Beginning to Define Infinity : 102 | Comment Section Convos

This is part 2 of this actual conversation.

Can read the initial comment and watch the video the comment was in response to in the previous post hudsonriver-parkBeginning to Define Infinity : 101.

Let’s get to this section. In the first section I showed the video in which Gavin McCinnes gives a humorous proof of god, gave you my initial comment then showed a fantastically done refutation of the points raised in the ‘proof.’

Here was the first response to that excellent breakdown:

1. I find this hard to believe too, it’s just enormous enough to not be able to tell otherwise yet. People used to think the sky was the limit, and before that the sea.
2. The universe is so amazing if you look in the right spots, the majority seems to be an empty vacuum
3. Yip, that would be evidence of mindreading unicorns
4&5. Summed up well
6. Very important, especially if the universe is not infinite. There are fairly clear rules to dictate what is needed to sustain life, and how long it needs to evolve. I find it hard to believe there are alternate Earths out there, but there has to be other lifeforms, even if it is just trees or insects.
7. Yip, we haven’t seen life, but it is probable. You didn’t see who killed the woman on the floor, but it is likely the man holding the bloody knife.
14. That was a silly thing to say. Along with with letting children die because otherwise life is ‘boring’, it’s a lot more fun when you are alive, else why bother living at all.

Someone added :

there’s actually proof, and a science, that proves that the universe does expand. the simplest proof is the photos of space that we’ve take for 20 years and how the universe has expanded over the same time. those photos were taken in the same spots too.

Original commentator or first to reply were silent, but I made some time :

I’ll field this one, though welcome others who may do it in a clearer way. What constitutes the observable Universe existed before its beginning, but was not the universe.

If you are familiar with the Sagan quote about us all being star-stuff, that’s how I understand it. As whatever constitutes us today, or our hair that will grow in some years, or the fact that our body supposedly goes through a renewal process in which it is essentially new atoms every 7 years or so.

If you can picture that existence is the process of arranging matter and energy (though energy may be more of the means of how its arranged) that was already there to something else. Think ants making an anthill out of soil, beavers making a dam out of wood, humans harnessing fusion by making a nuclear powerplant. Even non sentient conversions, such as gravity applying forces that hold the H20 to the surface of the planet, whose rotation and other things maintain a molten core. There are cracks in the earth that enable the lava to contact water deep in the ocean and creating steam and possibly the conditions for basic elements to bond on an atomic level.These ‘chance’ actions could in time with the (relatively to me) countless possible ways this could happen in the massive universe we live in, could lead to the chain reactions that have us discussing this in this very comment section.

So this may be a non answer, can’t recall having answered this sort of query before… but yeah. Since we subjectively define existence under whatever constitutes the current universal rules, then even if there is ‘stuff’ outside the universe (be it before, after or concurrently) then it is outside our existence. It may as well not exist.

To add to the above, I still do not have a way of picturing what a possible first cause of either the universe we are in or whatever it is that was the universe before. Which fills me with such awe and a good amount of humility and joy. Would not be against knowing someday but cannot comfortably or honestly attribute it to any god i have heard or or can imagine (that would not be synonymous with non existence).

One more person said this :

there is no end to the universe. saying the universe is expanding is assuming that the theory of the big bang is true.

To which I responded :

There is more space between things over time from all the measurements I have seen. From what I understand this fits in the definition of expansion. One does not need the big bang theory to state this. It is supportive but not superlative. I could be wrong and feel free to correct me if so. (Out of sight does not equal out of existence if the theory does not break the observed laws, yes this can be skewed to defend the existence of one of the gods humans worship(ed) but they break the laws)

We are finite beings in a universe that may as well be infinite. It is a well used, and possibly somewhat accurate trope that comment sections are cancer, especially YouTube one. I think it does depend on the video and is it much different form regular physical discourse. Online the anonymity may embolden people but in person they may be thinking the very things they say online without voicing them. I’ll take the truth and communication. Just as i don’t see the need to insult some random online is the same way i cannot truly be insulted by some random online.

Original commentor has a large tattoo on the back of his head, someone asked about his profile image(the tattoo was the image).

If you are referring to my tattoo, it’s a lion gilded in gold and blue (royal colors); it is located on my crown Chakra. The symbol is loosely based off the “Alliance” flag in World of Warcraft as it suited my needs at the time. This is a symbol of power for me, a reminder of “mind as absolute” and a connection to the universe.

And chicks dig it 😉

In person, how many would write him off for conversation due to the tattoo?

I have been enriched by participating in and viewing conversations such as these in various comment sections. It is just a medium. In person or online, your average conversations and interactions are likely by definition, average.

More about Hydro-thermal Vent Creatures


One response to “Beginning to Define Infinity : 102 | Comment Section Convos

  1. Pingback: Beginning to Define Infinity : 101 | Comment Section Convos | Rant A. Tonne·

Let us know what you think

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s