Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

What do people think of my theory?

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 12:47:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Essentially, what can we conclude or estimate based on the nature of our own existence. For one, either we are alone in the universe, the universe isn't infinite, or the speed of light is a brick wall when it comes to interstellar space travel.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 3:22:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Wouldn't that "probable" apply to every human being that ever lived and ever will live? So it's always going to be the middle and the end just keeps receding until the end comes and then you can just say, "Oh, I guess not"?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
TolerantSpirit
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 5:48:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think that your theory needs to first have evidence backing it up to be considered valid.

Also, I don't think it's a theory but rather a random thought on the spur of a moment based on not logic at all.
Think before you talk.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 9:38:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 3:22:19 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Wouldn't that "probable" apply to every human being that ever lived and ever will live? So it's always going to be the middle and the end just keeps receding until the end comes and then you can just say, "Oh, I guess not"?

Yes, but the chances that you are at the end of all humans to live are very small regardless.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 9:45:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:47:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
Essentially, what can we conclude or estimate based on the nature of our own existence. For one, either we are alone in the universe,

Odds are that this isn't so. But we may never know.

the universe isn't infinite,

We know for a fact that this is not true.

or the speed of light is a brick wall when it comes to interstellar space travel.

This is blatantly false. There is already quantum teleportation.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 9:47:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist.

Why is this probable over any other times?

So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Even if the first point were true, this point does not logically follow.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 9:48:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 9:45:42 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:47:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
Essentially, what can we conclude or estimate based on the nature of our own existence. For one, either we are alone in the universe,

Odds are that this isn't so. But we may never know.

the universe isn't infinite,

We know for a fact that this is not true.

or the speed of light is a brick wall when it comes to interstellar space travel.

This is blatantly false. There is already quantum teleportation.

Then the universe isn't infinite -- and by infinite I mean an infinite amount of intelligent life forms too-- or else it makes no sense that we haven't been visited. Either that or teleportation doesn't take time for the traveler but the world ages.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 9:50:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 9:47:16 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist.

Why is this probable over any other times?

So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Even if the first point were true, this point does not logically follow.

By span, I mean total humans -- not time span ;)

If we're following the logic, then humanity is probably more than half over time-wise.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 10:40:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 9:48:46 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:45:42 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:47:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
Essentially, what can we conclude or estimate based on the nature of our own existence. For one, either we are alone in the universe,

Odds are that this isn't so. But we may never know.

the universe isn't infinite,

We know for a fact that this is not true.

or the speed of light is a brick wall when it comes to interstellar space travel.

This is blatantly false. There is already quantum teleportation.

Then the universe isn't infinite --

I already agreed with this.

and by infinite I mean an infinite amount of intelligent life forms too--

Obviously.

or else it makes no sense that we haven't been visited. Either that or teleportation doesn't take time for the traveler but the world ages.

I have no idea what you are saying here. Are you trying to reply to what I said, or are you just rambling. And the teleportation I am talking about is instantaneous from any perspective.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 10:44:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 10:40:47 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:48:46 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:45:42 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:47:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
Essentially, what can we conclude or estimate based on the nature of our own existence. For one, either we are alone in the universe,

Odds are that this isn't so. But we may never know.

the universe isn't infinite,

We know for a fact that this is not true.

or the speed of light is a brick wall when it comes to interstellar space travel.

This is blatantly false. There is already quantum teleportation.

Then the universe isn't infinite --

I already agreed with this.

and by infinite I mean an infinite amount of intelligent life forms too--

Obviously.

or else it makes no sense that we haven't been visited. Either that or teleportation doesn't take time for the traveler but the world ages.

I have no idea what you are saying here. Are you trying to reply to what I said, or are you just rambling. And the teleportation I am talking about is instantaneous from any perspective.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 10:47:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 9:50:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:47:16 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist.

Why is this probable over any other times?

So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Even if the first point were true, this point does not logically follow.

By span, I mean total humans -- not time span ;)

If we're following the logic, then humanity is probably more than half over time-wise.

If we are at about half the amount of humans that will exist, then it would be about 25 years till the cap is hit. But this is non-sensical. What logic did you use, that makes you think it is more likely to be born in the middle of humanities total possible population? And who is it that is more likely to be born at the half way point, me, you, or billy who lives in the year 3000?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 10:53:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 10:47:44 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:50:39 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/18/2013 9:47:16 AM, muzebreak wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist.

