Search:

You're right, I have never been able to observe total rest, because it is an unattainable position. However, this problem has been approached by forcing molecules to move slower (approaching...

But they have been observed when two objects are placed in fixed positions relative to each other. That is physically equivalent to not being in motion at all.

Possibly, but I explained why it didn't matter whether they were in motion or in rest.

If in motion (there's no reason why "rest" is the ground state), then molecular collisions are expected.
...

I guess this means you are now abandoning the "logical" proofs of Aquinas and others? They are clearly wrong, so I guess that's not surprising.

Drumlogic, are you going to address the problems...

The only definition of existence is "all that is".

The idea of relying on a God that is outside of the box of existence is what is silly.

But you haven't answered my questions with regard to...

Nope, existence is everything and is independent of our perception.

that deduction is not appropriate - we (life forms) are a very small part of the space/time/energy/matter matrix (existence).

Existence could not be any other way.

No, existence does not start with the Big Bang. By definition, existence existed before the big bang, at least if the big bang is a definite event with a single point.

The axioms are valid.

I'm saying that to deduce meaning is arbitrary. But "meaning" implies that someone did something with a definite purpose. If you are saying that someone created existence with a purpose (giving...

But I'm not arguing about the Big Bang. I'm arguing about existence.

I do not see which assumptions I am using. All of the fundamental axioms have been proven to be axioms.

Everything depends on definitions (or what I mean by the words I use), yes. But I think you know what I meant.

I have proven that a supreme being did not create existence.

Try to disprove the fundamental axioms:
1) existence exists
2) A is A (identity)
3) consciousness exists, and we know it exists because we can perceive existence.

Nonexistence cannot exist.

But anything, anytime, anywhere presumes an existence. A supreme being cannot escape that.

I don't think anyone could DEDUCE that it has meaning. Ultimately, it's an emotional response that it does.

Nope, existence IS.

Consciousness absolutely comes AFTER existence. Otherwise, what is the conscious conscious of? And what is the conscious?

I can prove that a supreme being did not create existence out of nonexistence. I can further prove that a supreme being cannot be all that is existence, because all consciousness would be...

I'm saying there is no way to think about a "bigger picture" that would not make the bigger picture arbitrary. Hence, I choose to not put much thought into it, because I will never get anywhere.
...

And that's a completely arbitrary statement. But you're right - I can't disprove a supreme being, just like I can't disprove that there is an invisible gremlin sitting beside me. I can only...

The only primaries we can come up with, though, are what I stated. The power of deduction is important; I just don't think your deduction here is appropriate. At best, I'd call it arbitrary, at...

It is a tough issue to swallow if you've been exposed to a considerabe body going the other way. But the statement is true. And it is even easier to see if you dip into the "knowledge" thread and...

Sure, perceptions of time can be relative. I'm not sure you're making a valid point, though.

I agree to your 2nd statement, but let me say something that is more to the point. It is EASIER to...

Hmm., I think we can deduce better than that. We can hold objects in a fixed relative position and make the observations. Check your science on that one... It's well supported.


It's proven by...

I think the only facts in this matter are that 1) the universe exists and 2) life exists.

Sorry, not meaning to suggest you mean a God. But suggesting a purpose seems to call for a consciousness.

Hmm., not sure those numbers coincide with your theory. Plus, the amount of life per unit of universal volume is small.

But I'd also say that it might be easier to reach that conclusion if you...