i don't understand. why would you delete such topics? does it not fit in your understand of the universe so you delete them? or are you so sure that the concept of the thought is wrong that you just instantly delete any mention of it? that's stupid, sorry but it is, feel free to delete my post or even ban my account if that makes you feel good, I am going else were.Dale said:Let's please stop the discussion about motion as an illusion. I have deleted several of the previous posts about it and will delete all subsequent posts about it.
On PF all posts must be consistent with the mainstream professional scientific literature. The claim that motion is an illusion is not.TheNerdyBushman said:why would you delete such topics?
That is certainly your prerogative. It is also the prerogative of our community of professional scientists to avoid sites where "motion is an illusion" type discussions are permitted. We are glad to have your involvement too, for as long as you choose.TheNerdyBushman said:im going else were.
The "motion as an illusion" objection is a philosophical argument that suggests that the perception of motion is actually an illusion created by our senses, and that motion does not truly exist in the physical world.
This objection challenges the commonly held belief that motion is a fundamental aspect of the physical world and instead proposes that it is merely a subjective experience created by our senses.
One of the main pieces of evidence for this objection is the phenomenon of the "stopped clock illusion", where a clock that is ticking appears to be still when observed through a rapidly moving train window. This suggests that our perception of motion is influenced by our surroundings and is not an objective reality.
Scientists often argue that while our perception of motion may be influenced by our senses and surroundings, there is still strong evidence for the existence of motion in the physical world. The laws of physics, such as Newton's laws of motion, provide a mathematical explanation for the movement of objects in space.
If the "motion as an illusion" objection is true, it could have significant implications for our understanding of reality. It would suggest that our perception of the world is not a direct representation of objective reality, and that our senses can deceive us. This could raise questions about the nature of reality and the reliability of our perceptions.