Bipolar thinking

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Here is a BBC video about the expansion of the universe.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170210-how-the-universe-can-expand-if-there-is-no-extra-space


Not an extract...

**********

The universe is expanding...

Yes...but ...wait... that doesn't mean it is expanding into anything. It doesn't have to expand INTO anything. There is nothing OUTSIDE the universe!

It is like a balloon being blown up...

But ...wait...that doesn't mean more space is being created like inside the balloon.

Think of it as only the surface of the the balloon that is getting stretched. If dots are painted on the balloon, they will move further from one another.

But...wait...that doesn't mean the dots will themselves stretch. Because our solar system, individual stars,  planets and we... aren't stretching.

But the balloon is being blown into the space outside it..right?!

Yes...But...wait...we already said that there is no space outside the universe. So...that's not possible is it?

The universe is expanding like a balloon being blown up, except that it is not. It is stretching like the surface of the balloon, except that it is not.

But that's weird...! Its warped, selective logic.

Not really. You just need to be particularly capable and receptive to such 'scientific' and 'intellectually demanding' concepts.   Its all there in the maths!

OK. But if you guys can accept such weird ideas with no evidence, why can't you accept such simple ideas as the after-life for which millions of NDE's cases are available as evidence. Or the idea of the Self existing independently of the body? Or reincarnation for which some evidence is available?

No...No...No....all that is woo. No evidence at all, just delusion and woolly thinking. Common man's ill informed beliefs and misconceptions.

Well... I think its clearly a case of two boxes. Bipolar thinking! You dump all that you think of as science into one box...in which anything is acceptable....all possibilities are open!   On the other hand, anything that you don't think of as science you dump into the second box and nothing there is acceptable...everything is impossible. Its not about reality at all. Its about how you are programmed to think.

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

[torridon]

OK. But if you guys can accept such weird ideas with no evidence, why can't you accept such simple ideas as the after-life for which millions of NDE's cases are available as evidence. Or the idea of the Self existing independently of the body? Or reincarnation for which some evidence is available?

No...No...No....all that is woo. No evidence at all, just delusion and woolly thinking. Common man's ill informed beliefs and misconceptions.

Well... I think its clearly a case of two boxes. Bipolar thinking! You dump all that you think of as science into one box...in which anything is acceptable....all possibilities are open!   On the other hand, anything that you don't think of as science you dump into the second box and nothing there is acceptable...everything is impossible. Its not about reality at all. Its about how you are programmed to think.

Ideas in science are often counterintuitive at first, that is not at all surprising; it is for us to try to figure out what the evidence is telling us.  But they are at least based on research findings whereas NDEs and so forth are not.  These are just personal anecdotes.  There are many people who believe they are being regularly abducted by aliens, are we supposed to just take their claims at face value ?  To do so would be naive, humans are complex, often making poor witnesses, so we don't take anecdotal claims too seriously if they contradict the broader framework of understanding and there is nothing in our knowledge base drawn from physics up that would be remotely consistent with claims of OBEs, NDEs, personal after-life etc.

[Stranger]

OK. But if you guys can accept such weird ideas with no evidence, why can't you accept such simple ideas as the after-life for which millions of NDE's cases are available as evidence. Or the idea of the Self existing independently of the body? Or reincarnation for which some evidence is available?

The problem being that to say that there is no evidence for the expanding universe and the theory that explains it, is simply untrue. There is in fact, very good evidence for both in the form of repeatable observations and experiments. General relativity, which is the theoretical basis for it, actually has a practical application in everyday life: the GPS system uses it.

There is no such evidence for an afterlife or reincarnation. For example, odd near death experiences are not evidence of an afterlife.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The problem being that to say that there is no evidence for the expanding universe and the theory that explains it, is simply untrue. There is in fact, very good evidence for both in the form of repeatable observations and experiments. General relativity, which is the theoretical basis for it, actually has a practical application in everyday life: the GPS system uses it.

There is no such evidence for an afterlife or reincarnation. For example, odd near death experiences are not evidence of an afterlife.

I don't believe there is a conflict between science and religion and when we dig just a little we see that the conflict is with philosophical naturalism.

[Aruntraveller]

I don't believe there is a conflict between science and religion and when we dig just a little we see that the conflict is with philosophical naturalism.

A round of applause or a dose of clap as philosophical naturalism makes it's long awaited return. And when I use the term long awaited I use it in the same way I apply the phrase to a rerun of Dad's Army.

[Stranger]

I don't believe there is a conflict between science and religion and when we dig just a little we see that the conflict is with philosophical naturalism.