Why is this probable over any other times?

So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Even if the first point were true, this point does not logically follow.

By span, I mean total humans -- not time span ;)

If we're following the logic, then humanity is probably more than half over time-wise.

If we are at about half the amount of humans that will exist, then it would be about 25 years till the cap is hit. But this is non-sensical. What logic did you use, that makes you think it is more likely to be born in the middle of humanities total possible population? And who is it that is more likely to be born at the half way point, me, you, or billy who lives in the year 3000?

Bill hasn't born yet, that's why. I'm saying that if there really are so many humans yet to be born, it's very likely we would be one of them. Also, it's NOT 25 years. We've had approx 100 B people so far. If humanity is to exist and survive for MILLIONS of years, I find it very unlikely we'd be in such early development.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 7:41:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 9:38:26 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/18/2013 3:22:19 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Wouldn't that "probable" apply to every human being that ever lived and ever will live? So it's always going to be the middle and the end just keeps receding until the end comes and then you can just say, "Oh, I guess not"?

Yes, but the chances that you are at the end of all humans to live are very small regardless.

Every point on the line is equally probably, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that it's probably that one would be born near the middle. Everyone ever born was born smewhere on the total line, there is no basis to assume the probability of any particular birth being somewhere near the middle.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
sadolite
Posts: 8,836
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:23:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

Making the "assumption" it is probable, I would agree. But only on the "assumption" of probability
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 7:35:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Lol, you instigated a debate to promote this 'theory' but you lost (I think). This is a horrible 'theory' and it defies the laws of mathematics.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 8:16:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 7:35:23 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Lol, you instigated a debate to promote this 'theory' but you lost (I think). This is a horrible 'theory' and it defies the laws of mathematics.

How does it defy the laws of mathematics?
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2013 10:25:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/19/2013 8:16:09 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 2/19/2013 7:35:23 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Lol, you instigated a debate to promote this 'theory' but you lost (I think). This is a horrible 'theory' and it defies the laws of mathematics.

How does it defy the laws of mathematics?

I made up 'laws of mathematics.' Lol, but what I meant was, it makes no sense. While its EQUALLY probable that we are in the middle of the life of the human race, as its EQUALLY probably we are in the beginning, or end, or anywhere else. Your theory provides NO evidence to conclude that its MORE PROBABLE that we are in the middle of the life of the human race.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Cinco
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 5:08:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

If "space and time" are all at once, then everything's in the middle, isn't it? And, of course, if it's "infinite", then there's, pretty much, nothing but "middle".
If your time, to you,
Is worth savin',
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone.
For the times they are a-changin'. - Bob Dylan
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2013 7:08:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/23/2013 5:08:16 PM, Cinco wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

If "space and time" are all at once, then everything's in the middle, isn't it?

What do you mean, are you talking about block time, eternalism? If so, then no, everything isn't in the middle.

And, of course, if it's "infinite", then there's, pretty much, nothing but "middle".

Well it isn't infnite, can't be, Time had a begininning soand space has a shape, so they can't be infinite.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 11:15:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The problem with this is that is uses the same logic which, when one flips a coin and gets tails three times in a row, declares 'well, what were the chances of that?'. The chances of getting those results are the exactly same as the chances of getting any other set of result. Just like being the first human to ever exist, while it may appear to be unlikely, has the exact same probability as being any person currently in existence. The same idea applies to dice, or a deck of cards. If you roll two six-sided dice, your chances of rolling a seven are much higher than your chance of rolling a three, but each independent result is still exactly as likely as the rest. One is much more likely to be dealt a ten in blackjack with a fresh deck than any other number, but your odds of receiving each individual card is exactly the same.

To claim that your existence proves that you exist in the middle of human history because that is the most likely scenario is equivalent to claiming that if you are dealt a hand in blackjack (fresh deck), it will be a twenty, or that if you roll the dice, you will roll a seven. Anyone who has played dice or blackjack knows that these are not safe assumptions to make.

