What is possible and what is not

[A Schnitzel]

Impossibility is when something can't fit into a logical framework.

For example:
A triangles angles can't add up to 185 degrees under euclidean geometry.

Since euclidean geometry is a closed mathematical system, one can prove whether something is actually possible from it just by seeing if a statement follows from its the systems axioms.

All evidence points to the universe also having an axiomatic system that it is based on. Since humans probably will never get the universe completely figured out, deciding whether or not something is possible can be guessed to an unknowable (but high) accuracy. Possibility shouldn't be confused with scientific probability. If anything is scientifically probable, it is also possible.

For example, one could say "is it possible for time to suddenly reverse on all of us randomly?" The scientific answer would be no, because it violates many scientific laws, especially causality. Is it actually possible? Probably not. To see evidence that it is possible one would either have to see physical evidence of a similar event happening or see evidence that some of the theories that it violates are wrong. Since there is no evidence of time suddenly reversing (either through direct evidence or induction through axioms) and we also have an incomplete picture of the universe, it is not possible to conclude on its actual possibility.

 

[yenom]

is it possible for time to suddenly reverse on all of us randomly?[

Laws of physics violation.


The biggest limitation is death. followed by fear of failure. After that, anything can be defied, given unlimited time.

Then again the human brain itself can also be the biggest limitation.

Some say a lack of money is a limitation, but money itself is generated by human power.

But what if laws of physics are not the ultimate laws? How could we be sure that there is nothing deeper?

This is a matter of human perception. Human perception is flawed so the law of physics is not absolute.

 

[527468]

checklist:
- anything can be possible
- anything can be a possibility
- anything can not be possible
- anything is possibly not possible
- anything is not possible

all thoughts of possibility have thought to have been possible
possibilities are thought to be all thoughts of possibility
impossibilities are thought to be some thoughts of possibility
impossibilities are thought to be possible
possibilities are thought to be impossible

What's imaginable is likely possible. What is not imagined is for sure "impossible".

a nickel in the hay is worth more than a nickel in the bank
truth overrides possibility
limited minds live limited lives

 

[Gauche]

Impossibility is when something can't fit into a logical framework.

For example:
A triangles angles can't add up to 185 degrees under euclidean geometry.

Since euclidean geometry is a closed mathematical system, one can prove whether something is actually possible from it just by seeing if a statement follows from its the systems axioms.

All evidence points to the universe also having an axiomatic system that it is based on. Since humans probably will never get the universe completely figured out, deciding whether or not something is possible can be guessed to an unknowable (but high) accuracy. Possibility shouldn't be confused with scientific probability. If anything is scientifically probable, it is also possible.

For example, one could say "is it possible for time to suddenly reverse on all of us randomly?" The scientific answer would be no, because it violates many scientific laws, especially causality. Is it actually possible? Probably not. To see evidence that it is possible one would either have to see physical evidence of a similar event happening or see evidence that some of the theories that it violates are wrong. Since there is no evidence of time suddenly reversing (either through direct evidence or induction through axioms) and we also have an incomplete picture of the universe, it is not possible to conclude on its actual possibility.

Throw away that shackles of logic

lol

 

[Jack Flak]

It's possible that I cared about questions like this when I was 14. It is not possible that I care now.

 

[527468]

It's possible that I cared about questions like this when I was 14. It is not possible that I care now.

Been there, done that, hmm?

 

[wildcat]

Say where are your boundaries between what is possible and what is impossible.

Take it both subjectively (for me personally) and objectively (at all)

Is there a boundary beyond interest?
No.

The boundary is interest.

 

[yenom]

It's possible that I cared about questions like this when I was 14. It is not possible that I care now.

I would take what you say seriously if you are a multibillionare like Bill Gates.

A person who shows no interest in the limitations of human power is either an idealist who is lives in his own head or a person who does not care about achieving the impossible and wants to be part of the norm.

 

[Trovador]

Impossibility is when something can't fit into a logical framework.

For example:
A triangles angles can't add up to 185 degrees under euclidean geometry.

Since euclidean geometry is a closed mathematical system, one can prove whether something is actually possible from it just by seeing if a statement follows from its the systems axioms.

All evidence points to the universe also having an axiomatic system that it is based on. Since humans probably will never get the universe completely figured out, deciding whether or not something is possible can be guessed to an unknowable (but high) accuracy. Possibility shouldn't be confused with scientific probability. If anything is scientifically probable, it is also possible.

For example, one could say "is it possible for time to suddenly reverse on all of us randomly?" The scientific answer would be no, because it violates many scientific laws, especially causality. Is it actually possible? Probably not. To see evidence that it is possible one would either have to see physical evidence of a similar event happening or see evidence that some of the theories that it violates are wrong. Since there is no evidence of time suddenly reversing (either through direct evidence or induction through axioms) and we also have an incomplete picture of the universe, it is not possible to conclude on its actual possibility.

I agree completely. It's possible to define "impossible" in closed universes, and Math is the biggest example. There's no way to get a 7 by choosing a random number from {2, 3, 4}. It is impossible in this system (may be possible in others, but not in this one). I like this argument specially to prove to random relativists that "not everything is possible". It's quite fun, oh it is.

In the "real universe", a lot of things can be possible, and probably are, but being possible do not have any difference from being impossible due to its improbability. I mean, it's possible to suddenly all the particles of my monitor go up(suppose that other paticles will go down due to conservation of momentum), and the whole thing starts to fly. It is possible, physically. It's just not probably to happen. And there's no problem in having possible things that work as if they were impossible, at least IMO.

Finally, to exist or to be possible can be fairly indiferent. Remind the "there is a dragon in my garage" argument. It's possible to exist a dragon in my garage, that is invisible, without physical body and that does not interfere in the reality at all. The point is that his existence, or possibility, does not differ from his non existence. I can accept this kind of situation without problems but, if its existance or nonexistence is indifferent for reality, I'll opt that it does not exist to get the things easier, if the main interest is the Reality. If it's not, arguing about this is rather unconclusive.