Dream17:


One of my criticisms was that you said time wasn't a dimension; because time is a dimension in modern physics. Could you address that instead?

Dream17:

... and I think that's a subjective opinion of yours. Unevidenced nonetheless.

Surely, reality is not at all about "spirits", you have yet to demonstrate such a concept is even possible.

Dream17:

Well that's a very unfortunate remark that you've just made. I find your "finding" ridiculous, as will anyone with a rudimentary grasp of language, and access to any dictionary. In fact it's almost as naive a claim as it is dishonest. You either argue honestly and use the standard definitions that we are using or you continue to create a straw-man and argue from that position. I (and most atheists will agree here I'm sure) don't particularly care about your straw-man. We are the atheists, this is our definition. I don't need you to define my position. I'm also not impressed with the way you've completely ignored my request for evidence that connects any dimension with 'Spirituality."

Besides being a shoddy variant of the No True Scotsman fallacy, I have no real problem with this. We agree all babies, animals, rocks, and trees, lack a belief. However, It is not true that a rational mind can NOT lack a belief. The objective evidence suggests newborn babies don't start to form memories and therefore beliefs for several months after birth. But meanwhile, since you seem to think subjective anecdotal claims have merit, here is one for you: I know my earliest memories support this. So that's check and mate, by your own rationale.

Dream17:

We have no evidence that dogs believe in deities. There is no connection between a dog and belief in a deity until that connection can be evidenced. Do you understand the NULL HYPOTHESIS? If you are to assert a dog believes in a deity, you would have to provide evidence for the claim. If you make an assertion to the contrary, you would equally need to provide evidence that dogs no believe in deities. There is no evidence supporting the claim that dogs believe in gods, and all evidence seems to point to the contrary.

Dream17:

Same as above. We have no evidence of babies believing in gods. If you make the assertion, you need to provide evidence. We have no evidence that a baby has the ability to believe anything. On the other hand, we do have the Church. Any baby that is not baptized burns in hell. Now, I am not sure why babies are born in sin and separated from God until they are baptized. I think it's a rather silly idea, but it's their idea and not mine. According to religions, babies are born atheists and without belief. They need to be saved or they burn in hell.

Dream17:

Evidence please? I don't believe you.

Dream17:

Wrong. Atheists are not "rejecting a proposed thing". They are rejecting ARGUMENTS for the proposed "thing", which may or may not exist. The time to believe in the existence of anything is "AFTER" it has been demonstrated to be true. Theists have not met their burden of proof, ergo, there is no reason to believe their claims. Also, ignoring your bizarre attempts to tell me what I should think - which is an arrogant behavior that I've come to expect from a lot of Christians - your highlighted paragraph is a false dichotomy. One may lack a belief-thought choice, and one may also lack a belief without making any choice, this is self evidently true, since one cannot believe a claim that one has no conception of.

Dream17:

Ok. So then, you believe they're real?

So you do NOT in fact believe they are real then? So you do in fact LACK belief they are real then?

I'll give you a clue here: one can lack belief either because one has no comprehension of that belief, or because one has determined to withhold belief from any claim. You seriously need to look up "False Dichotomy" fallacies on Google.

TenQ:
Spatial dimensions are axes of space that we can move through like the x, y, and z axis that we can move through.

Let's go on a journey of dimensions by imagining a 3D space (as we are familiar with it).

Existence in Zero Dimension:
Zero Dimension is just an infinitesimally small point within a 3D space. A person within a zero Dimensional space is static and he would believe he's alone in the whole universe. Words like velocity, distance, Area, Volume or Space would be nonsensical to him.

Existence in One Dimension:
One Dimension is an assembly of infinitely large numbers of zero dimensions in a straight line. A person within a one dimensional space within a 3D space is unaware of the fact that he's in a 3D space. It is impossible for him to know if he's in the X or y or z directions as these are meaningless to him. Measurements of distance, speed make sense to him, however, he cannot comprehend the meaning of area or volume or space. You will find it difficult to convince him that it is possible to have a higher dimension than 1D.
A paradox:
even when he is seen from the 3D space as alined in x or y or xz directions, it is oblivious to him.

