|
 Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
 Re: Relative? or Absolute?  [Re: deafpanda]
#3867241 - 03/04/05 10:31 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
If you can't know an absolute absolutely or 100% of the time, then that implies the lack of an absolution. If you know your name 99% of the time, forget it 1% of the time, can it ever be truly said that you ever absolutely know your name?
To believe you know implies uncertainty, albeit far less then to think you know. To know that you know is absolute. But to know you know something absolutely is relatively foolish.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
 
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: fearfect]
#3867258 - 03/04/05 10:36 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fearfect said:
"I can say 2 of something plus 2 of something gives me 96 of something"
that is just a combination of words, it doesn't make sense.
It makes sense to me relative to my planning for party supplies and it makes perfect sense to anyone else wanting to know how many soda cans there are.
If my co-party planners asked me, "How many cases of soda did you get and I said, "I had 2 cases and added to 2 more so we have 96 cans, 2+2 =96 would make total sense to them because its relative to how many cans are in a case.
Yes, 2 plus 2 cases is absolutely 4 cases and relatively 96 cans. This is an absolutely correct statement, not non sense relative to those who know how many cans come in a case.
So it may be like gomp said , " aboslutes are also relative"
What if any thing one thinks is illogical simply makes no sense to them because their is missing information they are not aware of, like in this case, how many cans are in a case?
There are absolutely 24 cans to a case. Just because one may not know that doesn't make 24 cans to a case something illogical.
Take the words away from these two statements
2 cases + 2 cases = 4 cases
2 cases + 2 cases = 96 cans
you get
2+2=4
2+2=96
Bot are absolutely correct RELATIVE to the words around them.
I would like to see how relativity does not effect something to become an absolute and I am waiting for it to be demonstrated in this thread. I am also looking to find an absolute that I can't make relative.
Water is absolutely a liquid relative to its temperature.
Someone, give me an absolute that is not relative to something.
Even Skorps now is relative to past and future being a part of the now moment or not being a part of the now moment.
What is absolute is being aware of the now moments that are relative to the moments that came before and come after. Without before and after, Now becomes absolutely meaningless relative to experiencing the succession of cause and effects or the comparisons and contrasts that giving absolute meaning to the now which is absolutely moving and active, though one can't see the atoms and quarks and aethers spinning away.
If the absolute now is not relative to anything then it is stagnant, or frozen, not moving, still. The only way to KNOW this or experience this is absolutely relative to movement and change.
I dunno, the NOW being absolute is relative to something to matter how I look at it. The only way the now can be absolute with out relativity would be for me to not look at it.
Without a "me" to look at it there is no "me" to know it absolutely exists. So the NOW is absolutely relative to the self who can or can not perceive it.
I voted everything is relative to the perceiver of it. How does one locate a non relative absolute without being relative to it?
What do have in your bag to answer that question Skorp?
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
Edited by gettinjiggywithit (03/04/05 10:42 AM)
|
 deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
I think you just said what I said...
I believe that there are absolutes, I am as sure that absolutes exist as I am that 1+1=2, but I can't "know" this in an infallible, philosophical sense.
To be honest, I couldn't really decode your second paragraph very well, so fuck knows if I actually addressed what you said...
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: deafpanda]
#3867318 - 03/04/05 10:58 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Essentially, I was suggesting to know anything is absolute beyond what we define it to be is relative to our vantage point. Therin lies the dilemma of absolution, from my view point it is as absolute as it possibly can be relative to my understanding.
Only when I know it to be absolute in my mind do I know of absolution, when I subjugate others to my similar sense of absolution, I've stepped into the relativity of absolution.
Second Paragraph:
To assert my absolution as infallible to any degree, is relatively foolish, e.g. something is as absolute to the individual as 1 + 1 = 2 is relative to their acceptance of said stated concepts. But as far as it being certain and to know it is such to any degree of absolution is defined on our willingness to accept the nature of the mechanics; which of course is relative to our acceptance of it, and not absolute in any context but the context with which we assert it's truth and it's ability to work within our understanding. So simply put, to know of it being absolute is relatively foolish as it is what we choose to accept to know and use as a foundation, not that which is an inherent truth applicable to all, which is also applicable to gettingjiggywithit's post.
