Time

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

13 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

What in the lord mother of crikey mate.

Ahhh, you're Ozzy. Twilight Zone is an old scifi program in the US

[quiXilver]

13 hours ago, LightAngel said:

Time doesn't exist.

 

So just enjoy the moment. 

Be alive.

 

Stated so simply and poignantly, your statement echoes sentiments of great zen masters.

Shunryu Suzuki often said.  No teaching could be more direct that to just sit down.

 

As i experience it...

What declaration of realization or teaching could be more direct than to embody what you are, where you are, as is?   Here and now.

Utter simplicity.  No seeking or aversion.  Raw Beingness.

 

[quiXilver]

You are reading this now.

It's always now. 

It's never not been, now.

 

Past and Future are Memory and Imagination, respectively. 

The past is always remembered now.

The future is always imagined now.

Nothing ever occurs in the future, or the past.

 

Those are mental constructs, mentation artefacts that always arise in the now. 

 

You are reading this now.

You may think about this in memory and it will be now as well.

 

Fun to ponder the ramifications of this... Time that is now.

 

[jmccr8]

21 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

Haha!  Anytime jcm88r

Hi Psi

jmccr8

[+joc]

On 5/9/2022 at 8:27 PM, quiXilver said:

How long is a moment?

 

How could we determine when 'a moment' begins?

And how will we ever describe when, or how a moment comes to an end and separates itself from the flow of reality?

Excellent questions!

A moment is exactly  ....  infinite.  We all talk about 'moments' ... but in reality we are really just talking about our memory of 'the moment'.  

In a world...

Where the sun never rises and never sets...in a world where the sun is always rising and always setting simultaneously...in a world where it is always Right Now...and right now is the eternal moment that somehow keeps getting missed...in a world where we are always wanting to get to the next moment and missing the only moment that counts...in a world where that moment is the only moment and it is happening everywhere in real time to everyone...

The Moment...

...imagine...in a world where no one ever missed The Moment....

[lightly]

That IS Beautiful quiXilver & joc!        Ya, “TIME”. Does not exist..      .I’m not sure I even believe in this “moment”  or “now”.    All I believe in and Know is     IS          Aristotle said ‘there is no time apart from change’.      (change IS).   My lovable old uncle Albert said. .  ‘the distinction between past, present, and future, is only a stubbornly persistent illusion’.   (Illusion IS)  …there is only  IS        …when is now?  Oops!* too late!  

Edited May 18, 2022 by lightly

[+Grim Reaper 6]

2 hours ago, lightly said:

That IS Beautiful quiXilver & joc!        Ya, “TIME”. Does not exist..      .I’m not sure I even believe in this “moment”  or “now”.    All I believe in and Know is     IS          Aristotle said ‘there is no time apart from change’.      (change IS).   My lovable old uncle Albert said. .  ‘the distinction between past, present, and future, is only a stubbornly persistent illusion’.   (Illusion IS)  …there is only  IS        …when is now?  Oops!* too late!  

This video was recorded on the Ed Sullivan, in 1964. the name of the song is Time is on my side!

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Manwon Lender

[lightly]

I’m obsessed with this topic “ time”.  .   I’ve been thinking about ,so called, time dialation . (for a few years now)  (Clocks ticking slower when in Motion, as opposed to at Rest).  I’m wondering if the increased MOTION ..is responsible for the apparent ‘slowing’ of time…?     An object in motion is traveling through MORE expanding space than an object at Rest.    Motion+Expansion=Increased Distance .     =longer duration/time.

The difference in the measurements of ‘time’ at differing speeds or ‘altitudes’ is so small as to be barely measurable…until near light speeds.  The difference in the passing of ‘time’ at the top of Mount Everest and sea level is like…millionths of a second ??   Probably the same exact  difference in their respective ‘orbits’ around the center of Mass of the earth.   !    So, it isn’t that the clock on Mount Everest took longer …it traveled Farther.     That always takes  longer 

Edited May 18, 2022 by lightly

[quiXilver]

3 hours ago, lightly said:

That IS Beautiful quiXilver & joc!        Ya, “TIME”. Does not exist..      .I’m not sure I even believe in this “moment”  or “now”.    All I believe in and Know is     IS          Aristotle said ‘there is no time apart from change’.      (change IS).   My lovable old uncle Albert said. .  ‘the distinction between past, present, and future, is only a stubbornly persistent illusion’.   (Illusion IS)  …there is only  IS        …when is now?  Oops!* too late!  

