Discussion. another one.
Moderators: jelco, bert_the_turtle, Chris, Icepick, Rkiver
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
/me drills holes through his skull
Borderless vaccum is the space outside the universe.
Borderless vaccum is the space outside the universe.
I rock, and let no one tell u otherwise!
|My Profile|[
|My Profile|[
which is hyberbolic space, just as much a vacuum as inside this universe...
(/me assists :biggrin:)
(/me assists :biggrin:)
Employee of the SSI/SA
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
-
- level5
- Posts: 11553
- Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 7:44 pm
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Contact:
oh, well then!
/me drills coldfire's head again so he doesn't have to
/me drills coldfire's head again so he doesn't have to
Employee of the SSI/SA
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
Of course not: The Real vaccum Exists outside the universe, there is no outside the universe, so in other words the vaccum doesn't exist, And as vaccum means non-existence it has t not-exist. pure logic.
/me thanks Ami
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 8:45 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 8:46 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
/me thanks Ami
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 8:45 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 8:46 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
-
- level5
- Posts: 11553
- Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 7:44 pm
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Contact:
Or pure idiocy, either way. . .
If there is no space there is no vacuum. Your logic is fundamentally flawed, using the math you are so fond of, of you cannot say 1=4 (well you can but. . .). You still have yet to offer any support to whatever you think you believe. Until you actually set out what you believe with some base from which you derived it there is little point for this little discussion to continue.
vacuum
1. (Physics) A space entirely devoid of matter (called also, by way of distinction, absolute vacuum); hence, in a more general sense, a space, as the interior of a closed vessel, which has been exhausted to a high or the highest degree by an air pump or other artificial means; as, water boils at a reduced temperature in a vacuum.
If there is no space there is no vacuum. Your logic is fundamentally flawed, using the math you are so fond of, of you cannot say 1=4 (well you can but. . .). You still have yet to offer any support to whatever you think you believe. Until you actually set out what you believe with some base from which you derived it there is little point for this little discussion to continue.
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
hah, thats a nice one, why don't we bring some external sources, shall we? and don't prove them shall we? if we are talking about the definition of Vaccum i don't think we are supposed to use dictionaries.
If you really want, lets call it "Spifm", for that doesn't have a dictionary meaning, thus i can define Spifm as whatever i like:
"devoidness of existence"
now, replace all the words 'vaccum' with 'spifm' and prove i wrong.
besides that definition is extremly strange, as it says "exhausted to a high or highest degree by an air pump" and" devoid of matter", and as a high degree is not fully, thats strange.
If you really want, lets call it "Spifm", for that doesn't have a dictionary meaning, thus i can define Spifm as whatever i like:
"devoidness of existence"
now, replace all the words 'vaccum' with 'spifm' and prove i wrong.
besides that definition is extremly strange, as it says "exhausted to a high or highest degree by an air pump" and" devoid of matter", and as a high degree is not fully, thats strange.
-
- level5
- Posts: 11553
- Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 7:44 pm
- Location: Nashville, TN
- Contact:
What the hell are you on about. You're criticizing me for looking for an actual factual reference. We (at least me) are discussing reality and definite scientific theory, not whatever imaginary pseudological rabbit hole you are in. Making up words is stupid, the reason we are discussing definitions is because you keep reinventing language to suite whatever illogical post you most recently botched. We were discussing scientific theory when you came in argueing symantics so I followed and showed the flaws in your symantic arguements and now you flee by saying we should use madeup words that mean whatever you want them to mean at any given time. This has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas I have ever heard. I do wish you would obstain from discussion you have no intension of taking seriously.
-
- level3
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:02 pm
- Location: Ireland...
- Contact:
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
Hmm, Of course i am. I you don't understand why you can't just put in these 'facts', than there is no point of discussion.
Here is what i'm talking about:
Scientific is SCIENCE not words, you gave me the definition of a word, not the result of an experiment, now i wasn't going to actually 'use' the made up word, i just showed you how wrong this supposed proof is. a DICTIONARY is no proof, just explanaition of english words, not a result of an experiment. You have not given me any reason (of yet) to doubt this is true, except that 'it is ridiculous'.
now, replace vaacum with 'devoidence of existence' and prove me wrong, ifyou don't agree with me.
so i wish you would obstsain from the discussion if you don't want to do anything besides saying 'its ridiculous'.
Here is what i'm talking about:
Scientific is SCIENCE not words, you gave me the definition of a word, not the result of an experiment, now i wasn't going to actually 'use' the made up word, i just showed you how wrong this supposed proof is. a DICTIONARY is no proof, just explanaition of english words, not a result of an experiment. You have not given me any reason (of yet) to doubt this is true, except that 'it is ridiculous'.
now, replace vaacum with 'devoidence of existence' and prove me wrong, ifyou don't agree with me.
so i wish you would obstsain from the discussion if you don't want to do anything besides saying 'its ridiculous'.
Ba'ka...
You are a stubborn one
He DID give you the result of an experiment, he just didn't give you the entire <blipping> summary of the experiment...
And it wasn't ridiculus until you started to not consider other's views
(Edited by Ami Kato at 11:26 am on Dec. 10, 2003)
You are a stubborn one
He DID give you the result of an experiment, he just didn't give you the entire <blipping> summary of the experiment...
And it wasn't ridiculus until you started to not consider other's views
(Edited by Ami Kato at 11:26 am on Dec. 10, 2003)
Employee of the SSI/SA
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
Make me Morally Bankrupt!
-
- level4
- Posts: 837
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:40 pm
- Contact:
hmm...huh, i guess...
I never said i didn't consider other's views, if vaacum isn't the word i'm looking for that 'devoidness of existentce' is. i cannot see he problem here.
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:39 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:40 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:47 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
I never said i didn't consider other's views, if vaacum isn't the word i'm looking for that 'devoidness of existentce' is. i cannot see he problem here.
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:39 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:40 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
(Edited by Coldfire26 at 9:47 pm on Dec. 10, 2003)
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests