The main purpose of the human life is to be happy

Author: User_2006

Posts

Total: 64
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
..."I disagree, the main purpose in life is to have purpose."..

Only humans --via access to mind/intellect/concepts--- apply a "purpose" to Universe, or any of its parts.


 ..." Simply existing with no purpose in life in my view would  be the most dull and boring existence imaginable.  I would prefer death over a pointless purposeless  existence. Whats there to be happy about if you serve no purpose?"...

This above is anthropism.  I agree, that, there exists no conceptual  point of Universe's existence if there,  is no consciousness to  apply, or appreciate,  the conceptual point/purpose of any existence.

The strong anthropic principle fits in there somewhere, but been so long since I read about it. I think it is the occupied space Universe only exists, if a mind/intellect/concept accessing creature is there to observe it existence.  I dont believe that is the case.

However, Ive made clear in other threads, that, it may be that all that occupied space existent parts of Universe, --including the most complex humans,  -- may be encoded into some, if not all, black holes.  As black hole evaporate, that which is encoded inside  -on the event horizon---   is released/dissapated out into galaxies as radiation ---perhaps other just electro-mangetic ex plasma---  that carrys those patterns, that then coalesce into fermionic matter and subsequent molecular configurations.

All symmetry and asymmetry of Universe is dervied from two primary geometric patterns;

1} 4-fold symmetry, and,
.....includes 3-fold tetrahedral, 4-folds octahedrral, etc ex rhombahedral patterns......

3} 4-fold symmetry
...includes 5-fold icosahedral and pentagonal patterns,

and the most primary combination of the two above is the rhombic-tri-contahedron.  All of these abstracts with their abstract great circle associations, are the abstract axi of great complex { invesion-outversions } spiral tori, which great tori,

combine, overlap nad  interfere in a finite myriad set of patterns we observe as fermions, bosons, and,

what we do not directly observe, Gravity (  ) and Dark Energy )(.

What goes in --contractive Gravity  with ultimate black hole creation--   must come out  --expansive Dark Energy--.   Again and again and again, eternally.
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
Um ya, life is pointless without purpose.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
Um ya, that is correct, except for the point{s}/ purpose{s} humans  apply to life.

That biologic cells---and viri inside a biologic cell--- reproduce  is not a point/purpose,  rather it is an end resultant of cause and effect that is somewhat likened to karma.

All that exists is the end resultant of previous cause and effect.

What goes in must come out again, and again eternally.





zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Life might be either pointless or purposeful.....Because of either purpose or chance.....Jury's still out.


ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
> Point > and end point ><> Point > and end Point ><> Point eternally

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ ocean waves are resultant of wind

wind is resultant of daylight sun heating and sunless night cooling

 (  * * ) Purpose is to observe points, sort points , discover patterns of points and then, via access to metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts, apply the creative mind to reshape the points and end points in the direction we want them to travel.

Where humanity is today is a resultant of myriad of events to complex that know combination of computers can ever calculate.

What humanity thinks today, partially shapes { determines } where humanity may be 5, 20, 100, 500 years from now.

7 generations is approximately 140 years.  The resultants  --judgeand jury?---   has allowed humanity to make it this far with all of their ignorant bumblings to discover truth.  Finding truth, accepting truth and acting responsibility with truth is all part of a set of points, that, we make no gurranttees, because they are cause and effect points, not a judge and not a jury.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Exactly....Until the truth is found the Jury's out.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Z4, many truths have been discovered, well documented and applied.

  You will need to  specific what truth your refering to.  Life on Earth will go on after humans perish on Earth, is my best guess.

User_2006
User_2006's avatar
Debates: 50
Posts: 510
3
3
11
User_2006's avatar
User_2006
3
3
11
Fine, y'all go. What is the purpose of this anymore.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
A. I agree.

B. The truth of material existence/creation.

C. I agree.



The truth of human existence might be as an integral part of a universal system's progression. So with reference to Point C. We may well eventually become redundant, having exceeded our ability to influence material evolution further...Human life will perish on Earth when human life is no longer sustainable on Earth and the jury is also out on whether we will ever leave this solar system and colonise elsewhere.


So is happiness the main purpose of human life?.....I doubt it.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Leave this solar system.   Ha, I think you must have drunk the kool-aid.

Sure, if it is possible, then, who am I to say, humans wont discover and apply that possiblity technologically.  I wont be holding my breath, nor should you.

Meanwhile, reality points us in the direction of what we do see in front of our eyes, over population  ---see LINK below-- for the operating systems we have in place, and what those systems of operation are doing to the ecology that sustains humans on Earth.


