We’re used to accepting the most ridiculous things, eg. that an atom is mostly empty space, that a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time, that the Sun could jump out of the solar system without warning, that a sphere the size of a pea can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be reassembled to make a ball the size of the Sun, that society could just be a computer program generated by an artificial intelligence, that Hindus believed that the Earth was supported by four elephants on the back of a turtle, etc.

1) Is there anything so ridiculously impossible that nobody could believe it?

2) Is there anything so ridiculously impossible that I can’t prove (using crooked thinking techniques adapted from “straight and crooked thinking”) is possible?

I came across two yesterday. One person showed that the Moon was actually a seal, by drawing a seal face using craters. And another that global warming was generated by gravity.

mollwollfumble said:

We’re used to accepting the most ridiculous things, eg. that an atom is mostly empty space, that a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time, that the Sun could jump out of the solar system without warning, that a sphere the size of a pea can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be reassembled to make a ball the size of the Sun, that society could just be a computer program generated by an artificial intelligence, that Hindus believed that the Earth was supported by four elephants on the back of a turtle, etc.

1) Is there anything so ridiculously impossible that nobody could believe it?

2) Is there anything so ridiculously impossible that I can’t prove (using crooked thinking techniques adapted from “straight and crooked thinking”) is possible?

I came across two yesterday. One person showed that the Moon was actually a seal, by drawing a seal face using craters. And another that global warming was generated by gravity.

I mean, we really don’t prove anything, we just support or reject a theory.. with the understanding that current knowledge could change with further information that may reject a previously supported theory or demonstrate evidence which supports a theory that was previously rejected.

the mat sat on the cat

transition said:

the mat sat on the cat

The reader has the book upside down.

No and no.

Don’t underestimate the incredibly dumb things people believe either through social conditioning, lack of critical thought, distrust of authority, or the million other biases humans possess.

I can prove that this bloke hasn’t washed his hands recently.

eg. that an atom is mostly empty space,
Depending on what you mean by “empty space”,
either not accepted or not ridiculous.

that a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time,

Not accepted

that the Sun could jump out of the solar system without warning

Not accepted (for any realistic meaning of “could”)

, that a sphere the size of a pea can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be reassembled to make a ball the size of the Sun,

If talking about purely mathematical operations, not ridiculous, if talking about real physical operations, not accepted

that society could just be a computer program generated by an artificial intelligence
Not accepted, although the statement could probably be modified to be not ridiculous

, that Hindus believed that the Earth was supported by four elephants on the back of a turtle, etc.

I don’t know what Hindus believed or still believe, in the sense that they think it is or was physical reality, but if some did or do believe that it is not ridiculous to accept that they believe(d) it. Some people do accept ridiculous things (that is things that seem ridiculous to me).

On the other hand, I do accept that almost everyone is too ready to accept the statements of their accepted authority figures.

The Rev Dodgson said:

eg. that an atom is mostly empty space,
Depending on what you mean by “empty space”,
either not accepted or not ridiculous.

that a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time,

Not accepted

that the Sun could jump out of the solar system without warning

Not accepted (for any realistic meaning of “could”)

, that a sphere the size of a pea can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be reassembled to make a ball the size of the Sun,

If talking about purely mathematical operations, not ridiculous, if talking about real physical operations, not accepted

that society could just be a computer program generated by an artificial intelligence
Not accepted, although the statement could probably be modified to be not ridiculous

, that Hindus believed that the Earth was supported by four elephants on the back of a turtle, etc.

I don’t know what Hindus believed or still believe, in the sense that they think it is or was physical reality, but if some did or do believe that it is not ridiculous to accept that they believe(d) it. Some people do accept ridiculous things (that is things that seem ridiculous to me).

:)

The Rev Dodgson said:

On the other hand, I do accept that almost everyone is too ready to accept the statements of their accepted authority figures.

The Lord is thy shepherd.

>>>, that a sphere the size of a pea can be cut into a finite number of pieces that can be reassembled to make a ball the size of the Sun,

Wasn’t the universe the size of a pea of a brief period of time ?

Morning, its wet outside again, heading for 15° with showers.

wong fred

Can prove be proved by validation ?

Can you prove to a blind person that the sky is blue?

Tau.Neutrino said:

Can prove be proved by validation ?

Sure.

Juste show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

Divine Angel said:

Can you prove to a blind person that the sky is blue?

The sky isn’t blue to a blind person.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Can prove be proved by validation ?

Sure.

Juste show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

1 + 1 = 2

The Rev Dodgson said:

Divine Angel said:

Can you prove to a blind person that the sky is blue?

The sky isn’t blue to a blind person.

Can you prove there is a sky?

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Can prove be proved by validation ?

Sure.

Juste show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

1 + 1 = 2

Does it?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Sure.

Juste show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

1 + 1 = 2

Does it?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Sure.

Juste show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

1 + 1 = 2

Does it?

A formal proof that 1+1=2

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

1 + 1 = 2

Does it?

A formal proof that 1+1=2

Now show me the fomal proof that that formal proof is correct and I will gladly accept it.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Does it?

A formal proof that 1+1=2

Now show me the fomal proof that that formal proof is correct and I will gladly accept it.

Runs away.

This discussion reminds of why (many years ago) I adopted the name of Mr Dodgson in the first place.

“…
Because it follows logically from them. If A and B and C are true, Z must be true. You don’t dispute that, I imagine?

