What is "miraculous"?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The beauty of logic is that it eliminates the very kind of "fuzzy think" you complain about. For example, what is your analysis of the above example syllogism? How does it "drip through your fingers"? -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
That's the easy stuff, Tom. If such and such is so ... then ... so and so follows. All you have to do is round up "such and such".

[major]Premise: All animals are mortal.
[minor]Premise: Man is an animal.
Conclusion: Man is mortal.

Before the syllogism is complete one must define one's terms. What's an animal? What is mortality? Then you go round and round ... and everybody decides on his own where to get off. If everyone gets off in the same place then you can reason syllogistically. All elementary propositions will in fact "drip" ... including this one ... and this one ... and this one ...

You see me in the rearview mirror ... are you ahead ... or ... have you been lapped? Who decides? ;o)

[major]Premise: All animals are mortal.
[minor]Premise: Man is an animal.
Conclusion: Man is mortal.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by EBTX</i>
<br />Before the syllogism is complete one must define one's terms. What's an animal? What is mortality? Then you go round and round ... and everybody decides on his own where to get off. If everyone gets off in the same place then you can reason syllogistically. All elementary propositions will in fact "drip" ... including this one ... and this one ... and this one ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The beauty of logical syllogisms is that they are rigorous even without clear definitions. And that is how they help eliminate "fuzzy think", which otherwise has exactly the effect you mention -- You can go round and round forever, never getting any closer to your goal.

[major]Anyone who argues against logic is not being logical.
[minor][fill in name here] argues against logic.
[conclusion]obvious [] -|Tom|-

I assumed this thread was about infinite divisibility vs. the quantum and now you slipped into tthe smelly stuff again. Why is it so hard to stay on the subject without being distracted all the time? Just an observer making noise:)

Hello Jim,

Some of the participants have made statements that require clarification to be understood. So far they have been unable or unwilling to explain what they meant. Thus this little tangent.

I find it a little frustrating, too. But in the messy ole real world this often the path that progress takes.

It will eventually be worked out. In the meantime, if you treat it as a free, extra-credit learning experience it will probably be easier to take. Less smelly.



LB

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Why is it so hard to stay on the subject without being distracted all the time? Just an observer making noise:)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Skarp's last post seemed to end that discussion. Either miracles are going to be allowed into physics, in which case the whole universe can be explained as an "act of God" and we're done; or they are not, in which case Skarp's fundamental particles are not allowed.

Here are some examples of the miracles or magical properties he requires:

[tvf]: how do they differ from postulating a Supernatural Being?
[skarp]: It is entirely possible they don't differ all that much.

[tvf]: What density does the unit particle have?
[skarp]: A unit would have zero density.

[tvf]: will it be hollow? With what thickness of shell?
[skarp]: Not sure I would call it hollow if the shell has no thickness.

[tvf]: Can a unit particle come into or go out of existence?
[skarp]: Yes units can come into Existence all the time, and they do on a regular basis. It's part of the purpose of the universe.

[tvf]: Is there any sort of force associated with this particle?
[skarp]: I would hesitate to call it a force, more like a law.

[tvf]: Can the unit particle collide?
[skarp]: Any number of units can share the same point in space, but not the same space. Units can pass through one another, but not without effect.

[tvf]: With what speed would another particle rebound
[skarp]: All units move at C (no exceptions).
tvf: "move at C" with respect to what? Note that this requires an absolute space.

[skarp]: This is not a physical universe I am depicting, but a universe of thoughts, and those thoughts have form. These forms are made of nothing at all. It is the shape of these forms that determine the quality of your Existence. In this sense - The fundametal unit is logic undiluted.

tvf: I rest my case.

It was EBTX vs. TVF that I'm reading not Scarp. The infinite division and the quantum that is the draw for me.