Wow my friend.  What a potent sharing for me!  I'm going to sit with this for a time and let it percolate.  Your comment in awareness feels akin to a large stone dropped in a still, deep pond.  Ripples (thoughts/potential insights) will arise for some time due to its presence.  Your Uncle had his finger on the pulse, that's for sure.

There is only IS.  Synchronous for me, your sharing this in this IS.

Alan Watts reflects and touches on this IS in his short treatise This Is It. 

Thanks for the nudge and contribution mate.  You're appreciated.

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, lightly said:

I’m obsessed with this topic “ time”.  .   I’ve been thinking about ,so called, time dialation . (for a few years now)  (Clocks ticking slower when in Motion, as opposed to at Rest).  I’m wondering if the increased MOTION ..is responsible for the apparent ‘slowing’ of time…?     An object in motion is traveling through MORE expanding space than an object at Rest.    Motion+Expansion=Increased Distance .     =longer duration/time.

The difference in the measurements of ‘time’ at differing speeds or ‘altitudes’ is so small as to be barely measurable…until near light speeds.  The difference in the passing of ‘time’ at the top of Mount Everest and sea level is like…millionths of a second ??   Probably the same exact  difference in their respective ‘orbits’ around the center of Mass of the earth.   !    So, it isn’t that the clock on Mount Everest took longer …it traveled Farther.     That always takes  longer 

 

https://www.emc2-explained.info/Time-Dilation/#.YoW6g2QRUbR

[lightly]

Thanks psyche,  I don’t think I know what I’m talking about !     My old brain can’t figure out if I’m looking at it all backward, or inside out,   ..or what!?              For examples… if time Is Relative..then it is not an identical ‘thing’ in all instances?   And if ‘distances shrink in the direction of motion’. .then  distance Is variable, as well !!!!!

Edited May 19, 2022 by lightly

[lightly]

6 hours ago, lightly said:

Thanks psyche,  I don’t think I know what I’m talking about !     My old brain can’t figure out if I’m looking at it all backward, or inside out,   ..or what!?              For examples… if “time Is Relative” then it is not an identical ‘thing’ in all instances?   And if “distances shrink in the direction of motion” then  distance Is variable, as well !!!!!    
 ….which is what makes me question the existence of ‘time’ AND ‘space’..(sorry uncle Albert;). it looks more like there IS only ENERGY and MOTION..  (energy/motion)   the various  (interactive) combinations of which result in the perceived, experienced! ..and even Measurable!!    results’ !!!  ?

Edited May 19, 2022 by lightly

[quiXilver]

I suspect the incongruencies we experience at the extremes are due to the inaccuracy of our perceptual process, not to mystical strangeness in natural process. 

Humans do not perceive the universe as it is, but as it's interpreted by sensory transduction.  And these five functions are severely limited and innacurate. We perceive a micro-fractional sliver of what goes on around us... then extrapolate from that to make large claims.  The fallacy is strong with us.

Even our instrumentation which are built to help reach a bit beyond our normal sensory range are built on the foundational; principles of our senses and thus, our perceptual bias is inherent in them.

Edited May 19, 2022 by quiXilver

[Abramelin]

On 4/19/2022 at 7:45 PM, jethrofloyd said:

Just couldn't resist:

 

Me neither:

 

[PsiSeeker]

On 5/18/2022 at 7:13 AM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Ahhh, you're Ozzy. Twilight Zone is an old scifi program in the US

Oh I see.  Figured Twilight, like vampires and wolverines.  Lord that was a trip.

[PsiSeeker]

On 5/18/2022 at 9:24 AM, quiXilver said:

You are reading this now.

It's always now. 

It's never not been, now.

 

Past and Future are Memory and Imagination, respectively. 

The past is always remembered now.

The future is always imagined now.

Nothing ever occurs in the future, or the past.

 

Those are mental constructs, mentation artefacts that always arise in the now. 

 

You are reading this now.

You may think about this in memory and it will be now as well.

 

Fun to ponder the ramifications of this... Time that is now.

 

Exactly exactly, this is exactly the sorry if rock someone in metaphysics would throw in their little glasshouse not realising the future is an actual discovery and that premonition, fundamentally, must exist, as per the reality of determinism comprehending there is a difference between knowing the wall and walking (and therefore experiencing) the walk.

