Bruno, Your contention that "there is no evidence for a universe" is simply delusional. The very fact you can make any statement absolutely PROVES a universe of some kind.
Your contention is so absurd it's laughable.. Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 10:14:29 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Feb 2014, at 15:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Stathis, > > At least we AGREE there is NO empirical evidence for a block universe. > > > There is no evidence for a universe. (in the usual aristotelian sense of > the word). > > > > But there is OVERWHELMING evidence for flowing time and a present moment. > > > Not 3p evidences, and the relativity theory makes it senseless (as Jesse > made rather clear here). > Your p-time seems transitive, and this implies p-time is block-time. > > > > The experience of our existence in a present moment is the most > fundamental empirical observation of our existence. > > > It is a 1p evidence. It is not sharable. Using that type of evidence is > not allow in polite conversation. > > > > > And all science, all knowledge, is based on empirical observation. > > > OK. But consciousness and flowing time are not empirical evidence. They > are complex data top explain, but cannot be taken for granted, or even well > defined. > > > > So, in the face of this obvious weight of evidence, why do you insist on a > block universe instead of a universe in which time flows? > > Isn't it crazy to reject what there is enormous evidence for and accept > what there is NO evidence for? > > > That is what you do. There are no evidence for any universe, and indeed, > as you assume comp, you could understand that there is no universe. The > notion is close to inconsistent, and explanatively empty. > Physicists measure numbers, and infer relation among numbers. Then even > cosmological theories usually avoid metaphysical commitment. This is done > by physicalist philosophers, and can make sense, but then not together with > the assumption that the brain functions mechanically at some level. > > If you doubt this, then you must find a flaw in the UD Argument. > > Bruno > > > > Edgar > > On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 5:39:21 PM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > On 26 February 2014 08:07, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Stathis, > > > > I know that's your point. You are just restating it once again, but you > are > > completely UNABLE TO DEMONSTRATE IT without using some example in which > time > > is already FLOWING. > > > > Since you can't demonstrate it, there is no reason to believe it. Belief > in > > a block universe becomes a matter of blind faith, rather t > > ... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
