What's The Meaning Of Life

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JmiF@30 March 2003 - 19:23
What makes you think that time is infinite, any more than space.

---

Well, then we'd have to get into quantum physics. And that is too long to explain.

So time may not be infinate. It may be a loop that repeats itself.

Same with outerspace (and the 4th dimension).

Think of this. The speed of time is the same as the speed of light! If you travel near the speed of light, you almost stop time! Since everyone else is not you traveling at that speed, everyone else is progressing at a different speed than you, everyone else is in a different time rate than you. Time, to you will feel "normal", but after a year's worth of that, you will notice that everyone else has not aged as you have.


If you travel at the speed of light, you travel at the speed of time, therefore time will stop. Thus you cannot travel at the speed of light.

If you travel faster than the speed of light, then you are moving onto the future. You cannot do that, therefore you have to travel back into time.

Now comes the 4th dimension part... I'll let the brainiacs of the lounge to explain that.

Is there any good 'cool' websites that take you through an animated journey of quantum physics? Please post 'em!

I feel we are in some kind of Loop of time.

There may be life beyond us..
Think about it..

Atoms>Cells/Bacteria>Bugs>small creatures>animals>humans>>then something has to be next! we might just be a part of a bigger part which is part of something bigger> etc etc etc etc.. It gets sooo big that at the end.. everything is restarted all the way from the begining and you continue forever.

Confuseing huh?

well, eveything is energy
how did energy start?
what started space?
what is what?
how is area formed?
were we once *nothingness*?


This is the true meaning I beilieve

the begining of time... you need a brain 1 million times as big and powerfull as the human brain to know exactly what it was.

wolfmight, u are right.

but that is so off-topic! :lol:

It's simple:
there can only be a 'meaning' to life if life it self were created by some entity, this god would be unpercieveable to us, based on the fact that we can't (percieve it). sooo this meaning to which it created life, must also be unpercieble (un understandable) to us, and therfore it doesn't exist (to us), since we can't cope withit, reson with it, understand it, or act in compliance/discompliance with it. Just like there is no truth (nietschze).
Therfore I'm just gonna stick with the biological p PURPOSE of life, preservation of the spicies (SEX!!!)

http://images.rottentomatoes.com/ima.../26/129126.jpg
Composers: Eric Idle & John Du Prez
Author: Eric Idle
Singer: Eric Idle
From the Movie 'The Meaning of Life'

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour,
That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned,
A sun that is the source of all our power.
The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see
Are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour,
Of the galaxy we call the 'Milky Way'.

Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars.
It's a hundred thousand light years side to side.
It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick,
But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide.
We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point.
We go 'round every two hundred million years,
And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions
In this amazing and expanding universe.

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whizz
As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know,
Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure,
How amazingly unlikely is your birth,
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space,
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.

And that just about sums it up for me!!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes@31 March 2003 - 03:58
Skweeky,

Sorry, but you're posting nothing but illogical drivel. Edit: When we go out to the clubs and see the sexy ladies, we may not conciously think about procreating, in fact, we may be more concerned about how not to do so. The fact remains,however; that the drive to be with women, strip off their clothes and linger in their nudity is zero percent social and 100 biological. 1000% biological, an unconcious drive of lust.

Either explain your post or delete it. I don't care about a book, I care about reason.

How can you even state that the desire to procreate is social? I have never heard such absurdity. Have'nt you ever had the eternal boner?

If we can not deal in reality, let us not deal at all.

To be frankly honest, I feel like an intelligent, informed, and educated adult being subjected to the responses of children.

I do want to say that my objective is not to flame an individual, I try to learn from everyone, but the level of response from some indicates that they have "many miles to go before they sleep".

Peace, sorry for any animosity I create.

---

Once again, you miss the point, this time less than slightly.

First, I don't think Skweeky gets boners, eternal or otherwise.