[PsiSeeker]

On 5/18/2022 at 11:55 PM, lightly said:

That IS Beautiful quiXilver & joc!        Ya, “TIME”. Does not exist..      .I’m not sure I even believe in this “moment”  or “now”.    All I believe in and Know is     IS          Aristotle said ‘there is no time apart from change’.      (change IS).   My lovable old uncle Albert said. .  ‘the distinction between past, present, and future, is only a stubbornly persistent illusion’.   (Illusion IS)  …there is only  IS        …when is now?  Oops!* too late!  

Dynamism, nice, the universe is mutable!

[PsiSeeker]

On 5/19/2022 at 3:42 AM, lightly said:

I’m obsessed with this topic “ time”.  .   I’ve been thinking about ,so called, time dialation . (for a few years now)  (Clocks ticking slower when in Motion, as opposed to at Rest).  I’m wondering if the increased MOTION ..is responsible for the apparent ‘slowing’ of time…? ..

No it's not, it's the displacement, the distance.  W=dt t = W/d.  D is distance.  W is work done, t is time, and as entropy has it disorder increases in the universe and therefore space increases and therefore disorder increases and thus more work is done. Work divides time.  It has to.

/Sigh.  If there is some distance traveled in space from the perspective of one clock then of course there's going to be a difference in their measurements because work was done, divides time, can't be 0 otherwise it would be the object at relative rest.  Do you see?

[lightly]

12 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

No it's not, it's the displacement, the distance.  W=dt t = W/d.  D is distance.  W is work done, t is time, and as entropy has it disorder increases in the universe and therefore space increases and therefore disorder increases and thus more work is done. Work divides time.  It has to.

/Sigh.  If there is some distance traveled in space from the perspective of one clock then of course there's going to be a difference in their measurements because work was done, divides time, can't be 0 otherwise it would be the object at relative rest.  Do you see?

Thanks Psi,  I’m not sure I do see..  I think the ‘slower’ clock simply travels farther?    For example, a clock in orbit would travel a farther distance (increased motion) in it’s orbit around the earth’s center of mass ….than a clock on the earth’s surface. ?    O  o ?    They both orbit the earth’s center of mass?

Edited August 15, 2022 by lightly

[+Hammerclaw]

On 4/25/2022 at 3:17 PM, Desertrat56 said:

@PsiSeeker Time is not real.

My mirror begs to differ.

[PsiSeeker]

On 5/17/2022 at 6:28 PM, LightAngel said:

Time doesn't exist.

 

So just enjoy the moment. 

Be alive.

 

The dimension above must necessarily contain the dimension below even though objects within its range need not be expressed within its domain or the abstract effect.  2 dimensions are needed in order to quantify everything, which is why I had to say that mathematics is the 2nd dimension.  Its presence doesn't find expression again until the 9th dimension linguistically.  Science thinks it is beyond mathematics like how the Aristotelian defined meta virtues are beyond the cardinal, concerned with good and evil as they are, and further along deduced that is explicitly handled by Plato in his analysis of the cardinal virtue Justice, where I think his synopsis of it is synthesized further, later on, by the church in their identity of 4 cardinal virtues in total.  The only one that I didn't understand, and realised I hit a fundamental wall in philosophy, which I knew due to my inability to ground ethics as a morality in anything tangible, probably due to it being an abstract from dynamic discovery, namely the identifying of the rules that govern a particular elementisable algorithm identifying the atomistic components that comprise the building blocks for the measurable limit of a mass quantity itself, within space, which is where we identify compounds from chemicals from atoms from atoms from isotopes and from chemicals from RNA necessary for DNA as a platform on which it acts able to capture the shadows cast onto the RNA and measuring a different component of reality, namely the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum where what remains is the non-visual components, or stimuli producing, non-visual cortex.  Some idiot piped up "what can not be measured does not exist", the fool.  I can't measure a dream, in fact even if I were able to identify that someone is dreaming I would never in a hundred million years be able to identify whether or not Delta frequency dominance or theta frequency dominance identified by rapid eye movement is a dream without the person only being identifiable as knowledgeable (knowing what they're talking about) by their word, it's actually the correct comprehension of their word where sometimes one is forced to produce the synthesis when the gab comes in the form of good or Evil.  The good in good is identified by Plato in his analysis of justice.  If the theleme characterised as act is set in its Genesis by a closing set of the antithesis (so the thesis is embodied, the antithesis must always be used to denote awareness of the thesis, such as with atheism where it, atheism, is beyond good and Evil.  It is an Aristotelian virtue.  It is a priori of the antithesis that is demonstrably a posteriori inclusive of both the antithesis and its summation as either heaven or hell depending on the choices on chose.  Heaven if one chose justly, the antithesis, and hell if sin, presuming to have attained the best not realising the tangible, immeasurable, quality of the affect mind has upon the thinking, in the same way the affect infinity has in avoiding the eternity of calculation it takes to identify existence of certain mathematical objects via the fundamental tenet of calculus identifying the existence of a quantity, immeasurable, that must exist if there is some change in the domain despite there being no change in the range for the same quantity of the range identifying a new point along the range that is, again, immeasurable but is identified by the change (some arbitrary quantity) in the domain.  That is, a change in the y axis as you graph for x and Z= a + bi, where we're interested in |Z| in order to represent quantities above two dimensions completely in 2 dimensions since either the x or y plains can be used to denote 2 dimensional quantities without evoking discrete mathematics furthering complexity of the scaffolding needing to comprehend the language through holistics when it takes years in order to instinctively identify holistics by the jargon, the dogmatic language (i.e. comprehensible only by those practicing it) such as 1, 2, 3, instead of (, @#, 980.  The quantity is second nature, a habitual thing, one identified immediately up to 4, 1234.  After / *%+* one must actually count the individual quantities 5, 4, 2 or 3 times in order to see that there are 5.  It took so long for this notion to take hold that the roman system for counting is still used to denote different supersections in books authored.

