tryto

Taken from that link itself: ESA: Is the Universe finite or infinite? Joseph Silk: We don't know. The expanding Universe theory says that the Universe could expand forever [that corresponds to a 'flat' Universe]. And that is probably the model of the Universe that we feel closest to now. But it could also be finite, because it could be that the Universe has a very large volume now, but finite, and that that volume will increase, so only in the infinite future will it actually be infinite. Either time is infinite or volume is infinite, but either way that article seems to suggest that infinity can be found in nature. It can, but we do not know if it exists or if it does not. My argument is that the over-usage of the FSM is stupid. It worked for stopping creationism from being taught in school, but it's not going to work to disprove god as many seem to think. Did I say it would disprove god? No; it serves as an example of the faultiness of the "if you cannot disprove god, he must exist" argument, among a few other fallacies. Spaghetti cannot exist without humans. Either you agree or disagree with that statement, which is it? Not only that but god isn't contingent or physical like the FSM is. The FSM isn't contingent or physical. That's why it's immaterial and cannot be detected. Are you saying that the FSM or god could not create spaghetti before humans were created? Trying to make the FSM as plausible as you can is actually counterproductive to your argument. Anyone can babble illogical nonsense and claim that X is like Y. "You believe in ghosts? Ghosts are like triangular uncooked pieces of toast with five sides that can talk." No, it means string theory was made by man. After all, theories aren't found in nature. I'm waiting for you to bring up how god is a psychological comfort. *nudges* :P String theory says that there exist strings in nature. Are these strings, should they exist(let's assume they do) made by man? no, they are not. God isn't a psychological comfort; I think it's a psychological harm. Same with me. I believe in a god separate from the god who condones homosexuality, speaks of hell, asks to be worshiped, etc. but I like the idea behind Jesus's intentions and think that is probably the best way to live your life. OT: Gandhi > Jesus. Unless atoms take up 0 volume, they can still technically be divided - not physically but conceptually. In our atmosphere, on a coastline, something smaller than an individual atom cannot exist. We are talking about the physical nature of a coastline, and a single piece of coastline cannot be divided into a piece smaller than an atom without it no longer being a coastline. I don't know why I am arguing this, it really helps my argument that man created an infinity and then it was shown to exist(like the FSM) heh.

The length of a coastline What? I can easily measure the length of a single coastline to be x length. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... _coastline For example, the length of Canada's coastline is around 200,000km. coastlines are fractal in nature, and thus no matter how small your scale is, there is always more detail. I know the Coastline Paradox. It's resolved using advanced science; the smallest piece of coastline you can have is a single atom. And thus a rephrasing of Zeno's paradox falls.

So your argument is that if you believe in one god then you must believe in them all - including the FSM? Mathematics is an invention but that's besides that point. We're talking about the concept of infinity here. I guess my example would have been less vague if I would have said something like gravity - so I retract my statement. Let's use gravity instead. Whether it's physical or not is irrelevant. There is an infinite amount of space in the universe - therefore infinity exists in nature. That is also a matter of some debate. The universe may or may not be infinite. http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMR53T1VED_index_0_iv.html We're getting pretty sidetracked from the main point though. The FSM is used to show that anyone can make up a ridiculous entity, and it is impossible to disprove. The problem is that, by it's own name (spaghetti), it is already defined as something which is made-up by man. That's why it's a strawman in comparison to belief of a god - because it can be disproved. But your entire argument that you have been arguing is that something man-made can still exist. (infinity) FSM!= spaghetti; it is a cosmological spiritual being that just happens to be made up of cosmic spaghetti. In either case, perhaps the spaghetti monster had Italian chefs create spaghetti to honour it; in this case, the spaghetti monster would have actually created spaghetti, and not man. Before you object to this, remember that this is how most gods we have seem to work on us; they influence man to create or work something that can honour them; for example, god is described as "the alpha and the omega", which is something made up by man(letters in an alphabet). Consider that strings, as in yarn, are made by man. String theory, as the name goes, is composed of strings. But these are not strings in the way we think of them as in yarn. The are different. Does this mean that strings in string theory are made-up by man? Of course not. Or let's take Ganesha of the Hindus. It is defined as an elephant. Does that mean it can be disproved? No. When did you last see spaghetti that could create the universe, create man and the earth, that is metaphysical and immaterial, that is undetectable by any means, and can interfere with scientific measurements? Never? There is a clear difference between ordinary spaghetti and the metaphysical cosmological spaghetti of the FSM.

The length of a coastline What? I can easily measure the length of a single coastline to be x length. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... _coastline For example, the length of Canada's coastline is around 200,000km.

