Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #675539
| Subject | Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.misc |
| References | (6 earlier) <Jeff-Relf.Me@Oct.26--1.25pm.Seattle.2024> <vfl4du$bic6$7@dont-email.me> <lo7bi3FbimrU4@mid.individual.net> <c1udnZAWUoeaiIL6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <vfnm7g$tra6$9@dont-email.me> |
| From | "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> |
| Organization | wokiesux |
| Date | 2024-10-28 19:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MlydnQFn-p_ph736nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com> (permalink) |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 10/28/24 5:41 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 28/10/2024 04:37, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote: >> On 10/27/24 1:28 PM, rbowman wrote: >>> On Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:25:02 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>>> In fact if you delve deep enough you come to understand that the >>>> question 'why?' is an utterly human one, doesn't apply to the Universe >>>> at large and if extrapolated beyond its applicable context to Universal >>>> Purpose will likely lead you to a supernatural solution like 'Cos God >>>> did it' >>> >>> Enter metaphysics, stage right. >> >> >> Clue about The Universe ... it's NOT ABOUT US. >> >> We need to GET OVER IT. > > Clue about the universe *as we see it* > > ITS ALL ABOUT US. It is simply riddled with anthropic concepts to the > point that people dimly recognise this, and exclaim 'I've found God!' Depends on how to take "It's All About Us" ... we ARE a sort of 'consciousness' the universe evolved. May be more, maybe only us - wait awhile on that one. However to evolve anything The Universe had to be there already, fairly easy to confirm too. It just wasn't "self aware" so to speak. (yes, arguments have been made that causality may be something of an illusion - but the math needed to argue is WAY above my pay grade) As the Buddha said, there IS a reality. What it is in all its nuances are denied to us however because of what kind of beings we are. Likely would apply to ANY kind of 'being', they'll always see it their way, and just their way. As for all the anthropic junk, well ... can't get rid of it, it's the hub of this little discussion, but IMHO there's still WAY more than is wise. Anthropic too oft incorporates ego/pride/prejudice/etc and then we get 'gods' in robes telling us it IS all about us, that the planets circle ours for our amusement and affirmation - oh, and all the heretics must be burned.
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-25 18:10 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-25 19:36 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-25 22:13 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2024-10-25 15:39 -0700
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-25 23:43 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 03:20 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:39 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 13:40 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-28 11:29 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-28 18:10 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 22:31 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:03 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 21:41 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:20 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:09 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 01:28 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 02:33 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 03:08 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-29 03:47 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 04:52 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 05:58 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-29 18:35 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-29 07:19 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2024-10-29 13:27 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 20:44 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-26 01:08 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 02:37 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-10-26 04:06 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-26 08:34 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-26 05:45 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 05:51 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-26 03:01 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-26 11:01 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-26 12:21 +0200
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 00:28 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 00:25 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-10-26 05:56 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-26 06:49 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2024-10-26 08:43 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 23:26 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 01:56 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-26 18:01 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-26 23:27 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 01:44 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:13 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-27 17:11 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:16 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 22:32 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:06 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:13 +0100
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:18 +0000
As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "Relf" <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-26 13:25 -0700
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-27 02:06 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 02:21 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-27 01:35 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 11:00 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:28 +0000
The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). "Relf" <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 04:18 -0700
Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 11:32 +0000
We're in the middle, always. "Relf" <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 06:23 -0700
Re: We're in the middle, always. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 13:30 +0000
Who you are, where you are, when you are. "Relf" <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-27 07:07 -0700
Re: Who you are, where you are, when you are. The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 14:51 +0000
Re: We're in the middle, always. rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:25 +0000
Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:22 +0000
Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:21 +0000
Re: The "big bang" was fueled by "residual eXergy" (potential entropy). Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 21:19 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-27 22:34 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 00:48 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:32 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:10 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 17:35 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 22:37 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 02:27 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-29 11:32 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 16:19 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 20:53 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-30 01:16 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:12 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 11:22 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 10:32 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . D <nospam@example.net> - 2024-10-28 21:47 +0100
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:31 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2024-10-28 16:22 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:25 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-27 10:25 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-27 17:28 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 00:37 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:41 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2024-10-28 19:12 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-29 07:17 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 12:47 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 13:15 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 13:33 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 13:55 -0400
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:24 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-29 00:23 +0000
Re: As the cosmos goes from infinitely hot/dense to infinitely cold/sparse . . . Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-27 20:54 +0000
Whether it's enough or not depends on what kind of a being you might be. "Relf" <Usenet@Jeff-Relf.Me> - 2024-10-29 06:56 -0700
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-10-27 20:46 -0500
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-27 22:28 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2024-10-28 09:33 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-10-28 09:48 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-10-28 12:32 -0400
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-10-28 21:33 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-10-29 01:45 +0000
Re: Torvalds Slams Theoretical Security DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-10-28 21:52 -0400
csiph-web