So, we have Sriram woo peddling, with a side order of misunderstanding of evidence, and irrelevant drivel from Vlad complete with a much loved 'ism...

All is right with the world.   

[Sriram]

Ideas in science are often counterintuitive at first, that is not at all surprising; it is for us to try to figure out what the evidence is telling us.  But they are at least based on research findings whereas NDEs and so forth are not.  These are just personal anecdotes.  There are many people who believe they are being regularly abducted by aliens, are we supposed to just take their claims at face value ?  To do so would be naive, humans are complex, often making poor witnesses, so we don't take anecdotal claims too seriously if they contradict the broader framework of understanding and there is nothing in our knowledge base drawn from physics up that would be remotely consistent with claims of OBEs, NDEs, personal after-life etc.

It is not just counter intuitive.   There is no evidence to state that there is.. nothing.. outside the universe....and that the universe is stretching like a balloon. It is just an imaginary way of explaining some mathematical oddities. It may have nothing to do with actual reality.

There are in fact, theories that propose several universes like ours existing in a mega universe....the same way galaxies exist in this universe.   This means there is some sort of a 'mega space' out there too. 

You are the ultimate reductionist. You seriously expect NDE's to be explained by Physics?!!!!

The only way an universe (or anything) can expand without having any space outside,  is in a Virtual world.  Another reason to believe that the world is an illusion (Maya).

 

[Stranger]

It is not just counter intuitive.   There is no evidence to state that there is.. nothing.. outside the universe....and that the universe is stretching like a balloon. It is just an imaginary way of explaining some mathematical oddities. It may have nothing to do with actual reality.

What a confused and scientifically illiterate mess.

There is, as I said before, plentiful evidence, both for the expansion of the universe and for the mathematical theory that describes it (General Relativity). Said theory describes the counter-intuitive notion that space and time are not a fixed background but can 'curve' and expand (and contract).

The balloon analogy is an attempt to explain the results without mathematics and it has numerous limitations. It is the actual mathematical theory that has been tested, not the analogy.

I emphasize again that this is a very well tested theory with plenty of supporting evidence. Claims to the contrary are simply untrue.

There are in fact, theories that propose several universes like ours existing in a mega universe....the same way galaxies exist in this universe.   This means there is some sort of a 'mega space' out there too.

You have now moved from well tested theory to a very poorly described, untested hypothesis.

The only way an universe (or anything) can expand without having any space outside,  is in a Virtual world.

How quaintly Newtonian.   

[torridon]

You are the ultimate reductionist. You seriously expect NDE's to be explained by Physics?!!!!

Nah, non need to go that far; a little bit of psychology should suffice.

[Sriram]

Nah, non need to go that far; a little bit of psychology should suffice.

Like what?

[torridon]

Like the human tendency to indulge appealing beliefs over the mundane. Like the human capacity for self-deception.

[Sriram]

Like the human tendency to indulge appealing beliefs over the mundane. Like the human capacity for self-deception.

This thread is precisely about that. About self deception and our tendency to think in slots. Not about Relativity or the universe. It is about mental programming. Its about bipolar thinking. 

We tend to separate our ideas into two opposite and unconnected boxes. One that is all correct and the other that is all wrong. This has to change.

Its not really about evidence. As I have argued elsewhere, even something as fundamental and  all pervasive as Light, can be denied if one does not possess the necessary faculty. Evidence is only what we  are able to and willing to notice and accept.  Its not something Absolute that stands up and announces itself.... regardless of our prejudices, skepticism and mindsets.

Evidence is available everywhere for lots of things we cannot even imagine. But we need have a broader mindset to recognize this.

If we keep thinking in slots...the world will continue to have this gulf between the so called 'intellectual elite' minority  and the so called 'common believers' majority. This is a nonsensical and artificial divide.  It is more in the mind than in reality.

[Walter]

sriram

until you learn some proper science, give it a fuckin' rest will ya!

[Stranger]

Its not really about evidence. As I have argued elsewhere, even something as fundamental and  all pervasive as Light, can be denied if one does not possess the necessary faculty. Evidence is only what we  are able to and willing to notice and accept.  Its not something Absolute that stands up and announces itself.... regardless of our prejudices, skepticism and mindsets.

Your 'argument' about light was even more laughable than the one you started this thread with. You have completely failed, several times, to argue that scientific evidence is in some way subjective, so you can claim a basis for those things that you desperately want to be true.

It really isn't complicated: when we are talking about matters of objective fact, the evidence also needs to objective (by which I mean inter-subjectively verifiable). This rules out unverified anecdotes and entirely subjective impressions - which is all you have for your notions of afterlife and so on.