promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
As we determined earlier that there is the question of why the universe hasn't already reached absolute entropy if it is infinite in duration,
Here is another prime example of blindness, caused by and from one's 'currently' held onto belief. This one has proposed a rhetorical question, only, based on nothing more than what this one 'currently' believes is true, and which this one believes the never presented answer for 'determines' that the Universe began and that the Universe will end in a heat death.
The 'circular, and blind, reasoning' here is blatantly obvious.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 amwe may now pose this question: could entropy have begun with the beginning of our big bang and our observable universe is a recurrence, repetition or some cyclical phase happening in a larger system?
Were you not yet aware that the so-called 'observable universe' is not 'the Universe's, itself?
'We' were talking about 'the Universe', and not just some part of the Universe.
Also, depending on your use of the 'we' word here, 'we' have not determined, what 'you' are determined to believe and express is absolutely true here
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
One that exists and operates in ways we are as of yet unable to perceive or understand.
What 'you' are not yet able to perceive and understand does not necessarily have any bearing at all on what 'we' nor 'I' perceive and understand.
Also, your very limited and closed way of 'looking at' things here is why you have not yet been able to perceive and understand what is the actual irrefutable Truth here.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
Bro this may even make Kant right. A noumenal reality that produces no perceivable sense data for our sensory organs. Becuz check it. Perceivable realities consist of things moving about and changing, losing energy, ultimately cooling down; this process of dissolution is what drives change in our entropic universe.
See just how persistent this one is in trying to instill in you readers here, the exact same belief that this one had instilled in it and is now holding onto and maintaining, about how the Universe is entropic?
In case you are still unaware "promethean75" you have yet to provide and show the proof that you have for your 'current' beliefs here, that is; if you actually have any.
Do you have any proof for your claim here that the Universe began, and is entropic, or is this just what you 'currently' believe is true alone?
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
If this noumenal reality could produce sense data, it would have to experience entropy as well (which comes with having atoms that make up things). If that's the case, cue the entropy and infinity problem again: this noumenal reality should have already transpired if it were infinite
and experienced entropy (as one of its natural laws).
But, the Universe is, fundamentally, made up of matter, and, a distance between and around matter. The Universe is not, fundamentally, made up of atoms.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
This may be the only way to exonerate that problem of entropy and infinite time.
But there is no problem at all here. Well not to me anyway.
There is, however, a problem to and for you here only because you are believing things to be true here, which are not.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 1:06 am
U have to ultimately posit an existing energy system that somehow doesn't experience entropy itself*, but produces it whenever a universe (big bang) happens sonewhere in it.
* if it did, it'd be open to the same problem our universe has; why hasn't the big chill happened to it yet?
Why do 'you' call 'the' Universe, Itself, 'our universe'?
Do 'you' have some sort of superiority complex going on here?
Why do you continue to believe a so-called 'big chill' is going to happen and is necessary?
What actual proof do you have for this persistent belief of yours here?