I must say that there doesn't seem to generate any paradoxes giving light certain masses, such as gravitational affect (though not generating gravitation), the m (not the rest mass) in the equation above, mass to be accounted for in system (such as center of mass), and so on. Anyone willing to...
Do I understand correctly that the universe, x, is empty just in case [\forall x (Px)] is false and ~ is true?
No, it's when there's nothing possessing P(x), i.e. [\forall \neg x(Px)]
Then it is true, given that P is the property which defines whether something is "something in the universe"...
I'm still having problems understanding you. What is it that you wish to do?
I guess you here mean, can anyone perform a sound deduction of a contradiction? If there were, the complete logical system would fail since you may then deduct any statement.
For example, let's assume that these...
I forgot to replace v in the equation above, here's the complete equation:
If we call
v the speed of the box,
M it's mass,
L it's length, from one end to the other,
p_{\textit{box}} it's linear momentum,
d the distance the box is dislocated,
\Delta cm_{\textit{x,box}} the...
Note though that it takes time, not only to experience but even to understand what it means to be existing. Furthermore, how can we know that our logical system is correct, what basis for knowledge does this deduction give us?
I believe we are not to base these things on strict implication but...
Whether your notion is wrong or not depends on what logical system you use to declare that. According to my ontology
Existing\ objects \notin \varnothing
i.e.
Things\ which\ possess\ the\ property\ of\ existence \notin \varnothing
\forall(x)(Existing(x) <=> x \notin \varnothing)
Which is...
Notice though that the so called "circular motion" which frequency must deal with would rather to be thought of metaphoricly. Circular as in a repeation of a certain entity and motion in the sense of things altering as the function of another variable. We may very well measure the frequency of...
The com, seen from an external viewpoint, will be dislocated from it's original position as the box must travel due to it's increament of velocity, caused by the increment in linear momentum, caused by the projection of light. As no internal process may alter the com of an object, mass must be...
The reason it'd be the same amount of time as it takes for the photon to reach the far end of the box would be as the linear momentum of the photon would then be absorbed, forcing the box to a halt. Though L/c would be an incorrect time of travel, a miss by me, I'll update the post. Nevertheless...
I do not here state that srt or it's applications would be wrong but simply I wish to bring out a faulty example.
In the text box I carried about a year ago, the following "thought-experiment" and example were brought to support the mass-energy equivalence:
--- Einstein's gedanken, the lamp...
Regarding traveling backwards in time, using any method, I'd say faces the following problem:
Taken from an earlier discussions of mine found at http://forums.philosophyforums.com/comments.php?id=12797&highlight=c&findpost=251440#post251440. If the above was not clear enough please read post...
Hastly, search google for a more throughly one:
Achilles and a tortoise raises. the tortoise starts ahead of achilles, let's call the distance d. In order for achilles to pass the turtle, he must pass the point the turtle is at now. When achilles has reached the point d, the tortoise has moved...
Following your reasoning, I can very well take two cases, one in which I define determinism as the 0 point and in one, where I define randomness as the 0 point, would this then not lead to that in one case, everything moves towards randomness and in one, it moves away. Since I may have this two...
Anything, for example time, may cause the t. randomness, it is the process of the cause-effect rather than simply the cause which determines whether or not we have a t. randomness.
I am not that aware of how the fishes' minds works, however, it seems to me as if a small fish would be as happy as a large fish (in a sense of our human perception), therefor, except for how it is affected by the souroundings, it's size doesn't matter.
I am not aware of what exists in the...