Yeah, I got that. Why do you do it?

Because just like you said pal, he has the mind of a child. Probably why he finds children attractive in the first place.

This from a guy who literally admitted he is addicted to child pornography.

Lol. Notice how he immediately shuts his stupid face when you bring up his past. Thanks for exposing him.

Its hilarious watching you back track

It's hilarious watching you pretend to be laughing while you simultaneously ban every account which argues with you.

ROFLMAO. Your desperation is pathetic. You are a pitifully fucking stupid Irish lowlife and a barefaced liar.

A lib saying there's evidence

Stop lying for thirty seconds you farcically stupid wanker. No lib has claimed there is evidence. YOU, a NEO-NAZI and COMPULSIVE LIAR, claimed that "libs still have found nothing on him". You are brazenly trying to shift the burden of prrof for your own claim onto other people because you are a LUDICROUSLY stupid and filthily dishonest, sad little Nazi wanker.

There are no laws that govern the peniton particle because there is no such thing as a peniton particle.

Let me try to illustrate why this analogy is false.

Imagine you lived 10,000 years ago.

Would it be true to say: there are no laws which govern the movement of the wheel because there is no such thing as a wheel?

Spacetime is physical

No, space-time is a mathematical construct used to explicate the standard model of the universe. To call perfect emptiness "physical" is a contradiction in terms (i.e. a paradox).

If material doesn't exist, then the laws that govern it does not exist.

Wrong. You are conflating causes with effects, which I have already tried to explain to you once. If there were no water anywhere in the universe, then that would not stop H2O being the chemical rule for creating water. If there were no cars anywhere in the universe, then that would not change the rules one has to follow in order to build a car.

There are no laws that govern the peniton particle because there is no such thing as a peniton particle.

This is a false analogy. There are laws which govern all particles, regardless of what you decide to name those particles. Were your premise correct that the laws governing them simply vanish when one removes them all, then it would be quite an astounding coincidence when one puts them all back and the exact same laws begin to take effect, would it not?

Obviously, if one returns all the particles to their original positions, and the initial effects are repeated, that proves the universe has retained information absent all physical matter.

Yes. No religious zealots and no political extremists.

Which would rule out 97 percent of this website.

I did and you removed it and pretended you couldn't see it.

I intend to file a formal complaint with your alien overlords.

Gravity, for example, does not exist in a universe devoid of mass.

I am afraid that you are confusing the law of gravity with the effects of gravity. The law of gravity would still exist if all the mass were removed from the universe, but it would not affect anything because its effects are dependent on mass.

Similarly, if you removed everything from the universe which has colour, it would not change the rule which governs colour.

There is no information without interpretation. That requires an interpreter.

Edit: I just saw and responded to your post in the other side. I’ve never thought about it in the way you described. It wouldn’t necessarily be accurate to say that matter is an interpreter, but the information still relies on the physical for existence.

I understand why you might think so, but as strange as it might sound to you, it is actually the other way around. A hundred years of quantum experiments have yielded the repeated observation that, without an interpreter, the physical itself ceases to exist, and becomes only information. Without an interpreter, reality itself deteriorates into a set of mathematical probabilities.

I can certainly agree with you that there is a symbiotic relationship between (certain types of) information and interpreters, but simply because they both exist simultaneously (and depend upon one another) doesn't necessarily mean they both have to be physical.

Those laws, which are information, are properties of the physical universe.

Well, your statement is sort of true, but firstly, let's discuss your loaded language. If you remove everything from the universe which defines it as physical, then how can the universe still be physical? That is a paradox. If information remains in a perfect vacuum then obviously that information is not physical and your claim that "all information is physical" is false.

Secondly, while I again acknowledge your statement to be partly true, what is not true is that this gives these laws any physical form. Whether they are properties of the universe or not, they still do not exist in the physical sense. You could not burn the law of gravity onto a hard drive and take it with you to another universe.

I mean no. Information and the experience thereof is strictly physical.

No. If you removed all the matter and energy from the universe you would still be left with a universe which has laws. Those fundamental laws represent an example of information which is not physical, yet nevertheless must exist in order for the universe to adhere to them.