RJG wrote:You are trying to make a claim of 'delineate-ation', with only one object. It takes TWO to 'delineate' anything. When you look at a line and say the line is 'finite' and it is 'all' that exists, you forget that without the paper that the line is drawn on, there can be no line! It takes TWO to tango. You can't delineate the universe as 'finite' without something to delineate it with!
BigBango wrote:As Tamminen said "only objects can occupy the space of the universe.
Yes. We can delineate 'objects' from 'space', because we have TWO to tango (delineate); we have "objects" and "space", therefore we can delineate one from the other.
BigBango wrote:We can "delineate the universe as 'finite'...
Yes we can "delineate it as finite
there is something else
But if the universe is "everything", then there is nothing else
out-there. And if there is nothing else
out-there, then Tam's claim of the universe being "everything AND finite
" is logically FALSE. "Everything" AND "finite" are mutually exclusive
terms (contradictory), and therefore cannot refer to the same thing. In other words, to delineate something as 'finite' requires a dance partner. But if there is no dance partner, then there can be no "finite-ness".
"Everything and infinite" is logically coherent (sound).
"Everything and finite" is a logical contradiction
"Not-everything and infinite" is logically coherent (sound).
"Not-everything and finite" is logically coherent (sound).
BigBango wrote:...if we delineate the SPACE time continuum as within an infinite space of nothing that has no properties…
Aah, so here you are adding a dance partner ("an infinite space of nothing"), so delineation is now possible! By adding this dance partner, you can now RATIONALLY
claim the universe is "finite". Kudos to you BB! But this now means that the universe is "NOT-everything". For as you say, there is something 'else
' out-there; there is also "an infinite space of nothing"! ...or so you claim.
1. So then WHAT is an "infinite space of nothing"? ...this seems to be "double-speak" nonsense; it seems that you are trying to say "nothing is something
so as to then justify an indoctrinated belief in a 'finite' universe. It seems that you are trying to use ILLOGIC (non-sense!) [X=~X]
to justify your point.
2. Also, now you seemingly believe that "infinite" is possible. If infinite is possible, then why not accept the universe itself as 'infinite'? Why kick-the-can-down-road, and claim something else as infinite, so as to then claim this universe is finite? Are you trying to justify, or support, an indoctrinated belief that the universe is supposed to be 'finite'?
BigBango wrote:...and don't get hung up on the logical contradictions…
YIKES!!! ...okay, well this explains everything now, ...sorry BB, but without 'logic' (sense-making) we only have "non-sense" making, so I'll leave this part of the "discussion" (...or should I say "fairy tale"?).