Why do some ppl say "Nothing is impossible, just improbable"?

There are a lot of things that are not possible. Like survining a nuclear bomb at ground zero.

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

GabuEx

Because most of the people do not take these sayings literally, but rather take what they actually mean.funsohng

Because it's true.....Just because something is extremely unlikely to happen doesn't mean it wont.

[QUOTE="funsohng"]Because most of the people do not take these sayings literally, but rather take what they actually mean.DudeNtheRoom

Because most things in life that seem impossible are really technically possible, but the chances are like 1 out of a billion. I mean... surviving a nuclear blast at ground zero? If you were inside a castle or bunker or something, and you were in the bathroom and there were no windows and the walls were made from materials shipped in from China (increased lead content to resist radiation) and then the bomb went off over you, then you might survive. So next time you're afraid of nuclear war, go eat a sack-o-ten in the bathroom of a White Castle that was built by a discount construction company.

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

GabuEx

It's impossible to create a machine that works at 100% efficiency.

That is, to create a machine in which the energy put into the machine is less than the energy generated by the machine.

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"][QUOTE="funsohng"]Because most of the people do not take these sayings literally, but rather take what they actually mean.jeremiah06

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

MrGeezer

It's impossible to create a machine that works at 100% efficiency.

That is, to create a machine in which the energy put into the machine is less than the energy generated by the machine.

Assuming the absolute correctness of the second law of thermodynamics, yes. Without that assumption, not necessarily. In order for something to be correctly declared impossible, that which would create a contradiction if paired with it must first be taken as an assumed premise. As such, when one is talking about impossibility, one first needs to cover (if one is being logically rigorous) what one is assuming to be true about the world.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

It's impossible to create a machine that works at 100% efficiency.

That is, to create a machine in which the energy put into the machine is less than the energy generated by the machine.

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"][QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"] it actually means what it says. I don't think theres any other way of looking at it.DudeNtheRoom

If this individual had a latent genetic defect that caused his neck to instantly clot and scab over and caused a secondary nervous system sufficient for motor operation of a body to develop elsewhere in his body, then yes. Is this probable? No; however, one would need to illustrate how this suggestion would necessarily lead to an internal contradiction within the universe in order to declare it impossible.

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"][QUOTE="jeremiah06"] Gabu gave the best answer...GabuEx

If this individual had a latent genetic defect that caused his neck to instantly cauterize and caused a secondary nervous system sufficient for motor operation of a body to develop elsewhere in his body, then yes. Is this probable? No; however, one would need to illustrate how this suggestion would necessarily lead to an internal contradiction within the universe in order to declare it impossible.

It's possible that all the water molecules on Earth could spontaneously explode tommorow and blow up the earth due to something in chemistry/physics we haven't figured out yet. But it's highly improbable because of what we do know.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

jeremiah06

It's possible that all the water molecules on Earth could spontaneously explode tommorow and blow up the earth due to something in chemistry/physics we haven't figured out yet. But it's highly improbable because of what we do know.

poseidonwest

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"] So if I took an axe....which is in our world. Then decapitated someone and left thier head and bodies 100 yds aparat for 2 weeks, is it possible to say that the body can then act on its own?DudeNtheRoom

If this individual had a latent genetic defect that caused his neck to instantly cauterize and caused a secondary nervous system sufficient for motor operation of a body to develop elsewhere in his body, then yes. Is this probable? No; however, one would need to illustrate how this suggestion would necessarily lead to an internal contradiction within the universe in order to declare it impossible.

You did not even acknowledge the hypothetical, and proceeded as though I had not presented it at all. The hypothetical is that the individual in question has a genetic defect that causes his neck to scabs over and stop the bleeding instantly, and which resulted in the development of a secondary central nervous system elsewhere in his body that was sufficient to operate basic motor functions in the body. This would enable the individual's head to be separated from the body and yet still allow the body to function. In order to assert that this is impossible, it is incumbent on you to show the way in which this would create a necessary contradiction within the universe.

It's impossible for a fire-breathing hobbit straight out of Middle-earth to use Jedi powers to create a waterfall made of exploding diapers and candy canes that flows into Jerusalem on Valentine's Day. Explain that one, Gabu. Inb4 use drugs Inb4 overused gif Inb4 pics (probably not applicable)-Tish-

Not only is that not impossible, it's awesome to boot.

