View Single Post
  #36442  
Old 06-09-2014, 11:31 AM
Spacemonkey's Avatar
Spacemonkey Spacemonkey is offline
I'll be benched for a week if I keep these shenanigans up.
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: VMCLXXIII
Default Re: A revolution in thought

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey View Post
Peacegirl, you've now claimed that the photons at the retina/film came from the Sun. Note that this is exactly the premise from which the following reasoning begins. So please explain what part of the following you disagree with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey View Post
Let's try this another way, Peacegirl. Let's start by assuming that the photons at the film/retina came from the Sun.
Assumption #1: The photons at the film/retina came from the Sun.
Now lets define traveling and teleporting. Traveling is getting from A to B by passing through all intervening points. Teleporting is getting from A to B without passing through all intervening points. Clearly these are jointly exhaustive - if you get from A to B you must do so either by passing through the intervening points or by not passing through them. So...
Conclusion #1: If the photons came from the Sun then they either traveled there or teleported there.
Now you insist that they neither traveled there nor teleported, so we can conclude via modus tollens (If A then B, not B, therefore not A) that these photons cannot have come from the Sun.
Assumption #2: The photons at the film/retina did not travel or teleport there.
Conclusion #2: The photons at the film/retina did not come from the Sun.
So now the million-dollar question: Where the fuck did these photons come from? We can note also that the exact same reasoning as above will still apply for any location other than the Sun - as long as the photons are getting from A to B, they have to either travel there or teleport there - so we can know that...
Conclusion #3: The photons at the film/retina did not get there from anywhere else.
That leaves two remaining possibilities: (i) These photons were always there, i.e. sitting stationary at the film/retina surface; or (ii) They did not previously exist, and instead came into existence at the film/retina. But of course neither of these are plausible either, as photons cannot be stationary, and they do not pop into existence in our eyes or on film. But unless you accept one of these options we are forced to conclude that...
Conclusion #4: Assumption #2 was bollocks.
Basically, what we have proven is that you have only four options for the photons at the film/retina:
(i) Traveling photons.
(ii) Teleporting photons.
(iii) Stationary photons.
(iv) Newly existing photons.
So which is it going to be? (Remember, weaseling and fake-conceding are not honest responses.)
Bump.
__________________
video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.27150 seconds with 10 queries