Does Human Knowledge Have Limits?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of existence and the limits of human knowledge regarding the universe. Participants express skepticism about the universe's existence, with one asserting that life and the world are mere illusions, suggesting that only time is real. Another contributor argues that the universe, defined as everything that exists, must exist since the question itself implies existence. The conversation highlights a philosophical debate about whether answers to existential questions are beyond human comprehension or if they can be understood. Ultimately, the dialogue reflects deep uncertainty about the nature of reality and the extent of human understanding.
Sir Adam
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
The Universe, does it exist?

here is some of a conversation i had on IRC last night:

[10:52] SShadow_{D-O} What happens happens
[10:53] SShadow_{D-O} No one knows anything
[10:53] SShadow_{D-O} everything that has been "learned" is theories
[10:55] SShadow_{D-O} THE WORLD IS NOTHING
[10:55] SShadow_{D-O} JUST AN ENDLESS CYCLE
[10:55] SShadow_{D-O} OF REOCCURING EVENTS
[10:57] SShadow_{D-O} I don't think there is a universe
[10:57] SShadow_{D-O} I think this is the only world
[10:57] SShadow_{D-O} To ever live
[10:59] [DW]Capt_Kiwi|meditating IN THEORY, THERE MIGHT NOT BE ANYTHING
[10:59] SShadow_{D-O} no kiwi
[10:59] SShadow_{D-O} that is not theory
[10:59] SShadow_{D-O} that is real
[10:29] SShadow_{D-O} Life is nothing
[10:29] SShadow_{D-O} it controlls the future
[10:59] SShadow_{D-O} THERE IS NOTHING
[11:01] SShadow_{D-O} THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS WORLD
[11:01] SShadow_{D-O} ONLY WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE
[11:06] SShadow_{D-O} there are no humans
[11:06] SShadow_{D-O} there are no people
[11:06] SShadow_{D-O} what does older mean?
[11:06] SShadow_{D-O} answer:
[11:06] SShadow_{D-O} NOTHING
[11:08] SShadow_{D-O} listen:
[11:08] SShadow_{D-O} There is only Time
[11:08] SShadow_{D-O} Past and present
[11:08] SShadow_{D-O} the past has existed
[11:08] SShadow_{D-O} the present does
[11:09] SShadow_{D-O} and the future hasn't

In my opinion, no theory explaining how the universe began, or life began, or what the universe is, is not correct. I believe that the answer is beyond the human mind, beyond our thinking. I do not think that that answer can ever be answered... only a "higher power" knows. What do you all think?
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
Well, to put you at ease, Sir Adam, the Universe exists. You see, "Universe" refers to everything, and if nothing existed then you wouldn't exist and this question would never have been posted. Therefore, even if you are all that exists, the Universe exists, since "Universe" refers to everything that exists.

I'll have to get to those individual comments later, since I have to get off-line soon. Sorry.
 
IMHO, the universe is defined as existing. Or, in another way, our concept of existence derives from our understanding of what the universe is.

I believe that the answer is beyond the human mind, beyond our thinking.
But to state that, you must already know something of the answer, no? I see no reason at present to put anything as beyond us.

Everything is another matter...
 
Originally posted by FZ+
But to state that, you must already know something of the answer, no? I see no reason at present to put anything as beyond us.

Everything is another matter...

I've seen you post this before, and I thought it made perfect sense, but now I have a question: If there isn't anything beyond the human ability to discover it, then why is "everything" beyond us? Everything would be a specified amount of knowledge, and that amount would be something, and should thus not be put beyond us if we're holding to the "don't put anything beyond us" statement.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?

Similar threads

Back
Top