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

If this individual had a latent genetic defect that caused his neck to instantly cauterize and caused a secondary nervous system sufficient for motor operation of a body to develop elsewhere in his body, then yes. Is this probable? No; however, one would need to illustrate how this suggestion would necessarily lead to an internal contradiction within the universe in order to declare it impossible.

You did not even acknowledge the hypothetical, and proceeded as though I had not presented it at all. The hypothetical is that the individual in question has a genetic defect that causes his neck to scabs over and stop the bleeding instantly, and which resulted in the development of a secondary central nervous system elsewhere in his body that was sufficient to operate basic motor functions in the body. This would enable the individual's head to be separated from the body and yet still allow the body to function. In order to assert that this is impossible, it is incumbent on you to show the way in which this would create a necessary contradiction within the universe.

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"] The contradiction is that the brain stem is in the head. The head is off. Lets say theres a twin inside the body that has another brain but is not developed yet....like in that really crappy movie. After the 2 weeks, which I said on purpose, the body would have bled all necessary blood and could not function b/c blood is needed in order for you body to operate. Still after that, said brain would have been deprived of oxygen for too long and would have shut down itself.

You did not even acknowledge the hypothetical, and proceeded as though I had not presented it at all. The hypothetical is that the individual in question has a genetic defect that causes his neck to scabs over and stop the bleeding instantly, and which resulted in the development of a secondary central nervous system elsewhere in his body that was sufficient to operate basic motor functions in the body. This would enable the individual's head to be separated from the body and yet still allow the body to function. In order to assert that this is impossible, it is incumbent on you to show the way in which this would create a necessary contradiction within the universe.

Well, its immpossible to have a sex organ other than male or female. As I said before having both don't count b/c as they have both there are still only the 2.DudeNtheRoom

There is a race of aliens on the planet Hypothesia. Depending on their genetic material, they secrete from their sexual organs one of three compounds containing one-third of their genetic material. When these three compounds are mixed together, they combine to form a new compound that will then, if left alone, grow into a new member of this alien race. There being three different sexual organs whose secretions are necessary to complete the foundations for a new member of this alien race, there are three different sex organs in this alien race as opposed to only two.

Again, in order to claim that this is impossible, one needs to show how this would create an internal contradiction in the universe.

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"]Well, its immpossible to have a sex organ other than male or female. As I said before having both don't count b/c as they have both there are still only the 2.GabuEx

There is a race of aliens on the planet Hypothesia. Depending on their genetic material, they secrete from their sexual organs one of three compounds containing one-third of their genetic material. When these three compounds are mixed together, they combine to form a new compound that will then, if left alone, grow into a new member of this alien race. There being three different sexual organs whose secretions are necessary to complete the foundations for a new member of this alien race, there are three different sex organs in this alien race as opposed to only two.

Again, in order to claim that this is impossible, one needs to show how this would create an internal contradiction in the universe.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]It is not possible for me to empty a 12 gauge shotgun into a small, weak child's face at point blank range and have them survive. Discuss. thegerg

Sure it is. If that shotgun is filled with soft-serve ice cream and you allow it to slowly drop into the kids mouth he will be alive and (likely) happy.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

MrGeezer

It's impossible to create a machine that works at 100% efficiency.

That is, to create a machine in which the energy put into the machine is less than the energy generated by the machine.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"]Well, its immpossible to have a sex organ other than male or female. As I said before having both don't count b/c as they have both there are still only the 2.DudeNtheRoom

There is a race of aliens on the planet Hypothesia. Depending on their genetic material, they secrete from their sexual organs one of three compounds containing one-third of their genetic material. When these three compounds are mixed together, they combine to form a new compound that will then, if left alone, grow into a new member of this alien race. There being three different sexual organs whose secretions are necessary to complete the foundations for a new member of this alien race, there are three different sex organs in this alien race as opposed to only two.

Again, in order to claim that this is impossible, one needs to show how this would create an internal contradiction in the universe.

Not true. A square circle is certainly impossible.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

That depends on how one defines "impossible". The standard definition of impossibility refers to that which, if added to the world in which we live, would necessarily create an internal contradiction. And that makes the bar for actual impossibility almost impossibly high (pun intended).

xaos

It's impossible to create a machine that works at 100% efficiency.

That is, to create a machine in which the energy put into the machine is less than the energy generated by the machine.

