This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Teleport to/from Any Two Places on Earth
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Skyfire
Also, the universe is not finite. It's size is accelerating.
Just because something accelerating does not mean it's infinite. An accelerating car is not going infinitely fast.
Chuckle, in this your logic might not fail, but your response does, good man. There is empirical evidence that the size of the universe is getting bigger, and that it is getting bigger at a faster rate.
I.e., the size of the universe is infinite. Even were it not infinite, it is big enough for us not to be able to determine where the center is... and even if we could, it would be moving away from us, anyway.
Even so, it's all relative.
And besides, your analogy is poor. An accelerating car cannot go infinitely fast, because it has mass, which makes it nearly impossible merely to accelerate it to the speed of light.
Post by
Adamsm
It is interesting, but defeats the question. However, I did say a location 'on earth', and a titanium plate is a location on a titanium plate, above earth. I would say that if a location is generally accepted as a location 'on earth'.Okay, then you bury the plates where you want to teleport to. There, they're on earth now lol.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
There is empirical evidence that the size of the universe is getting bigger
I never denied this. In fact the very act of "getting bigger" implies that there is some state of being bigger than what you are currently. Thus it is not infinite.
and that it is getting bigger at a faster rate.
ie acceleration. I affirmed this too.
the size of the universe is infinite.
I just gave a logical reason from your two premises that it can't be infinite. You just tagged this on to them without any logical connection.
Even were it not infinite, it is big enough for us not to be able to determine where the center is...
What we can and can't do has no bearing on absolutes.
And besides, your analogy is poor. An accelerating car cannot go infinitely fast, because it has mass, which makes it nearly impossible merely to accelerate it to the speed of light.
I never said that it "can" go infinitely fast. I said that by the very nature if it accelerating it's going a finite speed.
Post by
MyTie
Assuming physicists are correct in stating that the universe we exist in is finite, then can we say that the center of the universe is an absolute location, because that location is not relative to something else, but instead is relative to everything else?
What's the "center" of a universe? I can define the origin of an object to be anywhere. Heck, I could be the origin (I'm not, but I'd love to be!).
The center is relative to every point... but every other point is also relative to every other point.
Also, current science suggests that the universe is not finite. It's size is accelerating. Mass (energy), however, is finite.
I was under the understanding that the universe is finite. Don't you remember the 'space foam' article I linked?
Post by
Skyfire
There is empirical evidence that the size of the universe is getting bigger
I never denied this. In fact the very act of "getting bigger" implies that there is some state of being bigger than what you are currently. Thus it is not infinite.
The idea of infinity is that you keep getting bigger, and you don't stop. Or you keep getting closer and closer to a zero point, and you don't stop.
The universe isn't going to stop getting bigger. I.e., infinity.
no bearing on absolutes.
Then why belabor the point?
I said that by the very nature if it accelerating it's going a finite speed.
You said neither of those things, actually. You may have meant (or implied, though I'm pretty sure not) the latter, but that would be you at fault then.
Post by
Skyfire
I was under the understanding that the universe is finite. Don't you remember the 'space foam' article I linked?
I don't...
Further, I can reverse engineer my understanding that the universe is infinite in size from the fact that heat death of the universe will occur in some number of billions of billions of years.
Perhaps a better word to say here is that the size of the universe is indefinite but increasing. Which means that over time, the size of the universe will approach infinity.
Bah, and "indefinite" isn't it either, as we know what the size of the universe is. I'll return to my assertion that the size of the universe will tend to infinity over time.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The idea of infinity is that you keep getting bigger, and you don't stop. Or you keep getting closer and closer to a zero point, and you don't stop.
The universe isn't going to stop getting bigger. I.e., infinity.
It's potentially infinite, it's not actually infinite. And there is no proof that it won't stop getting bigger; the big crunch theory is still a valid theory.
no bearing on absolutes.
I said that by the very nature if it accelerating it's going a finite speed.
You said neither of those things, actually. You may have meant (or implied, though I'm pretty sure not) the latter, but that would be you at fault then.
"Just because something accelerating does not mean it's infinite."
"An accelerating car is not going infinitely fast."
Not infinite = finite
Post by
Skyfire
The idea of infinity is that you keep getting bigger, and you don't stop. Or you keep getting closer and closer to a zero point, and you don't stop.
The universe isn't going to stop getting bigger. I.e., infinity.
It's potentially infinite, it's not actually infinite. And there is no proof that it won't stop getting bigger; the big crunch theory is still a valid theory.
