<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>Ok, so this is my current thinking on the subject:
Let's say that a star exploded (or whatever stars do) and the resulting shockwave sent a meteor on a collision course with earth. However, a nebula or something blocks all light/radiation or anything from that star from reaching earth. Therefore, according to Adam's theory, since nothing from that star ever reaches earth and affects us the star never exploded (in fact, since we never saw any light from that star it would never have existed.) But say the meteor hits earth and destroys a city.
Since none of the events (supernova) that propelled the meteor towards earth ever happened, the meteor could never have been propelled towards earth. Therefore the city wasn't destroyed.
Does that work? I think there might be a hole in the argument... since one might consider the meteor to be the effect of the star exploding on us, therefore legitimizing it. Bleh.
Gindipple: Go see "You Too Can See the Light." I like to keep my God debates confined...
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, there is a hole. The meteor would replace the necessity of light being the determining factor on whether the supernova exists. But what this does do, is prove that the supernova did in fact exist; its just that logic prevaled. In his theory, the trajectory of the meteor would have never existed (the funny thing is that every possibility of every event exists, but it only has a very very very very very minute probability). Which brings me back to it being a superposition of states meaning that it exists and does not at the same time until there is a consious observer observing the action or entity.
Another thing you could bring up is that ,just because you didn't observe it, or neither did anybody else on earth for that matter, does not mean that somebody or something didn't observe it that 100,000 lightyears away. So, once again, you can never know since nobody knows if anybody observed it over there.
My guess is that he will say something along the lines of, "I am talking about your perception of reality. That, since you didnt observe it, it doesnt exist in your personal reality". If this happens, then it all goes down to philosophy and there is nothing physics can do to help you
Then you should say something completely rediculous like, "So, if we didnt have the news, california would not exist? Or even the house down the block that i cant see because of that huge tree?" There is no way to argue this...And always remember that no matter what, you will always have a trump card
NOTHING in our reality is proven, the laws of physics are NOT proven, biology is NOT proven, etc...They are all theories and theories are NOT fact
The only thing that IS fact is that there is NO fact. Our idea of gravity could be wrong tomorrow and we could all be floating.
Hope i didnt confuse you.
------------------
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'
Dartan tells you 'i own so hard sometimes it makes me want to cry'
Nitupopple group-says 'esrel get glorishan off'