Oh God, terrible flashbacks to an argument I had with someone who seriously argued that position. :cry:

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

There is a race of aliens on the planet Hypothesia. Depending on their genetic material, they secrete from their sexual organs one of three compounds containing one-third of their genetic material. When these three compounds are mixed together, they combine to form a new compound that will then, if left alone, grow into a new member of this alien race. There being three different sexual organs whose secretions are necessary to complete the foundations for a new member of this alien race, there are three different sex organs in this alien race as opposed to only two.

Again, in order to claim that this is impossible, one needs to show how this would create an internal contradiction in the universe.

Not true. A square circle is certainly impossible.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="DudeNtheRoom"] It's immpossible for anything to be immpossible.DudeNtheRoom

Not true. A square circle is certainly impossible.

I was never arguing in favor of that proposition.

It is not possible for me to empty a 12 gauge shotgun into a small, weak child's face at point blank range and have them survive. Discuss. Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]It is not possible for me to empty a 12 gauge shotgun into a small, weak child's face at point blank range and have them survive. Discuss. thegerg

Sure it is. If that shotgun is filled with soft-serve ice cream and you allow it to slowly drop into the kids mouth he will be alive and (likely) happy.

There was a story where a woman got shot point blank in the chest by a AK 47 directly over her heart.. And her average breast implant some how saved her life.. Its a matter of probability...

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="thegerg"]

Sure it is. If that shotgun is filled with soft-serve ice cream and you allow it to slowly drop into the kids mouth he will be alive and (likely) happy.

thegerg

You didn't specify that. Although, you could empty a regular shotgun load into a kids face without killing him. Simply cycling the shell through the weapon and allowing it to eject onto the kids face won't kill him.

[QUOTE="thegerg"]

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] No i'm talking ordinary, blow stuff apart shotgun ammo not your made up AWESOME shot gun ammo. Ninja-Hippo

You didn't specify that. Although, you could empty a regular shotgun load into a kids face without killing him. Simply cycling the shell through the weapon and allowing it to eject onto the kids face won't kill him.

Well, in that case, a highly localized wormhole appears just below the surface of the child's skin through which the pellets travel and are ejected into space, and then the wormhole closes. :P

"Impossible is a word the weak use to justify failure"

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="thegerg"]

You didn't specify that. Although, you could empty a regular shotgun load into a kids face without killing him. Simply cycling the shell through the weapon and allowing it to eject onto the kids face won't kill him.

GabuEx

Well, in that case, a highly localized wormhole appears just below the surface of the child's skin through which the pellets travel and are ejected into space, and then the wormhole closes. :P

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="thegerg"]

You didn't specify that. Although, you could empty a regular shotgun load into a kids face without killing him. Simply cycling the shell through the weapon and allowing it to eject onto the kids face won't kill him.

GabuEx

Well, in that case, a highly localized wormhole appears just below the surface of the child's skin through which the pellets travel and are ejected into space, and then the wormhole closes. :P

That doesn't count. There's no evidene that wormholes are possible either.

There are a lot of things that are not possible. Like survining a nuclear bomb at ground zero.

DudeNtheRoom

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Yes, i'm talking about actually firing the weapon in the conventional manner, with each shot firing and landing successfully on target (ie the small child's face). MrGeezer

Well, in that case, a highly localized wormhole appears just below the surface of the child's skin through which the pellets travel and are ejected into space, and then the wormhole closes. :P

That doesn't count. There's no evidene that wormholes are possible either.

When discussing strict impossibilities, the burden of proof is on the one asserting impossibility, who must show that the existence of the allegedly impossible phenomenon would create a contradiction with certain things assumed to be true about the world. The old "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is not a cop-out in this case.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Well, in that case, a highly localized wormhole appears just below the surface of the child's skin through which the pellets travel and are ejected into space, and then the wormhole closes. :P

GabuEx

That doesn't count. There's no evidene that wormholes are possible either.

When discussing strict impossibilities, the burden of proof is on the one asserting impossibility, who must show that the existence of the allegedly impossible phenomenon would create a contradiction with certain things assumed to be true about the world. The old "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is not a cop-out in this case.

The thing is...I didn't say that wormholes were impossible.

Instead, YOU used wormholes as a possible means of debunking someone else's claims of the impossible.

I didn't say that ANYTHING was impossible or impossible. Instead, you decided to invoke wormholes and I pointed out that there's no evidence trhat they are possible.

Well, it's very easy to rationalize the literal interpretation of that quote. Nothing impossible has ever existed or occured, whereas there are plenty of things that are improbable.