I don't belief a specific god - I just believe there is something more than meets the eye in this universe which can be defined as god. And god is just as much an invention of man as infinity - yet infinity exists naturally. Spaghetti is an invention - not a discovery. So you just admitted, that while you do not believe in a specific god, you still disbelieve in many gods. In any case, your last statement is a matter of debate; is mathematics discovered or invented? Name an infinite physical object that exists naturally.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is undeniably an invention by mankind and bringing it up is a strawman. People invented spaghetti and meatballs - they are not found in nature. Then the Hindu gods, Zeus and Thor, and Mithra and Venus are also "undeniably inventions by mankind" ? Every god you don't believe in is an invention by mankind? The FSM is a parody; it seeks to show WHY you can not believe in it, yet not hold those same standards to other things. Why do you think that your god is not invented by mankind, yet every god you do not believe in is?

An infinite amount of finite numbers can add up to a finite amount. (0.999...=1) The universe is finite in size and number of particles, and in physics, conservation of information is a fundamental tenet of quantum mechanics. If we accept this to be true(and it appears to be), then there is a finite amount of information, and thus, a finite amount of knowledge. Since the universe is also finite in duration, there is an even lower and still finite amount of possible knowledge. Another tenet of quantum mechanics is the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which also lowers the amount of knowledge we can know. If you apply this to humanity, then the possible amount of knowledge sinks, since a single human brain holds a relatively small amount of information flawlessly. Computers can help, but they only increase the amount of possible information to a arbitrary number, and require humanity to interpret binary into knowledge.

Monster entry corrected. Thanks :)

Corrected, thanks :) Good catch!

Corrected the guide. Thanks! :)

It'll be one of Revenant Knight, Revenant Dark Beast, or Revenant Ork. Knight is the highest at 126. (which is also, handily, the highest possible f2p level ;) )

10/10 Because it's Jimmy.

Kanye West actually thought the episode was funny and wasn't angered by it at all. My opinion of him has gone way up. http://www.kanyeuniversecity.com/blog/? ... 1=&em3161=

I've taken this test like three times before, but I'll do it again just for you :P I personally feel that this test doesn't totally show my true stance; I'm more libertarian than is shown below heh.

I believe thats unitarian philosophy, noble in thought but it kind of breaks down here. Not going to get into abortion for obvious reasons, so lets look at something more expressive. Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is a satirous article about eating babies to solve hunger crisis(good read btw). Technically each baby is helping around 4 people survive but that doesnt make it right, while we can sort of equate life to life in what ratio do we equate life to standard of living? Ah but having babies to eat them is monstrously inefficient. Due to the respective laws of conservation of matter and energy, all the energy gained by eating the baby is used up by the extra food the mother needs to use to eat. Just like how eating soybeans and vegetables straight is much more efficient (I think you lose 90% of the nutrients) than eating cows, you lose an additional 90% of the energy used when eating a baby. The article is much more meaningful when you consider overcrowding in England, especially of the lower classes, not in terms of food gained.

A crewbie has confirmed this, it will be corrected shortly. Thanks. EDIT: It's been released. Thanks for your submission :)

North Korea has the fourth largest army in the world, and the second an army moves in on North Korea, Seoul(25 or so million people) gets flattened by NK artillery. Remember the Korean War?

Hi, I've merged these two topics. Thanks.

11 year olds can't even generally grasp the concept of algebra or abstract thinking. If you're not going to send an 11-year old into the juvenile system, there's no point in having one.

-80. Ooops I just broke the rules. Ignore me :P

Here's the conservation of mass and energy for the universe. It's quite simple. There is lots of matter and energy in the universe. This is all positive energy. (remember that e=mc^2.) But, there is also gravitational energy. This is a negative energy. Since gravitational energy has an infinite range and acts on every object in the universe and on everything else, it cancels out the positive energy and matter. In fact, since the gravitational force increases and decreases parallel to the amount of matter and energy in the universe, it will always be like this, keeping the law of conservation even if the universe is not the aftermath of another universe. (Although that may still be true, in the case of Brane World or Quantum Loop Gravity, among other theories) http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercur ... thing.html Of course, God doesn't conform to Thermodynamics Laws, Conservational laws, or any other kind of laws, so I'm always tempted to laugh when they're brought up against the universe or earth...

/server -m irc.tip.it /join #runescape #tip-it on swiftirc is *not* tip.it's official irc chat or server. Our only official server is irc.tip.it, and the main channel on that network is #runescape.

436

32

XXIX