Firstly, your main hypothesis is wrong. Space-time is not infinite. In fact, using the concept of space-time in what you are trying to express, seems to be confusing you and your argument. Space-time is just a quicker way of mentioning the 4 dimensions (x,y,z, and T) as opposed to talking about the seperate concepts of space and time. Space is certainly not infinite, as any introductory level physics class will tell you, and time isn't necessarily infinite either (especially in an instance where there is no matter for it to act upon).

Skeptical Dude wrote:
If when you say 'intelligence' you mean 'energy'... why don't you just say energy?No I don't mean energy. I define one of it's proporties as energy; that intelligence is tangible. People don't really know what definitions are it seems like. A definition describes something, and so it doesn't mean that they're exactly that. Ah arguing gets stupid sometimes, people argue about what a definition is. But can I tell you something? I believe that I'm catching onto something big. Hey umm and I should have also said this instead: "Energy is intelligence." but you can always configure definitions the other way around.

Nope you just assumed things incorrectly. Language is very imperfect.

Language isn't perfect, but it is by no means as flawed as you make it seem to be. It is only when someone bastardizes it that it begins to break down. Intelligence isn't the word you want to use here. You're attributing a meaning to a word that isn't the word's meaning. Energy is not intelligence, just as energy isn't purple. It's a complete misnomer. Saying it is so, most assuredly does not make it so. Your whole... hypothesis? argument? religion? Whatever it is, it comes across as gobbledygook, because it is glaringly apparent that even you don't quite know what you want to say, nor how to say it. I don't mean to sound harsh, but when you tell someone that they "assumed things incorrectly", make sure that you stated things correctly in the first place.

djcmus wrote:


I think about the concept of infinity from time to time, as well as the concept of nothing. Do you believe that we as human beings are capable of experiencing or even imagining infinity and/or nothing? Sometimes when people talk about the creation of the universe, they will say something like "in the beginning there was nothing", and you might picture just a blank black box or screen. If there is such a thing as nothing, however, there isn't even this black screen. There is literally nothing. Is it possible for humans to experience that or its opposite, infinity? Perhaps by some kind of super-deep meditation?



It is impossible for a human to experience "nothing" and "infinity", but as to conceptualizing them, of course it's possible otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

And infinity isn't really the opposite of nothing. Any "thing" would be the opposite of nothing.

Its mathematical foundations were laid in the 17th century with the development of probability theory by Blaise Pascal and Pierre de Fermat. Probability theory arose from the study of games of chance. The method of least squares was first described by Carl Friedrich Gauss around 1794. The use of modern computers has expedited large-scale statistical computation, and has also made possible new methods that are impractical to perform manually.
===========================
Income Protection Insurance| Life Insurance Quotes