[N0B0DY]

Very good posting, Greg.

It is apparently variable, time, dependent upon the timeframe and framework one is referring to. There can be a time of light, based on planck; time of day, based on the earth's rotation; eternity, based on expanding those concepts, perhaps inferenced as spatial continuum; then there is the timeless, absolute time, based on closing planck's gap.

No, there is no paradox, even without long division because the tortoise obviously passes Achiles, and destinations are reached. It is this that correlates to ordered finite consciousness, and infers the absurdity of the infinite. My statement of the absolute is a fewfold, where it designates the point of differentiation of which all measurements are made possible; an absolving of the above seeming infinite dichotomy paradox where the destinination is already reached, time being absolute speed - again, based on shrinking planck - reduced, which expands space inversely-proportionate to the reduction. Though this latter point is based only on red-shifted wavelength changes through variable densities of media, not an actual expansion.

The wife bit, lol, though mine has passed away, at any given instant there is a different person standing there because any massive body is formed via motion, but recreated incrementally over the above spatially-"extended" frames according to the same mass that decays at variable rates. Consider the flesh of an aged corpse, still part of the absolute matter which doesn't change position, but in different quantized form which does change position over time.

Another seeming paradox, that would explain the point above perhaps more clearly, is to consider moving your hand in front of your face. Where consciously, the motion is quantized from point A to point B, but is the absolute space possibly moving "out of the way," or can anything absolute give your hand room to move? That is not only improbable, but impossible, and therefore another explanation that llows for motion without changing the absolute state is required. That being, to me, the subconscious mind is linked to the subatomic particles/waves to render a probablistic outcome for our conscious minds to interpret as mass in motion. The further correlation to consciousness, as you stated, is based on what is possible and what is probable...the sun will rise and dinosaurs will not appear, but only because the parameters set by the subconscious ordering factor - the computer - follows strict laws that allow for temporal persistence of existence. Otherwise, the mind could create flying dinosaurs like the one that just flew by my window.

Ultimately, again, it is not a theory like others propose, but a few statements on my own logical deductions aimed at pushing people to express their own deductions and conclusions. Contrary to what is plastered all over the place about me, this is not science or religion, but a philosophical rendition that equates both...fair playing field, where we can reach our own conclusions hopefully not swayed by the "absolute truth" of either community.

Best I can do, Greg.

[NotStein]

Originally Posted by Graybeard I don't think that Zeno's paradoxes are really paradoxes. Its just that the Greeks had not discovered long division ?? Don't you agree ?? Whenever you guys start arguing about the Absolute or the Fundamental Substance I get left behind. I agree that there is 'philosophical' correlation between Consciousness and Time. But unless you accept time as a total human perception I can't see any logical theory for this ? cool bananas ... greg PS: Nob, perhaps if you stated how you see the transition from one moment to the next it would become clearer to me. ie: Do you think 'time' is the perception of a change in entropy ? Do you think 'time' is simply a quantum probability. When you leave home for work you kiss your wife goodbye. When you return you presume that it is the same wife you greet, but she is actually a version of your wife with one hair less on her head. ? This of course is a high probability because there would be millions of billions of versions of your wife where you could not define a difference. Where as a Tyranosauraus Rex appearing in your kitchen to greet you when you got home would be a humungous improbability. And so this outcome only happens once in an eternity, as opposed to an indistinguishable version of you wife happening every day. (multiverse) (parallell universe) ? Do you think time is a transition/measure of the 'Planck time' ? cool bananas ... greg

I think that what we describe as time is just the only way we can perceive energy. Energy expresses itself as motion. Motion is change. The only way we can perceive change is by measuring something twice. Therefore, we only way to differentiate the two measurements is to invent the concept of time. Time is a human tool, nothing more.

[N0B0DY]

Fair enough assessment, NotStein, but from what state to what state is matter actually changing?

It seems apparent, observable, that mass/energy is only a matter of time, no pun intended, instead of time being merely the means to measure mass/energy. I don't even think it is theoretically-possible to perceive, or even conceive of, objects without the concept of time required to perceive and conceive of them.

In other words, even if we didn't know of any tool called time, it would still take time for photons or waves to reach our eyes. So it seems as though time and space, dimensions in general, are pre-requisites of reality.

[MJA]

I'd like to make a watch to wear on my wrist that went counter-clockwise, and call it a Revolution.