Existence in Two Dimensions:
A Two Dimensional space is an assembly of infinitely large numbers of one dimensions in a straight line stacked on upon the other. A person within a Two dimensional space within a 3D space is unaware of the fact that he's in a 3D space. It is impossible for him to know if he's in the xy or yz or xz planes as these are meaningless to him.
Measurements of area, displacement, velocity, volume, area density make sense to him, however, he cannot comprehend the meaning of area or volume or height. You will find it difficult to convince him that it is possible to have a higher dimension than 2D.
Paradox:
When an object is placed in a closed loop, he believes that it is scientifically impossible to bring out the object from within the loop without breaking the loop.
Of course, those of us who live within the 3D space will laugh at his folly. When such a feat is done before him by someone in the 3rd dimension, he concludes that it must be a miracle

Existence in Three Dimensions:
A Three Dimensional space is an assembly of infinitely large numbers of Two dimensions stacked on upon the other. A person within a Three dimensional space within a 4D space is unaware of the fact that he's in a 4D space. It is impossible for him to know if he's in the xyza or xyzb or xyzd volumes as these are meaningless to him.
Measurements of area or volume or height, displacement, velocity, volume, area density make sense to him, however, he cannot comprehend the meaning of anything outside the 3D.

Just as the person in the 1D or 2D space, You will find it difficult to convince him that it is possible to have a higher dimension than 3D.

Paradox:
When an object is placed in a closed volume, he believes that it is scientifically impossible to bring out the object from within the volume without breaking the volume.
Of course, those who live within the 4D space will laugh at his folly. When such a feat is done before him by someone in the 4th dimension, he concludes that it must be a miracle

Christians have always spoken about God, Angels, Demons and the Spiritual Realm which in this case is at dimensions higher than 3 dimensions. We cannot tell if their dimensions is the 4th or 5th or 6th....1000th.
Atheists understandably think that any dimension higher than 3D is a figment of imagination.

Note:
Time is NOT a dimension: time is a measure of intervals between events in 1D, 2D, 3D , 4D space


Question:
1. Is it reasonable to conclude unequivocally that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe?
2. What kind of experiments would you advise scientists in the 2D world conduct to prove the existence of the 3D space?
3. Let's assume that by some Stroke of massive intelligence, scientists in the 2D space have perfect scientific knowledge of their space, would this knowledge be adequate in the 3D space?
4. We know that a person in a higher dimension can interact with those in the lower dimensions: is the converse possible?

AfricaGalactic:


All what you wrote is garbage and not worth considering in the first place. How do I know this? Because there are two applicable facts that I'm aware of. Namely:

1. There is an entire branch of mathematics that deals with the behaviour of spaces with different numbers of dimensions. That branch of mathematics is called tensor analysis, and if you have not studied it, you have nothing to offer here.
2. Physicists have been applying tensor analysis (more correctly, the advanced variant known as the Ricci Calculus) to matters including the development of cosmological models.

So with respect to the foregoing points, unless you've spent a significant period of time participating in that research, no one here is obliged to take this thing serious.

AudioMonkey:

Same goes for you and your folks.
One day when y'all finally find that theist who came hitting the gspot, you'll always find a way to die another day.

TenQ:

I never said that time wasn't a dimension perhaps you can quote where i said that?
I wouldn't even make a statement like that!

Note:
Time is NOT a dimension: time is a measure of intervals between events in 1D, 2D, 3D , 4D space

TenQ:
You are just being emotional as you've said nothing
You want me to adopt a definition that lacks merit!? Sorry m!

If you check closely, we now dont know who a Man or a Woman is based on the illogical redefinition of words and terms.

There is something common and unique with all who have the capacity to lack a belief. They are intellectually weak!

No need for long essays: a dog or any other animal CANNOT believe or disbelief or have any kind of opinion about any diety.

It takes a total lack of opinion, knowledge and comprehension of a fact, idea or issue for a person to successfully lack a belief in anything.

Which is more appropriate to describe you?
Do you believe Corithaze is a Nigerian Professor of Engineering?
OR
Do you Lack a belief that Corithaze is a Nigerian Professor of Engineering?

It takes a total lack of opinion, knowledge and comprehension of a fact, idea or issue for a person to successfully lack a belief in anything.