So we know the mind and infinity doesn't exist, by way of our ability to measure them, but who uses a photon measuring instrument to capture the existence of electrons?  If it can't be measured doesn't exist is correct then so too is the virtuous way of saying it.  If it exists then it is measurable however like IQ won't tell you how successful you'll be once you've turned ability into skill how difficult it is to measure may very well be impossible to identify even within the bounds of its domain or range only.  Why is this so?  Because from Godel we know it is perfectly possible to have constructs that exist and are true but can never be proven to be true.  To mean there is no sufficient claim to prove the existence despite it being sufficient to say that it's evidence.  In other words evidence is not sufficient, and never will be, to claim something must exist.  In other words correlation does not imply causation.  Causation of course implies correlation, so it's not commutative.  Otherwise the laws of motion, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction, bodies in motion stay in motion, and inertia, which identifies the root of the existence of force, despite not being measurable without producing it, so there's evidence for it, it must exist, but this is not sufficient to prove that it actually exists due to not knowing whether or not there's some substrate underlying it that causes illusion or paradox (contradiction) to occur.  For example we can measure waves, but they don't actually exist.  It's a useful holistic however but we don't get to find out about their actual existence until we travel to subatomic (quantum, not micro) magnitudes of the inverse of size.  Micro is atomistic, elementary.  Macro is compound.  Chemical is evidence of an existential layer superseding the building blocks of the quantum because it fully embodies the limits of what can be said to be order at the largest sizes of the Universe, but isn't sufficient to cause proof, once more, of the existence of something underpinning it.

So, from what you have said, after that speel by me, is the following in reply:. Just because time doesn't exist doesn't mean that it won't, can't, or ever will exist despite being necessary for determinism to be true therefore arguing in favour of free will that is something only a postmodernist would do.  Someone who thinks they're a telepath.  Once more, it exists, but evidence isn't sufficient because you can't prove it exists so what you think exists as you think it does might very well be bull-**** even though how you think it exists, despite very well not existing, very well could.  Time is identified in mathematics as precisely e, as far as I'm concerned.  It's a value that can be enumerated.  When talking about orders of magnitude or inverses (logarithms) then time and time again it proves more useful, unless dealing with data sets in linear algebra, to use the natural log when dealing with populations that change, not ones that stay the same, because by its behaviour it's possible to identify asymptotes that must exist, if not then wave good-bye to evolution because there's no time.  What all of this means is that there are some quantities in mathematics for which mathematics will never by sufficient enough to proof but necessary to show.  Otherwise physics, the ancestor of mathematics and philosophy, would be purely mathematical, and not a holistic language dealing with measurement phenomena.  The thing with time is that I can not measure below the Planck second.  This is what the person who said if it can't be measured it doesn't exist.  He is a fool showcasing his limitations of mathematics, a fundamentally limited thing where you can only understand all and any of it if your IQ is 120+.  Gargantuan ****ing effort if 120 and monstrous effort if your IQ is 160, but it's possible because it becomes purely intuitive once your IQ is at, or close to, 180.  All of those stats based on evidence that is necessary, once more to prove the existence, but not sufficient because experience or subsequent reiteration must prove them, even though there will come a period in the universe, entropy death, that makes it potentially forevermore impossible to show.  What this also means from Godels theorems and analysing them is that the proof of a thing isn't sufficient for its reality!  In other words there really is an a priori reality.  Plato's world of forms, in other words.  Once more though, none of those objects exist, yet they are, actually, physically, real.

