I pass sometime wondering if the crusades somehow didn't made the "Bible" weeker... my doubt is astronauts for instance were choose as the ones that were smarter as also physically capable. But in faith ... I was remebering this two movies with some diferent view about faith... "The green mile" and "The lady killers". Somehow... it makes me wonder...
I was wondering about time,...
Somehow t in C=distance(d)/time(t), is just a measure, we could always have time even though we couldn't measure it.
But why to have something that can't measure anything.
If the smaller particle gives the less amount of time to measure the least time that I can have.
(Would be similar to have temperatures less than 0Kelvin)
There's no sense the electrons can't move less than not moving (not spining, or not shaking).
If "best" means evolutionary fitness,...
It doesn't fail it has to be seen with caution.
If it means a subjective sense of satisfaction,...
As satisfaction the better way, you should see all alternatives and choose the one that is more correct to apply. (Through the best "knowledge").
It can only succeed if its meaning stays elusive, and at that point the argument is circular.
It's not circular we just have to have the context, the knowledge, and the capability to do what is right.
If "best" is to have a meaning that is linked to evidence, then there also needs to be a "worst".
The Worst is anything that would be the opposite that you should do.
What would a person doing their worst be like? Someone who fails to reproduce? A lazy person? Someone who lives an unhealthy life? Someone who is careless and dies in an accident? Someone who murders other people? All those types of people exist.
They exist but they have a large chance to be called a failure (or out of society).
How can we resolve this.
Maybe with knowledge. Maybe with "Books".
When we see the knowledge had become powerful we can also analyze that strength is not out of context.
How much strength would have a person without any kind of force saying that the earth is not the center of the universe in the past centuries?
Or the Bible without crusades.
The Debate is what a debate is, so I can't argue anymore, but I can make a comment.
I didn't say that evolution fails, I said it had "back steps".
And there's nothing that says what is the right thing to do or not apart from life itself.
And, life makes us with houses, car, tv set, (the moon), something that humanity achieve by knowledge.
Nobody says that Romains, or Greeks, were greater than Barbarians. Except, the life that we see nowadays.
Knowledge somehow had prevailed to strength.
And, the only thing that says that was the best thing, it was life.
Life is the only way to know if you did the best way or not.
At least, you might survive. At the most, you prevail through others.
(Nowadays, you prevail: with names and money, in the past with lands and honors; and at the very beginning maybe with healthy children).
Breath in life is natural. You don't ask.
Anyway if you want to swim, is convenient to know how to breathe.
Who says that is the best way, the competitors, the sports' people.
Because they live that.
In anything in life, without noticing, is something that you had learned.
Learned, with others, or with yourself.
(Even, if you want to breathe differently in swimming, you have to practice, your own style).
I could make assumptions of cases said previously.
But it's their lives.
The only way to know if it was the best thing that they do: It's just their lives.
And, there's also the question about the best thing they might do, is also contextual.
Sometimes people don't see options.
Other time, they might think that bad things only happen to others.
Other, might be afraid.
Other, they are not used to.
But life "sometimes" gives the chance to people get used, to people see that bad things happen to everyone and that exists more options.
This sometimes makes us see the best thing to do in life. (Or parents, friends,"books") .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In 1947 during a study of cosmic ray interactions, a product of a proton collision with a nucleus was found to live for a much longer time than expected: 10-10 seconds instead of the expected 10-23 seconds! "
in
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Particles/quark.html
Let's suppose that exists an electron-time.
And then maybe Shadows made by these particles, that just exist in their life in 10-23 seconds.
Like grains in a clepsydra that would be moist. (The moist would be their shadow).
Yes, I guess time as an infinite "thing" is an illusion.
Some philosophies believe that we are in a kind of simulation.
The existentialists' ones believe that if we go back, everything would be the same thing.
I sincerely don't know.
But having a doubt, there's a chance of being possible, I guess.
Well, Space is continuously growing (Doppler effect) but space is not continuous, you have atoms.
And, atoms are far away from being continuous. (Rutherford experience, not mentioning Schrodinger anyway, but saying that is how they are, not continuous).
In a larger space, I can also say that black holes may be are, what we can say, that space is not continuous.
Imagine a string with beads.
Imagine that you want to know the time that the bead takes to travel.
What is the maximum time that the bead can make to travel:
If the size of it, put the condition about the least size that it can actually make (it's the least portion that the bead can make, if it's smaller it can't move).
And the Velocity is the velocity of light, C.
I guess, we are all expecting something that combines two things. Like electro-magnetism.
Cosmos with atoms, the big and small.
And all the things in nature combine with one another.
Anyway, it is what it is.
It could be a so nice debate... I guess...
I pass sometime wondering if the crusades somehow didn't made the "Bible" weeker... my doubt is astronauts for instance were choose as the ones that were smarter as also physically capable. But in faith ... I was remebering this two movies with some diferent view about faith... "The green mile" and "The lady killers". Somehow... it makes me wonder...