Just look at how you truncated what I said just to create your strawman?

What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice based on reason to REJECT a proposed thing, fact, idea or issue in relation to deities.

HOWEVER, by reason I have come to an understanding that Superman and Spiderman are inventions by American Authors in comics and lately in movies for entertainment purposes all based on fiction.[/i]

Check this again:

What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice based on reason to REJECT a proposed thing, fact, idea or issue in relation to deities.[/i]

Do you lack a belief in deities because it was imposed on you or it was a personal choice you made?

Do you know any adult self proclaimed atheist who does not know that theists exist?

Dream17:


Lol, come on now. This is a bare faced lie you just told. Read here:

https://www.nairaland.com/7694450/philosophy-spatial-dimensions-spiritual-realm#123224891

I thought we were having an honest conversation. You've just cornered yourself with this cheap maneuver and I'm running out of benefits of doubts to give you. If you continue this way, I might just have to end this conversation.

kkins25:
God, is in a place called heaven, which of course has gates.

KnownUnknown:


I wonder who he is scared of.

Dream17:


I expect you to dress in a football jersey if you are going to play football. If you want to discuss a definition of atheism don't hide it in the pretext of another argument. Start a thread, give your definition, and see how it holds up. As long as you are using the term incorrectly, you are the one not having a conversation. You have created a straw man. No one needs to take that nonsense seriously.



Well if you checked closely, in the real world, you'd most likely get a slap in the face and a restraining order



So your lack of belief in mermaids is because you're intellectually weak? I'd find that more compelling if I thought you understood fully what a lack of belief is, but I am dubious that you do, in fact one might say I lack the belief that you do, as you are arguing that one cannot arrive at a lack of belief through reason and choice, which is frankly absurd. It is also a little early for you to be throwing ad hominem fallacies around don't you think?



So they would LACK such a belief then? Dear oh dear



I don't have a total lack of opinion, knowledge and comprehension, and I lack belief in any deity or deities making me an atheist, ipso facto your claim is absurdly wrong. I also don't think lack or absence of belief means what you think it does.



How does a cryptic name I don’t recognise evidence your obviously erroneous claim here?:




I didn't create anything. I asked for evidence of your claim.



They're not mutually exclusive, stop repeating yourself and read more carefully, atheism is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, even if one chooses not to hold such belief.



Ah. Of course. BEFORE you did your research you were CONVINCED of Superman and Spider-Man. You had to look behind the curtain in order to "form" your disbelief. I get it. Well done.



Does it arouse you listening to yourself talk?



Oooh. Shiny colours.

It is clear that you are out of your element and have nothing fresh to add to the topic. So, since you have succumbed to ad nauseam repetitions of unsupported subjective opinions, and YOU created this discussion, I am going to hold my belly while I point and laugh .



Irrelevant, since either way it would still be a lack of belief.



A very clumsy no true Scotsman fallacy there, do you think we won't notice the words "self proclaimed" in your fallacious representation? Just so you know, they would still lack belief in any deity or deities. No one has claimed a lack or absence of belief never involves choices or reasoning, only that it need not do so, and that even when it does atheism is still the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities. This is the common usage of the word. It also describes my atheism, which is the lack or absence of any belief in any deity or deities. The distinction is important as it has epistemological implications.

I note without any real surprise that you make no attempt to answer my request and provide evidence for your god?

Which is more appropriate to describe you?
Do you believe Corithaze is a Nigerian Professor of Engineering?
OR
Do you Lack a belief that Corithaze is a Nigerian Professor of Engineering?

I didn't create anything. I asked for evidence of your claim.

kkins25:
Let agree that God's dimension is incomprehensible. However, everything you're preaching here is against the teachings of the bible. God, time and time again, can be interacted with. Infact, Jesus claimed God can be known. "He who has seen me has seen the Father." In the Bible, God interacts with men, Men interact with God(See Jacob and the wrestle with God). God, is in a place called heaven, which of course has gates. God is spirit, Angels are spirit, Demons are spirit. The fact that God spirit, is different from angel spirit, and demon spirit, as well as Son spirit and Holyspirit spirit, tells us that God is confined to natural laws of the spirit world. Men can tell the difference between God, Son, Holy spirit, Angel, and Demon.

there is literally interactions between these entities and man all over the bible. So, how then can you say that man cannot comprehend higher dimensions? Moses saw the hand of God for fvcks sake!

