@vuviper said:
@Jezer said:
No, I would have convinced you that when you said "I get to move first", you meant "I get to move second". Therefore, you would have moved second under your own rule and conception of what first means. And I would have actually moved first genuinely winning. That's me manipulating you to lose despite your own rules.
That's not violating the rules, that's exploiting temporal loopholes in them.
My point is that you think it's as cut and easy as I lose. However, I can point out ridiculous loopholes a person can still use to win. And I'm not omniscient. Think of how many they can think of.
I've already pointed out viable ways for him to win: If he knows how to use magic that works instantaneously without his own conscious activation of it. It's the reason why Strange can withstand a speedblitz - magic autoshields. It is completely possible that for you to beat a speedster without time, thought, or preparation - if they go to punch you and end up KOing themself.
Please tell me how it's impossible. The overall arching point is that you need to humble yourself, instead of assuming what you know about the world or even logic is true. Do you realize some physicist think the implications of Quantum Physics probability waves is that a subatomic particle can be two places at once, everywhere and nowhere at the same time, impossible contradictory stuff like that?
Which violates the only rule
No, because I did not move first. violating the only rule. Loopholes are ways around rules, you are simply breaking them.
But you haven't. And neither could an omniscient.
But the omniscient doesn't have magic unless he was given prep time to obtain magic through his omniscience. Like the gun example I used before, knowing how to gain magic or knowing how to use it doesn't spontaneously and instantly grant him magic. Magic may not even exist in this fight. since we weren't given information on if he's a real world human or a comic book human
It's impossible because any action and thought any response even on the cellular level takes time. Time someone like the Flash doesn't have to give him. I don't need to humble myself. I didn't read your baby post in it's entirety but I can guess at where you were going with it. Just because there is the possibility of concepts that are inconceivable to human's doesn't mean they exist. And they're existence isn't even something that would be hard to prove. Quantum mechanics is weird, maybe counter intuitive to some even, but I haven't seen anything that "impossible" yet.
1. No, it doesn't violate the rule. If you told me "Hey, lets play this game. The winner is the person who moves before the other. The only other rule is that I move first." Omniscient person using omniscient knowledge of psychology and hypnosis: "So, when you say "first" you mean "second" right?" You: "Yeah" Omniscient person: "Okay" *moves and wins* We are the ones who give words meaning. If I change your concept of what a word means, it doesn't mean that I've validated the rules of the words you used.
2. Wrong. The loophole here lies in convincing you that your game is trash, therefore you choose to not play it. Therefore winning by not having to play it.
3. But I have. But, hypothetically even if I hadn't, that wouldn't prove an omniscient couldn't. What you're saying only applies to knowing things that aren't logically possible. What you're trying to say is "Does an omniscient person know how to add 2 + 2 so that it equals 5?" That's the type of thing that it is impossible for an omniscient person to know, because it is logically impossible. (unless he is super omniscient i.e. truly omniscient) However, this doesn't apply to this battle. It's not logically impossible for the omniscient person to win given the parameters. And because its not logically impossible, he could theoretically think of a way we can never comprehend.
4. Incorrect, what if this magic is tied to information about the universe? What if he something he knows - like an equation - simply gives him this magic? Then he would automatically have this regardless of not prepping or not being a magician. Like my previous refutation to the gun example: omniscience may mean knowing that there's that gun strapped to your leg in the 10th dimension that you can pull out of nowhere.
"Magic may not even exist in this fight. since we weren't given information on if he's a real world human or a comic book human"
I think this sentence literally embodies the flaw in your reasoning. Like, this is the essence of your point of view. Here you're saying that magic may not even exist for him to use if he's a real world human? In other words, you're saying that because we don't know if magic exists in the real world(like it does in the comic book world), then if he's a real world human he doesn't even have access to magic. This is based on the assumption that because we don't know if magic exists, magic doesn't exist. This is severely flawed reasoning. Do you know why? Because even even if we haven't discovered magic or have any knowledge of magic, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist! That may just mean that we don't have the knowledge of magic, I mean we're beings of limited intelligence living in one tiny portion of the universe - we've probably only glazed the surface of total knowledge of the universe! You can't prove that magic doesn't exist in some form or another in the real world - you can only discover it and thus establish that it does exist. As a result: We can't prove that if Barack Obama was given omniscience right now, he wouldn't suddenly know magic. We can't prove that an omniscient person, fictional or real, wouldn't suddenly have knowledge giving him the use of magic just from that knowledge.
And, here's the coup de grace to this debate:
http://www.comicvine.com/max-faraday/29-51553/
http://www.comicvine.com/creation-equation/12-51564/
Max. Faraday. The Creation Equation. I don't know if you're familiar, but the story is that in his world there is an equation that grants those who possess it near-omnipotent power. Faraday accidentally downloads it to his computer, and after viewing the string of binary code, he gains near omnipotent power. Just by possessing the knowledge of it in his brain. Just by knowing it.
Story synopsis can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right:_The_Adventures_of_Max_Faraday
This demonstrates what I've been saying - knowledge that gives its users powers simply by having the knowledge. What if this omniscient person was in the Wildstorm Universe? He would automatically have that power as a result of being omniscient and knowing everything, including the Creation Equation.
My point is that: Do we know if this exists in the real world? Or in any given comic continuity? No, we don't. But Wildstorm has shown that its possible. So what if there's knowledge that also gives him magic or power that defends him without him having to consciously use it? What if its not magic but a new type of power, similar to how there are things like the Power Cosmic and Power Primordial that are power sources that randomly exist? The possibility exists. Therefore, we don't know if there's knowledge gained from omniscience that gives him an ability that will allow him to beat the speedster with no prep.
This brings me back to the number one rule or principle of science: You can't draw conclusions based on a lack of knowledge. You can't say that the omniscient person would lose because those powers don't exist in the universe OR that he would win because they do exist. We don't know either way. Therefore, at this point, we cant say the omniscient person loses. Which is essentially a stalemate. The reason the omniscient person wins is that at any point that we think of a viable method he can use to win, we have to acknowledge that he knows it as well, and therefore uses it to win. He wins because it is impossible to prove that he loses, but possible to prove that he wins.
5. Lol but magic that works on its own isn't limited by a human body, by the response time of motor neurons or action potential or anything. It's only limited by that if it has to be activated by the user. If it actively works without conscious use of the user, then it may not take any time at all. It may even just ignore time and space. And again, as my point has consistently been: The point isn't that they exist, the point is that we don't know that they don't exist. And its not only hard - its impossible - to prove that they don't exist[without consulting an omniscient ;)]
Quantum mechanics: Sooo, you don't think it's impossible for something to be moving and standing still at the same time? That's logically inconsistent and paradoxal. And quantum physicist have made it happen: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1258932/In-places-Strange-world-quantum-mechanics-shown-work-visible-world-time.html
Please explain to me how the concept of something being two contradictory things isn't impossible. How is that not impossible?
Log in to comment