Vagrant Lustoid 2

1. So your entire theory has been entirely invalid from the start, and as such should not have been raised in serious discussion without proper supporting evidence. You just collapsed your whole argument that it's even a possibility. Without falsifiability something is not a possibility.

2. God isn't verifiable through science. He is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, yet also intangible and immesurable. I'd say that's pretty unfalsifiable. And I apply the term God as in almost every religion ever made. Except hokey ones like Scientology. The central tenant of religion is that your main aspect be unfalsifiable, so that no matter the argument you can weather it through simple faith.

How many times must I say it? The adage is simple: When dealing with the unknown, you can only apply the known.

That's the core of the argument. You have the burden of proof for your IPD, you cannot provide it and so it cannot be accepted as a reasonable argument or theory. it doesn't even have to be necessarily proof, as long as it is falsifiable. And you're not providing that. So no, in the technical sense, it's not even a possibility.

ANB

AGAIN (4 both of u):

Quote:

I don't mean to be a prick... ...but I already admitted that it's only a possibility several pages back. The math is irrefutable

The possibility is in the manga. It's STILL THERE

And my purpose:

__________________

Vagrant Lustoid 2

But you're not admitting that it's NOT A POSSIBLITY. You've provided a logically invalid argument and an unfalsifiable hypothesis, and as such it's not a possiblity. What you've provided is simultaneously true and untrue, and unprovable in either aspect. Even if the math is sound the logic is not.

Hence, it's not a possiblity and is worthless.

__________________

ANB

Your last sentence is laughable.

And why should I admit that it's "not possible"...? You trying to bring up that faulty eye thing again...? If it's both "possible" and "not possible" then we are talking about a concept that cannot be talked about: It does not exist in reality OR ficiton! Brilliant!

OOC: If you think I'm acting childish then you have sunk very, very low with that sig of yours. If you can't take the heat, get off the court.

__________________

Chibi Mystic Gohan

Ears do not work the same way eyes do, you know.

__________________


"Words don't exist so that we can tell the truth; they exist so that we can conceal the truth"
- ZOMBIEPOWDER. Volume 02

Vagrant Lustoid 2

I selected the sig because that's how I intend to argue all my arguments from now on, mainly. Through attacking logic rather than the facts. I quoted directly from you for simplicity in my sig, since I still had one of your quotes in copy-paste, but I've since removed that, because I didn't actually intend to portray you as such. I can see how you'd think the argument you've provided might work, and can't blame you for that. Logic is a tricky business, and if I hadn't learned the academic method of arguing and debate, I'd probably fall into a similar trap. And no, I'm not just quoting credentials. If a chemist walked into an argument about mixing a compound and said "This is the way it works, this is how it doesn't" you'd be inclined to accept that. I've done a full year of study on logic, debating and arguing for the express purpose of analysing political, economical and scientific theories and debates, so I'd say I'm a reasonable judge of whether an argument is logically valid or not. I've already fixed my sig, and apologise for the brief appearance of your name in the sig.

The reason you must accept it as not possible is because it is not logically possible. Logic and maths, though interrelated, are not the same thing. Though mathematically possible, your statement is unfalsifiable, thus logically impossible, and thus unfit for proper argument and debate. That's as simple as I can make it for you.

Also, this has nothing to do with eyes now. I'm arguing the invalidity of the argument through unfalsifiability. The eyes are a biological argument, and since you won't accept the biology, I've swapped to the underlying logic of your argument, which is a far more effective way to argue and hence why I've decided I'll argue that way in the future.

__________________

ANB

__________________

Madness

Actually, I think that his sig is pretty lolsome

__________________

Chibi Mystic Gohan

Yay, it's a possibility! That's as far as you can go with it. It's not a fact, it's a theory.

__________________


"Words don't exist so that we can tell the truth; they exist so that we can conceal the truth"
- ZOMBIEPOWDER. Volume 02

Vagrant Lustoid 2

And I'm arguing that it's not even a possiblity, logically speaking. But it's 2am, so I'm going to go to bed soonish.