Anyway, it is what it is.
I was wondering about time,...
Somehow t in C=distance(d)/time(t), is just a measure, we could always have time even though we couldn't measure it.
But why to have something that can't measure anything.
If the smaller particle gives the less amount of time to measure the least time that I can have.
(Would be similar to have temperatures less than 0Kelvin)
There's no sense the electrons can't move less than not moving (not spining, or not shaking).
If "best" means evolutionary fitness,...
It doesn't fail it has to be seen with caution.
If it means a subjective sense of satisfaction,...
As satisfaction the better way, you should see all alternatives and choose the one that is more correct to apply. (Through the best "knowledge").
It can only succeed if its meaning stays elusive, and at that point the argument is circular.
It's not circular we just have to have the context, the knowledge, and the capability to do what is right.
If "best" is to have a meaning that is linked to evidence, then there also needs to be a "worst".
The Worst is anything that would be the opposite that you should do.
What would a person doing their worst be like? Someone who fails to reproduce? A lazy person? Someone who lives an unhealthy life? Someone who is careless and dies in an accident? Someone who murders other people? All those types of people exist.
They exist but they have a large chance to be called a failure (or out of society).
How can we resolve this.
Maybe with knowledge. Maybe with "Books".
When we see the knowledge had become powerful we can also analyze that strength is not out of context.
How much strength would have a person without any kind of force saying that the earth is not the center of the universe in the past centuries?
Or the Bible without crusades.
The Debate is what a debate is, so I can't argue anymore, but I can make a comment.
I didn't say that evolution fails, I said it had "back steps".
And there's nothing that says what is the right thing to do or not apart from life itself.
And, life makes us with houses, car, tv set, (the moon), something that humanity achieve by knowledge.
Nobody says that Romains, or Greeks, were greater than Barbarians. Except, the life that we see nowadays.
Knowledge somehow had prevailed to strength.
And, the only thing that says that was the best thing, it was life.
Life is the only way to know if you did the best way or not.
At least, you might survive. At the most, you prevail through others.
(Nowadays, you prevail: with names and money, in the past with lands and honors; and at the very beginning maybe with healthy children).
Breath in life is natural. You don't ask.
Anyway if you want to swim, is convenient to know how to breathe.
Who says that is the best way, the competitors, the sports' people.
Because they live that.
In anything in life, without noticing, is something that you had learned.
Learned, with others, or with yourself.
(Even, if you want to breathe differently in swimming, you have to practice, your own style).
I could make assumptions of cases said previously.
But it's their lives.
The only way to know if it was the best thing that they do: It's just their lives.
And, there's also the question about the best thing they might do, is also contextual.
Sometimes people don't see options.
Other time, they might think that bad things only happen to others.
Other, might be afraid.
Other, they are not used to.
But life "sometimes" gives the chance to people get used, to people see that bad things happen to everyone and that exists more options.
This sometimes makes us see the best thing to do in life. (Or parents, friends,"books") .
Anyway, it is what it is.
Sadly the subject doesn't seem to be attractive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In 1947 during a study of cosmic ray interactions, a product of a proton collision with a nucleus was found to live for a much longer time than expected: 10-10 seconds instead of the expected 10-23 seconds! "
in
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Particles/quark.html
Let's suppose that exists an electron-time.
And then maybe Shadows made by these particles, that just exist in their life in 10-23 seconds.
Like grains in a clepsydra that would be moist. (The moist would be their shadow).
It's just wonders.
Never mind!
Well,
Somehow I'm thankful that somebody accepted the debate.
Well,
How to challenge you?
And I'm also wondering if I am able these days.
Usually, I just have some minutes to debate.
Sorry for the delay on the first argument wasn't on purpose. Belive me.
Yes, I guess time as an infinite "thing" is an illusion.
Some philosophies believe that we are in a kind of simulation.
The existentialists' ones believe that if we go back, everything would be the same thing.
I sincerely don't know.
But having a doubt, there's a chance of being possible, I guess.
Well, Space is continuously growing (Doppler effect) but space is not continuous, you have atoms.
And, atoms are far away from being continuous. (Rutherford experience, not mentioning Schrodinger anyway, but saying that is how they are, not continuous).
In a larger space, I can also say that black holes may be are, what we can say, that space is not continuous.
Imagine a string with beads.
Imagine that you want to know the time that the bead takes to travel.
What is the maximum time that the bead can make to travel:
If the size of it, put the condition about the least size that it can actually make (it's the least portion that the bead can make, if it's smaller it can't move).
And the Velocity is the velocity of light, C.
I guess, we are all expecting something that combines two things. Like electro-magnetism.
Cosmos with atoms, the big and small.
And all the things in nature combine with one another.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy a new year.