And the image is in your head.
And if you pay attention the "sunset" position changes everyday throughout the year, which is really interesting, rarely exactly in the West, and depending on where you are on the earth.

And none of this reduces knowledge to belief as you suggest in the OP- what it does mean is that induction is contingent on understood conditions. Now clearly 100s of years of study has reduced your "belief" that the sun sets in the west as inadequate. Now we KNOW why the sun appears to act that way, and we also know it is contingent on the motion of the earth as it rotates on its own axis, and on the trajectory and inclination of the earth as it rotates round the sun.
We know that should these things continue then the sun shall appear in the sky and move with regular certainty and we know why. None of this requires belief.

[Gary Childress]

Turning "enormous amounts" of matter and energy into computation. Is it to make more bitcoins? And what are the bitcoins going to do, preserve the Internet forever and people pay to mine them and devote resources to "enormous" power to mine bitcoins?

viewtopic.php?t=40665

[commonsense]

The sun has never done that and never shall.
And it does not matter what you believe.

Would you have preferred it if I had said that the image of our sun appears to descend in the western sky, and always has in my lifetime?

No because that would also be wrong. The sun is not moving with respect to the day at all. And the image is in your head.
And if you pay attention the "sunset" position changes everyday throughout the year, which is really interesting, rarely exactly in the West, and depending on where you are on the earth.

n.b. “appears to”.

[Walker]

But I am interested in hearing your answer.

Supernovas are a dime a dozen but The First Black Dwarf will be unique. Do the physics fit Sol for the first place trophy?

The persecution of Trump is an example of how the law, like the vote, has been corrupted by that which tolerates and defends the corrupt, bribe-taking Brandon.

Trump is The Individual Man against The Machine.

[Walker]

SO, this reply of YOURS could be taken as YOU have ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF, AT ALL, whereas IRREFUTABLE PROOF that 'Life', 'Existence', AND the Universe ARE ETERNAL EXISTS.

The mirror is as eternal as eteral can ever be, however, all reflections in the mirror are ... transitoree.

So what?

Well, it's only everything.

[Sculptor]

Would you have preferred it if I had said that the image of our sun appears to descend in the western sky, and always has in my lifetime?

No because that would also be wrong. The sun is not moving with respect to the day at all. And the image is in your head.
And if you pay attention the "sunset" position changes everyday throughout the year, which is really interesting, rarely exactly in the West, and depending on where you are on the earth.

n.b. “appears to”.

No - that is the least important remark I have made.
What only "appears to" is not knoweldge, is the point
I have told you want is known in regards to YOUE thread.
So if you are going to bother to respond to a post, at least have the decency to read it and respond to the main point as it relates to your original Post. Otherwise this is just another empty thread and a waste of everyones time like so many other threads on theis degenerating Forum.
I should not have to remind you of the point you were making in the OP.