The Instigator
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Theoretically the past will exactly repeat itself.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
drafterman
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 11/17/2011 Category: Philosophy Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 4,172 times Debate No: 19340
Debate Rounds (4)

19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
Believe me, it was a good diagram
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
I give up
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
fgs!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-I -/\ I /
\I / -\I/
-a----b-- <-This line represents the fourth dimension.
/I \ -/I-I -\/ I \
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
It failed.

-I -/\ I /
\I / -\I/
-a----b-- <-This line represents the fourth dimension.
/I \ -/I-I -\/ I \
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
Two such particles ..a) of the same atom.. would nevertheless have different b) space-time coordinates.

b) The space time coordinates are irrelevent in a debate considering time as the property of our observations of which we are accustomed to. "Theoretically the past will exactly repeat itself" implies the fourth dimention is the only differing factor and theoretically, we must locate the mass in the remaining dimensions.

a) The principle only applies to particles of the same atom, as the principle is to negate the probability of two particles in similar location in EVERY dimension, and so two particles of the same atom in similar location in every dimension other than the fourth. We are allowing the fourth dimention to differ and, in doing so, allowing two different atoms to occupy the same location in every dimension other than the fourth:
I / \ I /
\I / \I/
--a-------------b-- <-This line represents the fourth dimension.
/I \ /I I \ / I \ If this diagram fails when posted, I will cry.
a(1)=b(1), a(2)=b(2) and a(3)=b(3), so, if a(4)=b(4), then a=b (when we do not take into consideration dimensions 5-11, however the same outcome would occur if we did).

Therefore, two different sub-particles of two different atoms can occupy the same location in every dimension other than the fourth.
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
Also, Pauli Exclusion Principle trespasses on quantum physics; although this particular argument can be countered; and as I earlier stated, the argument becomes much more complicated with quantum physics introduced.
Posted by drafterman 5 years ago
I still don't see how this refutes the fact that any two such particles would nevertheless have different space-time coordinates and could be distinguished that way.
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
I apologise for unreliable sources, however I can still counter. Pauli Exclusion Principle refers to particles of same atom. It merely states that two particles of half-integer spin (a reference to an infinite canceled down to a finite number by Planck's Constant) of the same atom cannot possibly occupy similar amplification. Although unnecessary in an infinite time line, this increases probability of identical atomic particles in a finite time line, as it negates many possibilities, infinitely small as they are, of differing particles in the case, xy=xx.
Posted by drafterman 5 years ago
Paulis exclusion principle says that no two sub atomic particles can have the same state. They MUST differ.
Posted by Leftii 5 years ago
Also, this argument fails when one takes quantum physics into consideration.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.