How about a purpose being to survive our own stupidity, because humans are so bent on their individual independent freedom, they cannot grasp that cooperation is only way to attain survival and true happiness on Earth, with least amount of suffering to most people.







fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
Purpose of life: to fulfill the full measure of our creation: to become as God is, just as He was once like us. Eternal progression is the road we are on.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4

Flaw---"Purpose of life: to fulfill the full measure of our creation: to become as God is, just as He was once like us. Eternal progression is the road we are on."...


religous babble most likely from some bible fundamentalist. 

zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Population is population and if population becomes unsustainable then it will....  I would agree that our inability to override instinct and work collectively to limit population, does seem somewhat contrary to our assumed advanced levels of intelligence (stupid)....Though I would suggest that as the demands of technological/data, evolution/development become ever greater, then the demand on humanity to produce innovators becomes greater also....Out of a million people, how many possess the intellectual acuity necessary to move material/data development forwards?......Perhaps most of us are here simply to service the needs of the few, and the need for the the few.....That is to say, that most of us are expendable.

Maybe one day there will be only one intelligence that knows what is required, and perhaps that intelligence will be referred to as GOD.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
..."Maybe one day there will be only one intelligence that knows what is required, and perhaps that intelligence will be referred to as GOD."....

Dream on Z4

Free PDF  ..."The Intelligent Universe"......Fred Hoyle...LINK..



zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Hoyle's hypothesis fell down in the first paragraph I read.... That is to say all hypotheses including Hoyle's require faith in the impossible.

To explain the possible one must first explain the impossible.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
I couldnt read   any of it cause have sign in, so I have no idea what hypothesis your refering to. You brought intelligent God into conversation, and that Universe/God are synonyms ergo Hoyles book from 90's totally related to your comments.  I'm sure Hoyle had many hypotheses in his lifetime as well as many scientific theory.

Here is what is impossible, ---and it is so simple even you maybe will get it----, that, anything that would violate the finite set of cosmic laws/principles is impossible.

There can exist only five convex polyhedra of Universe.  The list is long of cosmic laws/principles is long.


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
As far as I have always seen it the only basic law that needs to be overcome, is something cannot be created form nothing.

 Intelligence but not as a material entity, for sure...But wherefrom is the initial intelligence source.

And I will have to pass on the "five convex polyhedra of universe".

And I would suggest that Cosmic Laws are only relative to post-cosmic creation.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
.."But wherefrom is the initial intelligence source."...

Huh? What are you talking about Z4?  Where do come across these ideas of a "initital intelligence source"?

I think you've dipped into the kool-aid again and/or been talking to the dead terrance mckenna. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Hoyle...Intelligent universe....Your link.

Intelligent universe is all well and good...but wherefrom came the original intelligence source....if Hoyle proposes one then he needs to explain the other....Simple logic.

Its what's referred to as starting at the beginning....Rather than after the beginning....Most if not all creation hypotheses start after the beginning. 
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
..."and perhaps that intelligence will be referred to as GOD."...

My reference of Hoyle followed your reference to God > intelligence. Get with the program z4.

..."Intelligent universe is all well and good...but wherefrom came the original intelligence source....if Hoyle proposes one then he needs to explain the other....Simple logic."...

Hoyle proposes one? Your the one proposing one.  Read your own words again #47

..."But wherefrom is the initial intelligence source."....

And here again, your proposing g some intitial source for intelleigence, when there is none.  When you want to stop playing mind games of denial, address what youve stated, and to which I responded.

.."Its what's referred to as starting at the beginning....Rather than after the beginning....Most if not all creation hypotheses start after the beginning. "..

There is no initial source of intelligence, irrespective of you claims Hoyle is saying so.   There is not initial source of our finite, occupied space Universe.  Your mind games are just that, mind games that avoid truth.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
So fully explain something from nothing without starting after the beginning.


I currently run with the idea of an oscillating universal sequence, in which intelligence/data is a key component. This also loosely addresses something-nothing-something as part of a sequence, but does not account for nothing-something.

As I see it, nothing-something has to be void of intelligence.....This has always been my argument.


Something-nothing -something fits nicely within the context of a finite universe, though I would question whether  this also implies that occupiable space is also finite. 
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
...."So fully explain something from nothing without starting after the beginning."....

You've never heard that from me and in fact you and others have clearly stated for last 30 years that  our finite, occupied space Universe { something } is eternally existent ergo the only perpetual motion machine.

Your above proposition, ---whether you agree with or not--- is irrational, illogical and lacks common sense.

..."I currently run with the idea of an oscillating universal sequence, in which intelligence/data is a key component. This also loosely addresses something-nothing-something as part of a sequence, but does not account for nothing-something."..

Osscillations between this phase of something and another phase of something { occupied space } is still eternally existent something { occupied space }

.."As I see it, nothing-something has to be void of intelligence.....This has always been my argument."...

Ive laid out very clearly for at least 10 years not, the three primary kinds of existence, in my Cosmic Trinity.

All else is just mental masturbating mind games.  Bubble-gum for the mind, sort of like a good fictional movie.

.."Something-nothing -something fits nicely within the context of a finite universe, though I would question whether  this also implies that occupiable space is also finite. "....

There exists the macro-infinite non-occupied space, that, embraces/surrounds our finite, occupied space Universe. All else is mental masturbating mind games.