A further illustration of the coin flip:

Possible outcomes:
H T
12.5%: HHH 3 0
12.5%: HHT 2 1
12.5%: HTH 2 1
12.5%: HTT 1 2
12.5%: THH 2 1
12.5%: THT 1 2
12.5%: TTH 1 2
12.5%: TTT 0 3

3H 0T: 12.5%
2H 1T: 37.5%
1H 2T: 37.5%
0H 3T: 12.5%

So while your chance of getting each result in the first table is perfectly equal to the chance of getting each other possible result, your chance of falling into 2H 1T or 1H 2T categories in the second table are much higher. In the same way, while you are much likely to be born in the category which constitutes the middle of net human population, your chance of being born as any one person is completely equal to your chance of being born as any other person. To say that we can conclude that we are born in the middle of human history because it is the most likely circumstance is like saying that we can conclude that we are born Chinese because it's the most likely circumstance.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2013 11:23:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/24/2013 11:15:16 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
The problem with this is that is uses the same logic which, when one flips a coin and gets tails three times in a row, declares 'well, what were the chances of that?'. The chances of getting those results are the exactly same as the chances of getting any other set of result. Just like being the first human to ever exist, while it may appear to be unlikely, has the exact same probability as being any person currently in existence. The same idea applies to dice, or a deck of cards. If you roll two six-sided dice, your chances of rolling a seven are much higher than your chance of rolling a three, but each independent result is still exactly as likely as the rest. One is much more likely to be dealt a ten in blackjack with a fresh deck than any other number, but your odds of receiving each individual card is exactly the same.

To claim that your existence proves that you exist in the middle of human history because that is the most likely scenario is equivalent to claiming that if you are dealt a hand in blackjack (fresh deck), it will be a twenty, or that if you roll the dice, you will roll a seven. Anyone who has played dice or blackjack knows that these are not safe assumptions to make.

A further illustration of the coin flip:

Possible outcomes:
H T
12.5%: HHH 3 0
12.5%: HHT 2 1
12.5%: HTH 2 1
12.5%: HTT 1 2
12.5%: THH 2 1
12.5%: THT 1 2
12.5%: TTH 1 2
12.5%: TTT 0 3

3H 0T: 12.5%
2H 1T: 37.5%
1H 2T: 37.5%
0H 3T: 12.5%

So while your chance of getting each result in the first table is perfectly equal to the chance of getting each other possible result, your chance of falling into 2H 1T or 1H 2T categories in the second table are much higher. In the same way, while you are much likely to be born in the category which constitutes the middle of net human population, your chance of being born as any one person is completely equal to your chance of being born as any other person. To say that we can conclude that we are born in the middle of human history because it is the most likely circumstance is like saying that we can conclude that we are born Chinese because it's the most likely circumstance.

I completely understand what you're saying and even had the thought myself (apparently not mine, coined "Doomsday argument"). I understand that being born as the exact "Middle human to ever exist" is just as unlikely as being the first or the last, but this is besides the point.

"To say that we can conclude that we are born in the middle of human history because it is the most likely circumstance is like saying that we can conclude that we are born Chinese because it's the most likely circumstance."

If what I said gave you this interpretation, then I apologize because I did not mean to claim that humanity is necessarily half way through. I don't have the necessary time to fully explain, but you can read the wikepedia page on the topic "Doomsday argument." I don't actually know if it's correct, but it's pretty compelling.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 10:52:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

If you Google "doomsday paradox" you'll find two problems with that.

First, by that logic, everybody, regardless of when born, is presumed to have been born at the halfway point. Thus, the logic is self-refuting.

Second, since our population tends to grow exponentially, you should be concluding that we're near the end, not near the middle.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2013 6:01:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/25/2013 10:52:12 AM, wiploc wrote:
At 2/18/2013 12:41:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
It is probable that one would be born someone near the middle of all humans to exist. So, humanity is probably somewhere in the middle of its span.

If you Google "doomsday paradox" you'll find two problems with that.

First, by that logic, everybody, regardless of when born, is presumed to have been born at the halfway point. Thus, the logic is self-refuting.

Second, since our population tends to grow exponentially, you should be concluding that we're near the end, not near the middle.

"Second, since our population tends to grow exponentially, you should be concluding that we're near the end, not near the middle."

I said this already.

"First, by that logic, everybody, regardless of when born, is presumed to have been born at the halfway point. Thus, the logic is self-refuting. "

First off, no one is claiming humanity is exactly half way through. Second, I recognize the fact that anyone anywhere along the timeline of humanity could claim they were half way because it was the most like likely, but this doesn't make the argument false, because it's still very unlikely that one would be born in such a time to be so inaccurate (looking back).