[RascalPuff]

A quote from Lloyd and response from RP... Rascal, you seem to be locked into "time" as something having meaning, other than matter in motion. I am not. Time is matter in motion, and nothing more. If you stop using "time" as a "god", then maybe we could get somewhere. Even Einstein didn't have that much faith in "time." He believed in B. Spinoza's "god"___one of least action. "The given units of time" can't be squared, they don't exist!___that's mythology of your over-active abstract imagination. Try squaring the "Now", and you may see what I mean...

It seems any time anyone tries to use a cosmological constant, this is what happens___That old boogyman, "time/god", enters and plays hell with linguistics. State your positions as matter in motion, so we all may understand your ideas...

You and I move through space at the exact rate as the earth, sorry... My math tells me that if all were expanding at a simple rate of 32fps/s, all our mathematical/physical/mental problems would have been solved centuries ago, and we all know it hasn't been. Iff it were so, the earth would have long exceeded the moon's lesser gravity requirement expansion rate, making the moon, just a little dot... 32fps/s only applies to the earth, not any other celestial body, unless one exists with the earth's attributes, in almost identical amounts... Throw "time", as a meaningless measurement, away, and use matter in motion, to replace it, in order to do real physics, not abstract imaginary physics___Please...

You can like me or hate me, I don't care. I will continue to state my educated opinion___No "matter" what... - Lloyd

______________________________

Dear Lloyd:

'Matter in motion' is time - is a newly recognized whole new dimension; no less real than the preceding three; hence the (also frequently misunderstood, not infrequently denied) term, 'space-time'.

Displacing the concept of time with the concept of 'matter-in-motion' is no displacement at all. It's two different expressions of the same phenomenon.

'Now' in space is irrevocably connected to 'then' (past or future) in time:
'Now' and 'then' are connected by the dimension of matter in motion.

The so called 'eternal now' is ephemeral - now isn't then, and conversely...

Here isn't there.

Zeno excuded time, and behold his (perhaps deliberately created) fictional quandary of never arriving from his point of departure...

Time is the continuum that separates events in space.

Rates of omnidirectionally outward acceleration depend on outside parameters and circumference, while inward gravitational potential also depends on density - without contradiction. Gravity is complementary vectors of push and pull.

Now, then, there and here, have been and/or will be, inseparably contiguous with the dimension of time, which has been endemically misunderstood since the inception of it's mortal contemplation.

There is an interval of space dividing two events, that interval of event division is the dimension of time - in the case of three omnidirectionally expanding dimensions of space, contrary to what you declare: time is space: squared; at concentric right angles from itself, arriving endlessly in a 'now', having endlessly departed from - or approaching - a 'then'.

Arriving somewhere prior to departing wherever you're coming from: excludes time. Until further notice, moving against the flow of earthly time zones in a Concorde still won't make the arrival precede the departure... (Spinoza's god of 'least action' doesn't connote no action at all).

On the lighter side of this debate, the 'Crackpot Index' (which I don't personally agree with), subtracts five points from your argument for alluding to your 'educated opinion'.
And five more points are lost for mentioning 'Einstein'.

(HeeHaw - man, if that's the case I'm so many points in the hole that Stephen Hawking's tunnel can't locate me...)

Regarding personal sentiment toward you from me, Lioyd, Of course I don't hate you. Have absolutely no reason to even approach that adjective relative to you.

I consider you more of a thought provoking colleague more than an adversary. You are of value to my evolving contemplations of the dimension of time, for one obvious example. I have learned quite a lot from your posts and dialogue with others, for another...
I could say you're only lines on my moniter screen, and that I don't care, but, I'm still fortunate - and grateful - that you're there, authoring the issued, only lines...

Of course there's more to our contentious dialogue, and here's hoping we find time to get around to it - errrr, hoping you'll pardon the timely expression, sir?

Best regards,
- RP
(Zeno bought it here...)