It's potentially infinite, agreed, but an understanding of a universe that is finite is the much less likelier candidate based on our understanding of the universe (i.e., Hubble's law, the laws of thermodynamics, etc).
"Just because something accelerating does not mean it's infinite."
"An accelerating car is not going infinitely fast."
Not infinite = finite
As I said, a minor point, one caused by misspeaking on my point.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The idea of infinity is that you keep getting bigger, and you don't stop. Or you keep getting closer and closer to a zero point, and you don't stop.
The universe isn't going to stop getting bigger. I.e., infinity.
It's potentially infinite, it's not actually infinite. And there is no proof that it won't stop getting bigger; the big crunch theory is still a valid theory.
It's potentially infinite, agreed, but an understanding of a universe that is finite is the much less likelier candidate based on our understanding of the universe (i.e., Hubble's law, the laws of thermodynamics, etc).
I'm not arguing whether it's infinite or not, I haven't studied enough physics to make a judgment one way or another. I'm arguing your proof. I have studied enough physics to know that something that is actually accelerating cannot be actually infinite in the same respect (size in this case).
Post by
Skyfire
It wasn't a proof, but a statement of fact.
Sorry bro, but that's not much to argue against. Go somewhere else if that's all you're here for.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
It wasn't a proof, but a statement of fact.
Sorry bro, but that's not much to argue against. Go somewhere else if that's all you're here for.
What...
Even the mods are loosing it apparently.
Something that is actually accelerating cannot be actually infinite in the same respect (size in this case).
There is the statement you claim to be empirically wrong. I can get some high level physicists on this if you'd like.
Edit: Emails sent. I doubt I'll get a response tonight, though.
Post by
MyTie
I was under the understanding that the universe is finite. Don't you remember the 'space foam' article I linked?
I don't...
Further, I can reverse engineer my understanding that the universe is infinite in size from the fact that heat death of the universe will occur in some number of billions of billions of years.
Perhaps a better word to say here is that the size of the universe is indefinite but increasing. Which means that over time, the size of the universe will approach infinity.
Bah, and "indefinite" isn't it either, as we know what the size of the universe is. I'll return to my assertion that the size of the universe will tend to infinity over time.
It may not matter to my point. If we could freeze the movement through time, and just look at one singular point in time, can we not say that that point is absolute, even if we cannot define its parameters. Can't we say it does have an absolute location to in reference to all other points, even a point of origin, the 'big bang' if you will.
Post by
Skyfire
It may not matter to my point. If we could freeze the movement through time, and just look at one singular point in time, can we not say that that point is absolute, even if we cannot define its parameters. Can't we say it does have an absolute location to in reference to all other points, even a point of origin, the 'big bang' if you will.
Freezing time has nothing to do with it.
All positions are relative
.
Even time is relative. But it's not even a consideration of what I'm trying to say.
Post by
MyTie
It seems your point is there is no absolute, since there is no origin, no 0, only relative to our closed systems. I propose that there may be a '0' out there, an origin, and absolute.
Post by
349634
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
283199
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skyfire
It seems your point is there is no absolute, since there is no origin, no 0, only relative to our closed systems. I propose that there may be a '0' out there, an origin, and absolute.
It's not my point, it's Einstein's and Galileo's. You see, I've been reading
Relativity
... it's actually quite a nice read.
There is no absolute origin, in space
or
spacetime. There are inertial origins, but those are in specific reference frames... which are relative.
Post by
MyTie
It seems your point is there is no absolute, since there is no origin, no 0, only relative to our closed systems. I propose that there may be a '0' out there, an origin, and absolute.
It's not my point, it's Einstein's and Galileo's. You see, I've been reading
Relativity
... it's actually quite a nice read.
There is no absolute origin, in space
or
spacetime. There are inertial origins, but those are in specific reference frames... which are relative.
I read it. It was very boring to me, and had a hard time holding my interest. I seem to remember it being a very small book.
Post by
Skyfire
I read it. It was very boring to me, and had a hard time holding my interest. I seem to remember it being a very small book.
It is small. I was actually surprised at the size of it.
Post by
Squishalot
I read it. It was very boring to me, and had a hard time holding my interest. I seem to remember it being a very small book.
It is small. I was actually surprised at the size of it.
Small relative to what? :P
Anyway, to put the absolute/relative debate to bed, the original question is about teleporting to places "on Earth", which means that any place has to be set relative to the Earth.
The bit about teleporting into walls is an interesting one though. If you can teleport into a wall and die (should they happen to build one above your teleport pad), then what would be the effect of someone walking along MyTie's sidewalk when he teleports over to go bank robbing?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.