Beyond what we know as the "Universe"????

[Elledan]

<<

You can't derive knowledge from a void

Yes you can... that's what a definition is. >>

?!?


<< Or alternatively, in the same way it takes faith to believe that a God is present, >>

The belief that gods exist is based on absence of evidence. Blind faith, superstition, call it whatever you want.


<< it takes faith to believe that the laws of physics will not change tomorrow - since there has been no credible evidence to the contrary, we believe the laws are immutable. >>

Doh, even life itself requires faith.

"You believe that's air you're breathing?"


<< You can assert anything you want, and it's credible so long as there is no evidence to disprove it. >>

Wrong. That's NOT how the scientific method works. There must be evidence to support the thesis, through observation, experiment or mathematics.


<< In fact, I may just be the first sentient gerbil to ever post on ATHT. 😉 >>

No comment 😛

 

[NovaTone]

<< << You can assert anything you want, and it's credible so long as there is no evidence to disprove it. >>

Wrong. That's NOT how the scientific method works. There must be evidence to support the thesis, through observation, experiment or mathematics.
>>



True. But the scientific method also centers on the fact that the results must be reproducable. In which case, none of this discussion or related discussions can be argued based on scientific theory.

 

[imgod2u]

You can't view the universe from the perspective of 3 dimentional space in which something that's expanding has to be expanding into something. Visualizing the expansion of the universe is virtually impossible for the human mind. Only concepts can be discussed. Spacetime is expanding, so at any given point in the universe, every other thing is stretching away from you. Think of it as being a spot on the surface of a balloon, the surface is spacetime, for you, there is no outside of it. It'd be like a drop of water asking what is beyond the water. It doesn't apply because wherever the water goes, it will still be water. I think the misconception comes from humans often thinking of themselves as separate from the universe. Some stupid self-important thing.

 

[NovaTone]

It sounds to me like this nothingness you speak of is similar to "not-defined."

Am I right in comparing this to a math example? Given say a function defined for t >= 0. How would you describe values for t < 0? There's nothing to discuss cause it's not defined. It's not a question of whether or not the values for t<0 equals 0 or something else, it's simply not defined. As a result, it doesn't make sense to talk about it as if it were defined.

 

[Agent004]

<< Given say a function defined for t >= 0. How would you describe values for t < 0? >>



What is the function, what is the function defined by 😉. Once you know the function, you can make an exception(that's what I called it, hope youunderstand what I mean) for it.