God, ESP, the occult, and logic

[HarryW]

I think maybe there's different fundamental axioms, but I don't think they're 'God exists' and 'God does not exist'. Those are much higher concepts, built from more fundamental ideas. Gen-X's apparent lack of either of these axioms (not saying that's a bad thing, just can't think how else to word it) shows this.

Gen-X, are you sure that the number 10 is the foundation of all our mathematics? I would not agree, it's just that we have learnt to count using ten different symbols for numbers. I mean, hex is easy to work with if you're multiplying ar dividing by 16 or 8, just the same as decimal is with 10 or 5. Sorry to be picky, I can't help it.

Oh and the extra dimensions you made up - they are of course your idea, don't forget to mention that ;)

[Sam Finch]

Guv.

Sorry to hack at the basis of your argument but your thoughts on Sphere vs Planar Geometry are wrong.

Euclidian (planar) geometry is a special case of sherical geometry where the radius of the sphere is infinite, spherical geometry is just seeing a larger picture. I'm sure there is an area of maths whereby you can describe any shape you like (using some kind of formula to describe it) and instantly get the rules for geometry on that surface. (don't ask me to do any sums in it though) This is the whole picture.(In fact to get the whole picture you'd have to extend it even more so as not to limit yourself to a 2D surface)

Euclids Parralell pustulate applies only to Euclidian geometry, If you are in a situation where Euclidian geometry doesn't apply you cannot assume the parallel potulate, likewise if you can fine a case where there exists a line parralell to 2 intersecting lines you have proved that euclidian geometry doesn't apply.

This is where phillossophy differs slightly from pure maths.

In the Real world we have only one situation to consider, Laws either apply or don't apply axioms are either true or not true, if they are not true we can use logic to disprove them. 2 People can have different views but we're still all in the same boat and can argue about what kind of boat it is.

[Gen-X]

Harry

Gen-X, are you sure that the number 10 is the foundation of all our mathematics?


Yeah I am sure. While other numbering systems such as "Hexideciaml" and "Octal" don't have the ability to replicate themselves in the same way.

It was the whole reason we dumped imperial and went to metric.... Both Hex and Oct only came in with computers and were designed PURELY as a result of a byte being 8 bits.

Either way its debatable :)


Oh and the extra dimensions you made up - they are of course your idea, don't forget to mention that


Which is why I said it matches my Axiom... because its something that makes sense "to me".

I wouldn't call it "made up", because that implies I just pulled it out of thin air... in reality I developed it because it follows what "could" be a pattern. I know its only a step "above" made up... but isn't ALL science like that until it is realised?

[Sam Finch]

Gen-x

The Base 10 system is only the way we represent numbers, Maths would work just as well in whatever base you want, even roman numerals, the same principals still apply this is illustrated by the fact that we use letters to represent numbers.

[Guv]

My comments on Plane versus Spherical geometry are valid. Anyone who disagrees needs to take more math courses.

Hex and Octal came about because Bytes are 8 bits? Where did anyone get this idea?

Binary is a natural number base for computers for reasons obvious to anyone familiar with electronic circuitry.

Binary is a pain for humans, while hex & octal are more convenient and compatible with binary. Who wants to cope with ten ones & zeros and only be able to cope with numbers a little beyond one thousand. Hex & octal came into use due to the need for notation compatible with binary and more convenient for people. In prehistoric times, some computers had 6-bit bytes. Most early computers got along with 64 characters, which was more than most printers could print anyway.

[Iain17]

Guv

I think it is our turn to question the validity of your arguments.

First off you waltzed in claiming that people who could not spell, and whose grammar was slightly lacking, could not have any valid opinions.

I am hardly an expert at maths, so i will reserve comment on who is right regarding Plane vs Spherical geometry, but Sam is generally seen as our resident maths expert, so i would tend to side with him.



Finally i disagree completely with your idea that Logic can not be used to argue the matter of God and ESP etc. You explained the reason why by trying to disprove it.


Logic is based on some "Self Evident Truths" or Axioms which are accepted as true without proof


The whole God argument cannot be proved either way. This is why logic, reason, and common sense are the only valid ways for discussing the matter. We have no proof, so we cannot argue from a scientific standpoint. The point you should have been making is to do with these "Self evident Truths" however.

To argue about it we need to take an Axiom that the majority of people will accept. We take this as our starting point and try to logically work through ideas until we reach a conclusion. We then explain to others the logical steps we took to reach this conclusion, if they see a flaw in our logic, then it is back to the drawing board. Besides which you cannot argue the existence of god from the starting point that he already exists or not. That is the end result that is achieved from logic, hopefully starting from an Axiom that people will accept.

Time to go back to the drawing board boy.

[HarryW]

The whole reason we dumped imperial and went to metric was because our usual numbering system is base-10. That's just because we have 10 characters which we use to represent amounts, nothing more special than that. What can base-10 do that base-16, base-8, base-2, base-39 or base-643 can't?

If you want a special number, try e or pi.