When you actually have any mature adult, rational, logical common sense that adds to, or invalidates my Cosmic Trinity, please share.

You, nor anyone else has done so, nor will any every do so. Cosmic laws/principles/truths are eternal.

The closet we can come to something from nothing, is my symmetrical, ---ergo pure i.e. liken to concept---  four level/lines, that, when inside-outed define the asymmetrical, four level/lines, wherein we find basis for;

outer, positive shaped, mass-attractive Gravitational Space (  ) ---metaphysical-3 { spirit-3 }---,

inside the tube resultant reality, 0,3,6,9,12,15,18, etc sine-wave /\/\/\/ patterning ---3 kinds of electron,  3 kinds of neutrino, 18 kinds of quark etc----

inner mass-dispersive Dark Energy Space )( ---metaphysical-4 { spirit-4 }----.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So went from symmetrical /\/\/\/\ to symmetrical /\/\/\/ being  inside-the-tube reality resultant of (>*< ) i  (>*<  ) { vertical cross-section of a torus } and i as metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts being outside/beyond/meta, the occupied space torus.

Yes, truly metaphysical-2, non-occupied space is outside the composite set of tori as Universe, but for this example I only include metaphysical-1,  i



zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
So fully explain something from nothing ( in a language that idiots like me can comprehend), without starting after the beginning.

Your personal hypothesis is what it is and has probably perplexed people for the last thirty years.

And cosmic trinities abound, but are always based upon something.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
..."So fully explain something from nothing ( in a language that idiots like me can comprehend), without starting after the beginning."...

z4, your still playing immature mind games.

how many times do I have to repeat to you over the last year or more, that, You've never heard that from me and in fact you and others have clearly stated for last 30 years that  our finite, occupied space Universe { something } is eternally existent ergo the only perpetual motion machine.

Something { occupied space  } cannot come from nothing { true non-occupied space }.

PLease get off the drugs long enough to open your eyes, ears and mind to rational, logical common sense truths.

There is only one Cosmic Trinity by me and Ive attached various labels that seperates it from all others. Your closed/dens mindless ego prevents you from being able to make rational, logical common sense between various Cosmic Trinities.  Get off the drugs, your mind will work better.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,068
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Nope....That's because of your own ego based mind games.

Sometimes there are rare flashes of clarity.


Nonetheless, your hypothesis (if it is seriously meant ) starts after the beginning.....Which just won't do.


And as you can see I am still undecided....Troll, Nutcase or Genius?
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Something { occupied space  } cannot come from nothing { true non-occupied space }.

When you actually have any signifcantly relevant evidence, much less a proof that invalidates my given above please share.

You have no,t because, you do not have any.  Your ego based mind games have led you to false beliefs in immature irrational, illogical concepts.

My ego has led to absolute and relative truths based on observation, rational, logical common sense conclusions, some of which or intuitive/speculative.



189 days later

Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
Makes sense, thank you.
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,838
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
With all due respect nothing you said makes anything clear. LOL.  Don't quite know what the entire universe has to do with finding a reason to wake up in the morning.
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,198
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
....'Nothing from nothing leaves nothing, you got have something, if your going to be with me'.......song I heard on radio the other day

Universe comes with happiness, sadness and all degrees in between. i'm happy to have discovered the geometric princples of;

toroidal, positively curved Gravity (  )  in dieametric oppostion to,

toroidal, negatively curved Dark Energy )(, and the resultant of those two, and the resultant

inside the toroidal tube, sine-wave /\/\/\/\/\/\ patterned and associated physical/reality aka Observed Time

I'm happy with my discoveries, there trinary correlation to my Cosmic Trinity Outline.  Its trinary turtles al the way to the micro-bottom from the macro-top, of occupied Space Universe.

I'm happy that these discoveries are related to my geometric disoveries regarding prime number patterns in semi-linear 2D rows of four, semi-linear 2D rows of four when inside-outed, and with hexagonal pattern rows of prime only falling on  two radii, on each side of radii with no primes.

Gravity ( 1, 5-7, 11-13, 17-19, 23----25......etc ) ....peak of positive geodesic curvature

Observed Time /\/\/ 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18,....etc /\/\/\/ inside the toroidal tube

Dark Energy )(  2, 4, 8, 10, 14, 16, etc )( ...peak of negative geodesic curvature

If want to understand Universe, begin at the top of my Cosmic Trinity Outline, that, I was so happy to discover and pass on those in search of cosmic truths.
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ebuc
This isn't me disagreeing, this is me legitimately curious where you got those numbers? From my brief research I've learned that positvely and negatively curved shapes are typically what people use to describe the shape of the universe, so I can infer that you are speaking about the specific shapes of gravity and time? Furthermore you extrapolate based off of that shape to come to some conclusion? I am curious where you got your numbers from? Do you have an academic resource, did you do and publish the tests yourself? Are they common knowledge I haven't stumbled onto? I am skeptical of every claim until it's been demonstrated, so this isn't a case where I'm saying I don't believe it, but I'm not convinced yet either.