Sorry, my explanation might be absolutely confusing  ... but it makes sense relative to me.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 5 months, 19 days
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: trendal]
#3867356 - 03/04/05 11:06 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The only absolute I can think of is the speed of light in a vacuum.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: Seuss]
#3867372 - 03/04/05 11:09 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
"In a Vacuum", absolute to the restraints used. Not absolute to any other degree then the restraints given. Is subjective evaluation of a mechanic within a defined parameter absolutely absolute? Or is it subjective to it's environment? Or is it absolute upon the nature of our definition of the speed of light?
BTW, the speed of light isn't the absolute speed as well, as far as mechanics go, their have been faster forms energy transfer through electrical means.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
|
Quote:
gettinjiggywithit said:
I voted everything is relative to the perceiver of it. How does one locate a non relative absolute without being relative to it?
Whatever an absolute is, it has to become relative to the one that perceives it to be so. Then that one says to another , "look, see what I see and how it absolutely is?" This is relating absolutes. This is what makes them all relative.
We are relators of absolutes via perception making us all "relatives" of the absolute, scientifically speaking. That is also an explanation what some mean by our being interconnected as one or what religions mean by we are Gods children.............relatives of the absolute
It's all the same thing The only difference is that;
Science doesn't make something an absolute until they can relate to it through scientific exploration and discovery.
A spiritual meta-physician doesn't make something an absolute until they can relate to it through "meta"- physical exploration and discovery.
A religious person is told there is an absolute they are related to and to believe in its absolute existence because it said so or else. 
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
Edited by gettinjiggywithit (03/04/05 11:14 AM)
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
|
This post just keeps getting better.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: Seuss]
#3867406 - 03/04/05 11:17 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
The only absolute I can think of is the speed of light in a vacuum.
Doesn't that make the speed relative to its being in a vacuum?
Thats what some of us are saying about absolutes being relative to something.
--------------------
Ahuwale ka nane huna.
Edited by gettinjiggywithit (03/04/05 11:20 AM)
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
Ah-ha yes I see.
Yes, absolutes require a framework around them to exist. This still makes them absolutes within that framework, I think.
P=P is true in all cases once you have defined the relationship denoted by "=".
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: deafpanda]
#3867448 - 03/04/05 11:27 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
deafpanda said:
Ah-ha yes I see.
Yes, absolutes require a framework around them to exist. This still makes them absolutes within that framework, I think.
P=P is true in all cases once you have defined the relationship denoted by "=".
Yup. But absolutes within a defined framework aren't absolute still. The true question is can you provide anything that truly is absolute without question of relative circumstances?
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
But they ARE absolute in their own context, as you just said. O'm not sure you can get better than that.
Within the context of logic, P=P is absolutely true. Taken out of this context it is meaningless.
The only possibility would be the natural laws of the universe. I think these are absolute. (Note, I am not talking about human measurement or approximation of these laws).
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: deafpanda]
#3867478 - 03/04/05 11:34 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
True... but the nature of laws, is to define that which we understand it. Their have been, and will continue to be methods of circumventing them. What we thought as a basis of a natural law, and the implications of it have vastly changed from the 17th-21st century. A natural law is only absolute to our ability to circumvent it.
No limits.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
A natural law cannot be circumvented. As I said, I am talking about the underlying principles of the universe (the mass of an electron etc), not our shoddy theories of how they work, which do change over time.
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: deafpanda]
#3867558 - 03/04/05 11:52 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
How can you say that? Like any law, it can be broken if we have a great enough understanding of it.
Just need the next "Johnny Cochrane" of lawyers to come about. (Note: Next Great Theorist; e.g. Einstein). Remeber, nature is only natural to the degree that we cannot overcome it. All in time, provided we don't kill ourselves off first
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
deafpanda
Stranger
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 984
Loc: Inguland
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
|
We have never broken a natural law. Can you give me an example of where we have?
For instance, electrons always have had and always will have the same mass.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 5 months, 19 days
|
|
>> The only absolute I can think of is the speed of light in a vacuum.