ANB, the point of my arguing by this point isn't to show that your theory is absolutely wrong (since with further evidence that currently remains unknown it could become a possibility), rather, I was hoping that you'd pick up that it's a logically invalid argument thanks to unfalsifiablity, and refrain from using them in the future. I dunno, guess my way of forceful education doesn't really work, huh? Sorry bout that, but I stand by my point, it's a logically invalid argument and is thus not a possibility.

__________________

ANB

And the thought that matter cannot travel beyond the speed of light is a "theory". Scientists love to treat their inconclusive findings as "facts". Do we have machines that can even travel AT the speed of light...? No, so how do they "know"...?

I said over 9,000 times I admit it's a possibility. You wouldn't even admit that so you are at no less fault than me. Quit trollin.

You have to understand that sometimes It doesn't matter if it makes sense. The math shows the possibility. If you honestly can't even consider it when the manga and math alludes to such then you shouldn't be reading DBZ. No, I'm dead serious, you need to get your mind together. Go take a nap, I'm not going to wrap my brain around "double-think".

__________________

Vagrant Lustoid 2

Scientists treat inconclusive findings as facts because they will never, ever have 100% confirmation of any "fact". There's always the miniscule scientific possibility of it being disproven somewhere, but since that is such a miniscule possibility for many things, it's simply not worth arguing for. Once again: the unknown can only be argued using the known.

If it happened to be stated in the manga, I would accept it, and that'd be taht. but since it's not, I can only rely on what we know about our own world in application to theirs, and also on the fact that your argument contains logical fallacies that have nothing to do with the math. Those logical fallacies transcend maths and whether something is fictional or not, because the same logical systems apply everywhere.

I accept that mathematically it becomes possible, but I do not accept that that makes the theory itself possible thanks to biological and more importantly logical impossibilities within your argument.

For a theory to be possible, it can't have even one impossible factor in it, because impossibility is an overriding master status. Which means your theory needs to be at least mathematically, biologically and logically possible to actually be considered possible.

To clarify, I give no doublespeak. Your statement is: Gotenks may or may not be able to surpass lightspeed. This is a statement that is obviously always going to be true, since it encompasses both aspects of a situation that only has 2 options. This is why it is both impossible and possible at the same time. In fact, it is impossible but certain at the same time. It's impossible for you to take both parts of the statement as seperate parts and for them both to be true, but the statement as a whole is certain to be true. That's why your argument lacks falsifiability and is logically invalid and as such isn't actually a possibility. I cannot put it any plainer than that.

Since we know at least one of those factors is currently deemed as impossible, the theory is also currently impossible. Kudos on the maths, but they're only a part of a bigger whole.

__________________

ANB

How about this:

-Muten Roshi could catch bullets
-He moved fast enough to evade human eye-sight

He is likely as fast as the speed of sound (700mph). Now, Vegeta told Zarbon that he "looked like he was standing still" (official viz translation betch) and the difference between their power-levels was 1.09 (I'll round it to 1.1 for simplicity's sake).

-Therefore, a difference of 1.09x is enough to be much faster than someone.
-It is also a sufficient gap in power although nothing baffling.

Let's say, if Roshi's power-level is 139 (fact) and his speed is 700 mph then what of someone 1.09x stronger...? Wouldn't their power-level be 278 and their speed consequently 1,400 mph...

Do you know where I'm going with this? Eventually, they would exceed the speed of light!

No, the fact it's theoretically possible means it IS possible regardless of the scientist's assumptions about the limits of speed. Again: Sometimes it doesn't matter if it doesn't make sense. The math and evidence speaks for themselves and again: This manga has defied several scientific facts. That can no longer be used as a counter-arguement for "why".

To believe it is possible while at the same time it is impossible is double-think. I think the terms you're looking for are "almost-impossible".

__________________

Final Ultima

LOL, I find it very freakin funny how many members in this thread try with all their might to apply heavy physics to a children's comic book yet DISREGARD a simple statement from a character.

Madness

So, Noobimus Prime, which character stated that they could exceed the speed of sound?

__________________