TenQ:

I understand your feeling:
We can interact with God only when He comes down to our Level. Since He is higher than us, this is reasonable that in some cases we can interact with God on our physical level.

Example: A Person in 3D space can easily interact with observer's in 2D space who will see this person in 2D form

At the same time as Christians, we know that God made us also as spirit beings, in that respect, we can interact with God as "a Spirit"

kkins25:
so you see, your argument is self defeating.

TenQ:

If you had just paused to follow the development of the idea, you would have seen that it is you who lacks understanding.

1. If you are a personality in 3D, is it possible to interact with 2D observers in their 2D space? How would the 2D observers behold you

2. If you are a personality in 2D space, is it possible for you to interact with 3D observers in their 3D space? How would you, the 2D observers behold the 3D observer?


If you cannot correctly answer this question, no one can help your case!

kkins25:
is this a philosophical question or an empirical scientific one. they aren't mutually exclusive either

TenQ:

Does The Question appear like a physical science to you or as aspect of philosophy?

kkins25:
You're aaking me to imagine my self to be an amoeba and tell you how the amoeba can perceive the world. No amount of philosophy will solve the problem. The universe we live in is assumed to be 3D,because thats what our eyes permit. We don't fully understand the univeese, we barely know it. You want to use science that is not clearly understood to debunk the same science that exposed the concept of 3D etc to us? Are you normal? 😂

TenQ:

I understand your feeling:
We can interact with Leprechaun and Unicorn only when They come down to our Level from the Ultimo level. Since They are higher than us, this is reasonable that in some cases we can interact with L&U on our physical level.

Example: A Person in 4D space can easily interact with observer's in 3D space who will see this person in 3D form

At the same time as humans, we know that L&U made us also as essential beings, in that respect, we can interact with Them as "an Essence"

TenQ:

I understand your feeling:
We can interact with God only when He comes down to our Level. Since He is higher than us, this is reasonable that in some cases we can interact with God on our physical level.

Example: A Person in 3D space can easily interact with observer's in 2D space who will see this person in 2D form

At the same time as Christians, we know that God made us also as spirit beings, in that respect, we can interact with God as "a Spirit"

TenQ:
Being emotional doesn't help you out one bit.

I asked you a basic question

What is your response?

There is not one single Christian who says that God is a Physical Being and there exist no physical proof of God because He is not subject to the natural/physical laws. Since there exist no physical proof, then the ball is in your hands

I didn't create anything, therefore I ask you for evidence of your claim that NOTHING created everything?

It takes a total lack of opinion, knowledge and comprehension of a fact, idea or issue for a person to successfully lack a belief in anything.

What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice...

TenQ:


Even Animals can form a Belief!

TenQ:
a dog or any other animal CANNOT believe or disbelief or have any kind of opinion about any diety.

TenQ:

It must be a mistake:
Time is not a Spatial Dimension!
The emphasis was on spatial dimensions

AudioMonkey:


I agree with you to a good extent on this but how many are sincere with their deductions to start with?
You clearly deduced your doppelganger son who also ticks all other traits, by intuition is beyond any doubt your own son but being a skeptic, you still desired a DNA test for evidence/fact so you won't be living in fantasy but it only becomes something else if you reject him and all those right deductions, kicked him out and say he isn't your son just because you're yet to get a DNA evidence confirming it.

kkins25:
God, is in a place called heaven, which of course has gates.

TenQ:

Sorry!

I have been answering your questions endlessly, please respond!
I want to hear your OWN views: I'm all ears!

TenQ:



What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice based on reason to REJECT a proposed thing, fact, idea or issue in relation to deities.

KnownUnknown:


Or



Which one do y’all prefer? They both have the same amount of evidence.

TenQ:

I am tempted to call you a fool but I can't.

1. If a 3D Observer in a 3D space is within a 5D environment, will it see
a. Objects from the 4D space in 3D or 5D form?
b. Under what conditions would objects in 6D space completely invisible to this 3D Observer?