Message from @Firefly

Discord ID: 322233175583490050


2017-06-08 04:18:10 UTC  

Some is very objective.

2017-06-08 04:18:15 UTC  

@Deleted User @Firefly#9983 You're both talking about different things, one is using philosphy to describe their definition of relativity, while the other is using mathmatics and physics

2017-06-08 04:18:20 UTC  

you're never gonna agree

2017-06-08 04:18:54 UTC  

@Deleted User Consensus is my mortal enemy.

2017-06-08 04:19:17 UTC  

@Deleted User it would makes things boring, yeah

2017-06-08 04:19:20 UTC  

@Deleted User Lenins work was based on that. And it worked.

2017-06-08 04:21:53 UTC  

I would like to see how logic can be objective or subjective. Sometimes logic is applied to practical things, sometimes not. But neither is less logical.

2017-06-08 04:22:16 UTC  
2017-06-08 04:22:32 UTC  

Conventional logic is limited.

2017-06-08 04:22:57 UTC  

It is also used in dialectics.

2017-06-08 04:24:50 UTC  

I don't think one is better than the other.

2017-06-08 04:26:44 UTC  

I think conjecture of what could be should always be welcome, but at the end of the day practicality is all you can actually go off of

2017-06-08 04:27:14 UTC  

I think we are done here.

2017-06-08 04:28:10 UTC  

sure

2017-06-08 04:29:03 UTC  

@Deleted User One is included in the other.

2017-06-08 04:29:20 UTC  

It is an extension.

2017-06-08 04:35:36 UTC  

@Firefly Can dialectical logic show that the universe did not have a beginning?

2017-06-08 04:36:40 UTC  

@Deleted User It can show. There was an article about it from Proriv. But I'm not sure of their version as well.

2017-06-08 04:39:14 UTC  

I personally do not follow any of this theories at this moment. It is out of my field of study. But I know few things are incorrect in the theories that are present.

2017-06-08 04:39:35 UTC  

From the perspective of logic.

2017-06-08 04:41:38 UTC  

Not sure if it is anyhow relevant to me. But following Judaist tradition and Catholic force of Big Bang I will not. Not enough evidence for the logical assumptions.

2017-06-08 04:41:45 UTC  

At this moment.

2017-06-08 04:42:51 UTC  

Okay. I appreciate the input.

2017-06-08 04:54:26 UTC  

From another side we have evidence of everything existing for as far as we can see. So eternal (for us) existence of the universe is the only thing we can see.

2017-06-08 04:55:20 UTC  

Knowledge without speculation is more trustworthy in this case.

2017-06-08 04:55:26 UTC  

For me.

2017-06-08 07:08:14 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/308995540782284817/322270581489664001/image.jpg

2017-06-08 14:31:19 UTC  

Hello

2017-06-08 18:43:08 UTC  

No

2017-06-09 04:29:00 UTC  

Name: Nathan125

Age: 15 Thousand

Species: Time lord Hybrid

Likes: Minecraft, Being there for my mates, Traveling around space and time, ETC

Dislikes: Porn, being bullied, Death, ETC

Bio: I'm a pony hybrid that lived on earth but didn't know that I became a Time Lord/Time Worlder. I have a TARDIS that can taking me anywhere in time and space and also different dimensions.

Stable: I travel alone. Basically No stable

2017-06-09 04:29:18 UTC  

>Google+ RP group, this was a no joke character forum

2017-06-09 04:29:36 UTC  

and it was accepted

2017-06-09 10:34:35 UTC  

Why does the universe exist rather than not exist?

2017-06-09 11:00:36 UTC  

There is no purpose.

2017-06-09 11:01:05 UTC  

It is how it is.

2017-06-09 11:30:11 UTC  

Can the universe ever not exist?

2017-06-09 11:31:52 UTC  

Have no idea. I'm leaning towards eternal universe.

2017-06-09 11:32:22 UTC  

But I don't know.

2017-06-09 11:34:01 UTC  

You will want to say that it must always exist. If it ever becomes non existing then something else will have to make it exist again. Unless matter is self generating from nothing.