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 <edga...@att.net> 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.