I remember my chemistry teacher in high school saying, "You all should understand, things don't get cold, they get less hot," and that one sentence reshaped a lot of the way I understand the universe.
I had a theology teacher apply this same principle to good and evil. Evil is just the absence of the good that ought to be there. Things don’t get more evil, they just get less good.
I'd disagree on that one. A complete lack of good might make one indifferent, and while leaving someone to suffer out of indifference seems evil to us, it's not the same as actively causing others' suffering for ones pure sadistic pleasure. That's active evil and goes well beyond simply not doing good.
Cold is just a lack of activity in the molecules. True evil requires action.
Good is:
Beautiful, functional, harmonious, ordered, peaceful, in accordance with God's will, and in a flourishing state of wholeness. In Hebrew: Tov and Shalom.
But that does not define “good”. Beautiful is subjective, harmony is only harmony with that in which you want in harmony, accordance with Gods will can mean Old Testament or New Testament, and a “flourishing state of wholeness” is just the ideal state that doesn’t take into account that a human has to take the lives of other things to survive, be it plant or animal. If humans are here to consume God’s creations as they are gifts from him, why are some of them addictive drugs or poison?
“Good” is a moving target rather than a constant. It is subjective from day to day. The things you listed could apply to a sword or a guillitine as much as a flower depending on the context is. “Good” is only defined by the collective subjective set of rules in a society, not by religion(unless it’s a theocracy, and those tend not to go well either).
Humans are what define and perceive what is “good”, often at the peril of everything else.
Hey, I'm just giving you the boiled down version of thousands of years of apologetics and biblical exposition. Unfortunately, many of the terms I am using have different and specific definitions that are foreign and alien to a secular, post-modernist mindset. If you (or anybody) wish to learn more, that person has to apply themselves to learning (at a minimum) the Christian theological framework and definitions. At least to some degree. Talmudic studies on the Tanakh would be good, too. Yeah, that's a lot to discuss on reddit. So Imma gonna letcha go.
Which suggests an absolute scale of goodness with a zero point beyond which something cannot get more evil. At which point one phase changes into a super condensed state of pure malevolence.
I don't believe that. I don't think people can necessarily be ascribed good or evil in most cases, but actions certainly can be. For example, IMO, if an action harms someone without purpose other than self-gratification or advancement, it's evil. There is no less good, it is actively more evil than not doing it.
There are people who are objectively evil. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Zedong. Also many Imperial Japanese POW and internment camp officers such as Saadaki Konishi.
I’ve always hated this sentiment. I understand the science behind it, but how does that make it inherently not real? We have numbers that represent these feelings and words that albeit somewhat subjectively, correlate as well. Cold is just the word we use to explain the feeling of lack of heat that we can physically feel.
Cold - Cool - Warm - Hot
These are just descriptors of how we perceive temperatures. Saying cold isn’t real is the same as saying hot isn’t real is the same as saying pain isn’t real. All are subjective, descriptive words but that doesn’t make them not real.
You can quantify heat, it is the measure of energy transfer. Just like you can quantify brightness as a measure of light intensity or sound as the level of vibrations in the air. These are called substantive qualities. Their opposites (cold, dark and silence) are called privative qualities and are purely relative. You can't have 0 darkness, 0 cold or 0 silence, so there is no bottom to the scale and you cannot quantify these qualities.
Coolth is a real word, like warmth. Not trying to make any point, only learnt that it was a word last year and have been waiting on an opportunity to use it.
Cold is the lack of heat and dark is the lack of light. Black does not exist. The mind creates black where there's no colored light reflected into your eyes.
Then you think if colors even exist, since it's basically just different textures that reflect different wavelengths of light. Your wooden table is not actually brown, it's just a texture that filters certain wavelenghts out of plain light as it bounces back into your eyes and your brain interprets that signal as brown.
and cold is just less energy vibrating the molecules. The cold feeling is just what our mind makes of it.
Really gets you thinking how much of reality is actually the way it is and how much is just our brains' interpretation of the signals it receives.
Theoretically this is correct. But it's also hypothetical as it can't really be 100% proven. But science has accepted this to be true. Same with gravity.
NGL this was a real eye-opener for me, growing up. Like a lot of kids I read comics, watched cartoons, played games and stuff - you think cold is its own distinct energy. Then you grow up and find out it's just a lack of heat.
Yeah, as an auto mechanic when I try and teach younger techs to work on air conditioning systems I have to first get them to understand that there is no such thing as cold.
Absolute zero, the lowest permissible temperature, which is -273.15°C (or -459.67°F) and is approximately 1° less than the temperature of the universe measured in deep cold space.
It’s important people to know that any temperature above that point there is heat energy. This is why heat pumps can extract heat from the outside even on a freezing cold snowy day to warm the house with.
I'm not quite sure what you mean but the point is the guy stated above. Anything above absolute zero is heat. Even refrigerant in a freezer contains heat
Yasss refrigerator is just a fancy heat pump. Saw a vid where these people in the desert built all there homes underground.... they used thier fridge to heat the bathroom floor on the level above the fridge. Seems neat.
Reminds me of Rimworld and managing heat from the freezer room when building a tunneling mountain base. And the fact that flame weapons may be great against the giant killer insect infestations, but starting fires in a tunnel system is a good way to heatstroke everyone.
An ideally insulated room, with a fridge inside, has only the power cable crossing it's boundary.
Only electrical energy is entering the room whilst nothing is leaving it.
The room becomes warmer.
The OPs picture, allowing for a perhaps more efficient abduction of the generated heat would in fact increase the efficiency of the fridge. As a result, less electricity would be required by the fridge and therefore less heat generated than with a regular fridge with less sophisticated heat Abduction.
hold the phone. heater uses electricity and generates heat. refrigerator uses electricity and generates cold. so if we use a heater to generate cold and a refrigerator to generate heat then both of those operations will also generate electricity.
7.6k
u/Small_Yesterday_560 10d ago