=
MJA

[NotStein]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY Fair enough assessment, NotStein, but from what state to what state is matter actually changing? It seems apparent, observable, that mass/energy is only a matter of time, no pun intended, instead of time being merely the means to measure mass/energy. I don't even think it is theoretically-possible to perceive, or even conceive of, objects without the concept of time required to perceive and conceive of them. In other words, even if we didn't know of any tool called time, it would still take time for photons or waves to reach our eyes. So it seems as though time and space, dimensions in general, are pre-requisites of reality.

I don't think from what state to what state (or position to position) really matters; just the fact energy must express itself as change/motion.

That does not invalidate your point, however, and a good one it is. It does legitimately invalidate mine. Time must be more than just a tool, unless the universe itself measures itself, which gets into all that universal conciousness stuff I recoil unavoidably from.

It does leave open whether or not space/time is a 'pre-requisite' of reality, or if space/time is an after-effect of energy, i.e. it was left behind by the initial wavefront of the Big Bang, like ashes behind fireworks (simplistic analogy). If not, then it seems to me you have a chicken/egg scenario (more recoil) whereby energy requires space/time, yet space/time requires energy.

Jeff

[Profpat]

Hi everybody;

I agree with you on this one nobody;
In other words, even if we didn't know of any tool called time, it would still take time for photons or waves to reach our eyes. So it seems as though time and space, dimensions in general, are pre-requisites of reality.


Jeff, you also have a good point in that under the theory of spatial inflation I believe our universe grew by light years in the matter of 1 second to the minus -33 power. Hardly any time at all.

Best,

Pat

[Graybeard]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY No, there is no paradox, even without long division because the tortoise obviously passes Achiles, and destinations are reached.

I think you mean that Achilles passes the Tortoise ??

Originally Posted by N0B0DY My statement of the absolute is a fewfold, where it designates the point of differentiation of which all measurements are made possible; an absolving of the above seeming infinite dichotomy paradox where the destinination is already reached, time being absolute speed - again, based on shrinking planck - reduced, which expands space inversely-proportionate to the reduction. Though this latter point is based only on red-shifted wavelength changes through variable densities of media, not an actual expansion.

Wow .. Nob ... This is very difficult (Esoteric ?)for me to follow.

Wiki

Esoteric knowledge is that which is specialized or advanced in nature, available only to a narrow circle of "enlightened", "initiated", or highly educated people. Some interpretations of esotericism are very broad and include even unconventional and non-scientific belief systems, typically as contrasted with the "scientific" or "traditional religious" beliefs of the society without or "at large".

What I mean about Zeno's Paradoxes is that they are easily solved using todays algebra, but as algebra was not named (invented ? ) until around the seventh century these puzzles appeared as paradoxes. I mean that, literally, the greeks could not perform long division

When I was talking about the wife I was really referring to the 'Parrallel Universe theory'. If I am right this is the one where everything has a probability of occurring, and everything that has a probability will occur in due course. Therefore all roads are taken simultaneously. Its the land where 'Wot if?' really exists.

There are many other things in your post that I would like to reply to. Will do, as soon as I get some time, at work now.

You too Jeff.

cool bananas ... greg

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by Profpat Hi everybody; I agree with you on this one nobody; In other words, even if we didn't know of any tool called time, it would still take time for photons or waves to reach our eyes. So it seems as though time and space, dimensions in general, are pre-requisites of reality. Jeff, you also have a good point in that under the theory of spatial inflation I believe our universe grew by light years in the matter of 1 second to the minus -33 power. Hardly any time at all. Best, Pat

Hey Prof, Nobody and you some others may be stigmatized as heretics with your acknowledgement that time is a real factor. There is, after all, an interval between two or more events, and that interval really is time...

Best regards,
- RP

[Profpat]

[quote=RascalPuff;38265]Hey Prof, Nobody and you some others may be stigmatized as heretics with your acknowledgement that time is a real factor. There is, after all, an interval between two or more events, and that interval really is time...

Best regards,
- RP[/quote

It wouldn't be the first time RP, and unless those events are simultaneous I agree that interval would be, I don't know? How about we call it time.

Best to you and your family sir,

Pat

[RascalPuff]

[quote=Profpat;38271]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Hey Prof, Nobody and you some others may be stigmatized as heretics with your acknowledgement that time is a real factor. There is, after all, an interval between two or more events, and that interval really is time... Best regards, - RP[/quote It wouldn't be the first time RP, and unless those events are simultaneous I agree that interval would be, I don't know? How about we call it time. Best to you and your family sir, Pat

You phrased that swimmingly, Mr. Prof.
It also just occurred to me that Einstein is among the mavericks who identify time (and motion) as a (the 4th) dimension.

Thanks for the well wishes and the same to you, sir.
- RP