> Doesn't that make the speed relative to its being in a vacuum?
No. The speed of light in a vacuum is the same, regardless of what vacuum you use or how fast your vacuum is moving or accelerating. "Relative" only comes into play when the light (photons) are observed. A vacuum isn't a thing, so much as a lack of things. By using the term "in a vacuum" I am really saying "all else being equal with nothing interacting or obstructing the path of the photons".
> the speed of light isn't the absolute speed as well, as far as mechanics go, their have been faster forms energy transfer through electrical means
You wording makes this tricky to argue. You are correct, we can transfer energy faster than the speed of light (there are huge losses)... but, there is a lot of debate about the "state" of the resulting energy. For instance, we can split a modulated microwave beam, sending half of it through a vacuum and the other half into a solid brass bar, both of equal length. Both the vacuum and the brass bar will transmit some of the microwaves... but the brass bar transmits them faster than the vacuum. However, the vacuum maintains the information (modulation) contained in the microwaves while the brass bar loses the modulation. (I am very fasinated by this research... it demonstrates that we still do not understand how matter, time, and energy work together.)
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: Seuss]
#3867595 - 03/04/05 12:05 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Electrons have a determined mass, not an actual mass. We believe we have an estimation of their mass, but our measuring system is such that, while attempting to measure it, we are indeed influncing it's weight.
As for the actual weight; it is relative to it's speed, which suggests that it might not be as constant as we might think it is. Think quantum mechanics.
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci839930,00.html
With the degree of relativity associated with the speed of the electron and that acting as a mechanism to change the approximated weight, can one say that it most certainly abides by a natural law, if it's influenced by relative means of speed? Just needs to be broken.
Breaking the speed of light (and changing it too )
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6092
Natural law for ya.
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
Psychoactive1984
PositiveCynicist
Registered: 02/06/05
Posts: 3,546
Loc: California, Monterey Coun...
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: Seuss]
#3867608 - 03/04/05 12:11 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
>> The only absolute I can think of is the speed of light in a vacuum.
> Doesn't that make the speed relative to its being in a vacuum?
No. The speed of light in a vacuum is the same, regardless of what vacuum you use or how fast your vacuum is moving or accelerating. "Relative" only comes into play when the light (photons) are observed. A vacuum isn't a thing, so much as a lack of things. By using the term "in a vacuum" I am really saying "all else being equal with nothing interacting or obstructing the path of the photons".
> the speed of light isn't the absolute speed as well, as far as mechanics go, their have been faster forms energy transfer through electrical means
You wording makes this tricky to argue. You are correct, we can transfer energy faster than the speed of light (there are huge losses)... but, there is a lot of debate about the "state" of the resulting energy. For instance, we can split a modulated microwave beam, sending half of it through a vacuum and the other half into a solid brass bar, both of equal length. Both the vacuum and the brass bar will transmit some of the microwaves... but the brass bar transmits them faster than the vacuum. However, the vacuum maintains the information (modulation) contained in the microwaves while the brass bar loses the modulation. (I am very fasinated by this research... it demonstrates that we still do not understand how matter, time, and energy work together.)
I agree with you on this. My primary point is that regardless of it being absolute in a state, it is thusly only absolute due to the fact of it having parameters placed onto it. Which essentially only makes it absolute within the confines we give it. Wasn't disagreeing with the mechanics of it, but more the semantics of it
--------------------
"Their is one overriding question that concerns us all: How can we get out of the fatal groove we are in, the one that is leading towards the brink?" Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
"We may not be capable of eradicating the corruption of reason, but we must nevertheless counter it at every instance and with every means." Dan Agin
"Politics is the best religion and politicians are the worst followers."
-It's ok to trip as long as you don't fall.
-Substance over Style.
-Common sense is uncommon.
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,814
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Relative? or Absolute? [Re: Seuss]
#3867779 - 03/04/05 12:51 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Isn't speed itself a relative?
Light may travel at 300,000 km/s in the vacuum....but 300,000 km/s relative to what?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
shroomydan
SkorpivoMusterion
Malachi
Sclorch
IAmTheWalrus212
Phluck
Turd