If A and B and C are true, Z must be true, the Tortoise thoughtfully repeated. That’s another Hypothetical, isn’t it? And, if I failed to see its truth, I might accept A and B and C, and still not accept Z, mightn’t I?

You might, the candid hero admitted; though such obtuseness would certainly be phenomenal. Still, the event is possible. So I must ask you to grant one more Hypothetical.

Very good. I’m quite willing to grant it, as soon as you’ve written it down. We will call it
(D) If A and B and C are true, Z must be true.
Have you entered that in your notebook?

I have! Achilles joyfully exclaimed, as he ran the pencil into its sheath. And at last we’ve got to the end of this ideal race-course! Now that you accept A and B and C and D, of course you accept Z.

Do I? said the Tortoise innocently. Let’s make that quite clear. I accept A and B and C and D. Suppose I still refused to accept Z?

Then Logic would take you by the throat, and force you to do it! Achilles triumphantly replied. Logic would tell you, You ca’n‘t help yourself. Now that you’ve accepted A and B and C and D, you must accept Z! So you’ve no choice, you see.

Whatever Logic is good enough to tell me is worth writing down, said the Tortoise. So enter it in your note-book, please. We will call it
(E) If A and B and C and D are true, Z must be true. Until I’ve granted that, of course I needn’t grant Z. So it’s quite a necessary step, you see? (¶ 38)

I see, said Achilles; and there was a touch of sadness in his tone.”

Full text of the sad tale of Achilles and the Tortoise

He also wrote, in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, that one should endeavour to believe up to 6 impossible things before breakfast!

(Which is much easier if you have breakfast at midday…) 655\

The Rev Dodgson said:

Divine Angel said:

Can you prove to a blind person that the sky is blue?

The sky isn’t blue to a blind person.

I just looked outside and it’s grey

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

On the other hand, I do accept that almost everyone is too ready to accept the statements of their accepted authority figures.

The Lord is thy shepherd.

Oh, good one!

I showed recently that this is a misquote. The word mistranslated “shepherd” was actually the word “evil”, the Hebrew for the two words is very similar.

So it’s really “The Lord is thy evil”.

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

On the other hand, I do accept that almost everyone is too ready to accept the statements of their accepted authority figures.

The Lord is thy shepherd.

Oh, good one!

I showed recently that this is a misquote. The word mistranslated “shepherd” was actually the word “evil”, the Hebrew for the two words is very similar.

So it’s really “The Lord is thy evil”.

Yeah, there was a big punch up over that at one of PeterT Ministries Bible study classes.
They had to call the police.

Took the pizza out of the plastic.
Very nice it was too, Margherita but I put some salami slices on it as well.

Divine Angel said:

Can you prove to a blind person that the sky is blue?

From Newton’s spectrum and Rayleigh scattering, yes.

Rayleigh scattering means that the shorter wavelengths are scattered by nitrogen molecules more than longer wavelengths. And the shorter wavelengths of visible light are blue. The full argument is longer than that, but yes.

On the other hand, I can also prove that the sky isn’t blue.

The dichotomy is that theory says that the sky is blue, but actual observations says that it often isn’t.

Tau.Neutrino said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Can prove be proved by validation ?

Sure.

Just show me the validation for the validation and I will accept that it is a proof of the proof.

1 + 1 = 2

That’s a very easy one. All I need to do is consult Google calculator.

I can also prove that 1 = 2, using suitable crooked thinking.

The Rev Dodgson said:

This discussion reminds of why (many years ago) I adopted the name of Mr Dodgson in the first place.

“…
Because it follows logically from them. If A and B and C are true, Z must be true. You don’t dispute that, I imagine?

If A and B and C are true, Z must be true, the Tortoise thoughtfully repeated. That’s another Hypothetical, isn’t it? And, if I failed to see its truth, I might accept A and B and C, and still not accept Z, mightn’t I?

You might, the candid hero admitted; though such obtuseness would certainly be phenomenal. Still, the event is possible. So I must ask you to grant one more Hypothetical.

Very good. I’m quite willing to grant it, as soon as you’ve written it down. We will call it
(D) If A and B and C are true, Z must be true.
Have you entered that in your notebook?

I have! Achilles joyfully exclaimed, as he ran the pencil into its sheath. And at last we’ve got to the end of this ideal race-course! Now that you accept A and B and C and D, of course you accept Z.

Do I? said the Tortoise innocently. Let’s make that quite clear. I accept A and B and C and D. Suppose I still refused to accept Z?

Then Logic would take you by the throat, and force you to do it! Achilles triumphantly replied. Logic would tell you, You can’t help yourself. Now that you’ve accepted A and B and C and D, you must accept Z! So you’ve no choice, you see.

Whatever Logic is good enough to tell me is worth writing down, said the Tortoise. So enter it in your note-book, please. We will call it (E) If A and B and C and D are true, Z must be true. Until I’ve granted that, of course I needn’t grant Z. So it’s quite a necessary step, you see?

I see, said Achilles; and there was a touch of sadness in his tone.”

Full text of the sad tale of Achilles and the Tortoise

Nice one. Reminds me of the logic found in old parliamentary debates. It was used, for instance in the infamous “axis of evil” speech. Give A, B and C, the axis of evil speech concludes that Z is true, that the USA must invade Iraq, when neither A, B or C have any connection to Iraq.