Second, the need to procreate is involuntary; it is what might be called a biological imperative-not subject in any way to conscious thought. What you regard as simple lust is merely the vehicle by which this imperative is satisfied.
This is not to say an individual cannot choose re: procreation-look at the semantic gymnastics religion puts itself through dealing with the question.
In any case, Mother Nature (who is a stone fox, by the way) will have her way. ;)

IT THINK OUR LIVES WERE INTENDED FOR ONE THING AND FOR ONE THING ONLY.......................TO BLOW UP A LOT OF THINGS ExAMPle

1.your cat

2.your dog

3.your car

4.YOUR COMPUTER (just joking)

5.an old building that nobody uses

6.a bus

7.your arm

8.your house

9.your fishtank

10.iraq

11.run around in circles

J2K4,

I'm a little confused as to what point I am missing. :blink:

1. We all get boners, there is just a level of magnitude difference between men and women. And of course, the urethra issue.

2. As I explained before, our genomes actively shut us down as our reproductive abilities deteriorate. So, although the actual commission of the sex act is voluntary, our whole existence is primed for reproduction.
You can use your car as a decorative centerpiece in your living room, but this does not change the purpose of the automobile. You are just simply chosing to ignore what is was designed for.

3. In above case, "meaning" and "purpose" are equivalent, as I don't consider inanimate objects, such as cars, to have meaning. In a prior post where you thought I was missing the point. I was actually explaining the difference between "meaning" and "purpose" to Z, as I felt that his philosophy class was missing this distinction.

4. A final note. You can see that I editted the post you quoted. Skweeky had posted the notion that reproductive drive as the meaning of life was considered passe(sp?) and that it was more social than biological. She went on to say that there was a book on the subject. I guess my pet peeve is that being in a book somehow makes something "right" or "true".

I would have preferred that she explain that assertion so I could think about and judge its merit. If you are going to counter someones argument, you should first indicate why you feel someone is wrong, and then explain how you think something is "correct". Not just say, "You're wrong, it's in a book and everything, period". It is hard to rebut that statement.

Did I mention I was drinking coffee, I guess that was obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes@31 March 2003 - 17:05
J2K4,

I'm a little confused as to what point I am missing. :blink:

1. We all get boners, there is just a level of magnitude difference between men and women. And of course, the urethra issue.

I somehow failed to discern your intent to be "clinical"; you seemed to be speaking in the vernacular.


2. As I explained before, our genomes actively shut us down as our reproductive abilities deteriorate. So, although the actual commission of the sex act is voluntary, our whole existence is primed for reproduction.

The "commission of the sex act", under any circumstances, without regard to any ambient condition, frequency, or type of impetus, serves to reinforce the imperative. As to the effects of "genome shut-down", the attempt to copulate still occurs in many geriatric wards; the remnants of procreative imprinting still drive us.

You can use your car as a decorative centerpiece in your living room, but this does not change the purpose of the automobile. You are just simply chosing to ignore what is was designed for.

I DO keep my car in my living room, and I look at it as an ornament of art, regardless of it's obvious motive overtones.

3. In above case, "meaning" and "purpose" are equivalent, as I don't consider inanimate objects, such as cars, to have meaning. In a prior post where you thought I was missing the point. I was actually explaining the difference between "meaning" and "purpose" to Z, as I felt that his philosophy class was missing this distinction.

The difference between the two words is obvious as regards the original question. Period.


4. A final note. You can see that I editted the post you quoted. Skweeky had posted  the notion that reproductive drive as the meaning of life was considered passe(sp?) and that it was more social than biological. She went on to say that there was a book on the subject. I guess my pet peeve is that being in a book somehow makes something "right" or "true".

I agree wholeheartedly with this last; I am forever amazed at what I see in print, as well as where I see it.

I would have preferred that she explain that assertion so I could think about and judge its merit. If you are going to counter someones argument, you should first indicate why you feel someone is wrong, and then explain how you think something is "correct". Not just say, "You're wrong, it's in a book and everything, period". It is hard to rebut that statement.

Correct again. Period.

Did I mention I was drinking coffee, I guess that was obvious.

I apologize-I was myself drinking coffee.

---

I attempted to use the snazzy editting controls and was foiled again. Hobbes-if you would please re-read the quote with my commentary? GOOD CHAT! Now I'm exhausted and ready to go to work-will check in later.

hobbes,

it is just one opinion I posted, but more and more scientist agree that the urge to reproduce is not only biological. From the moment one has a partner people in your environment have the expectation of you to have sex, and therefore to reproduce.
I named the book because, as I said, my english isn't good enough to explain the detail of it, and if anyone should be interested in this matter, it is an interesting book.


btw: thanks for the &#39;nice and friendly&#39; reply <_<