Before I go on I want to pause with this to make it a dialogue.  Time doesn't exist.  Why do you say that?  I imagine because you see and understand why it doesn't.  Tell me how you understand it?  And I'll tell you why you're wrong in reply.  Now tell me why time does exist.  And I'll tell you you're wrong again.  Two times you sin.  Look...  Harder.  Give me the synthesis.  The rate of change of time is itself.  The kilogram is a quantity that doesn't exist, but is precisely defined in empirical means covered by a glass dome where I can physically point shoe and let you feel the existence of what I've come to the conclusion is precisely the instrument of SI unit I use for kilogram.

The reason I know time exists is because I can identify it irrationally as a fraction of a whole quantity in terms not breaking the wholeness of the quantity, so it's necessarily also in the realm of natural number, but further, it is in the realm of counting numbers, integers, because if I can identify its quantity I can identify an origin, and if I can identify an origin then I can identify the lack of it, and if I can identify the lack of it then I have time.  The existence of the lack of quantity is necessary and sufficient to prove the existence of time via the existence of negative numbers.  Are they just a useful mathematical holistic or actually real?  Both, actually.  The hardware running our computers wouldn't work to produce anything, neither would our brains, if we couldn't identify an a priori state (the power grid) to produce an a posteriori state, mechanical physical storage (hard drive, the brain minus the neurochemical soup) due to absurd things like reverse correlation in quantum mechanics causing the break down of what we think of as quantities from wave states into physical ones.  Why does this occur?  Why, because waves don't exist, despite the fact that we can measure them.  From this what can be measured doesn't exist.  But this is a contradiction to what can't be measured doesn't exist.  So this must necessarily be true, by mathematical law, by discrete mathematics its opposite must be literally, physically, true.  What can be measured doesn't exist.  What exists is determinism.  And if determinism exists then there also exists myth, and very few people know their myths despite the discovery of the future.  Chaos can't be measured because its measurement would render it order.  So, by the reality lemma, chaos must exist.  Yet this seems at first glance to run into the face of determinism suggesting free will, or man is the centre of the Universe, is the case, and even though this night be demonstrably true, it isn't actually true, as an example of something that should be true, seems to be true, is good, buy still, is sin.  Seeing like the genius does automatically is seeing that philosophy is like science in that it is static, and thus a complete field.  Like music.  Like language.  The expansion of its range, even if infinitely interpretable by its domain, approaches some finite quantity that is true, that we know is true having experienced it, but impossible to show indefinitely meaning that new knowledge producing new tests to check the fact of a thing can only hope to run into the is ought problem.  The existence of the is ought problem is once more, the existence of time.  In order for the is ought problem to exist determinism must fail.  It's never is ought.  It's is and was.  Another point of evidence for the existence of time.  This is why the rule of the game is don't assume.  Because you take it on board yourself and it's impossible to take the light of Ra off of you when grossly prostated backwards on the top of a pyramid facing him, (the Sun), so do not assume.  Instead assume that.  Therefore it's a thing of analysis, as justly intended in the beginning and finally the synthesis is produced.

It is a highly presumptuous act to make the claim time does not exist.  It is beyond good and Evil to claim beyond the Cardinals their predecessor, virtuously instead, assume THAT time does not exist.

Finally we're getting somewhere.  If time didn't exist then all of science fails because the friction in the universe would be infinite.  And, the true words spoken by the gentleman, fool as he needed to be to open the eyes, mine at least, that what can not be measured doesn't exist.  This is the oddity of the 4th dimension, or dimensions higher than one's own, it is still there with real world quantities despite not touching any dimension lower than it so there is something there to measure it.  If a tree fell in the woods does it make a sound?  In its original context, such as the original time doesn't exist, (ASSUME 'THAT' time does not exist for else you evoke all of psychology, far too early) no sound exists because there's nothing there to measure it.  With the discovery of the 4th dimension by Einstein special and general relativity, we know that time is relative, yet like an idiom it exists but there's absolutely no way you're going to be able to prove it, so it's a theory, despite being fact.  Fact isn't sufficient to make claims of proof because anything that is proven is probable a hundred million different ways and despite this notion it simply takes one piece of counter evidence, such as with Einstein's predecessor, scientifically at least, Newton, in order to render Law as rule (religion and state mixing if the dumb ass Newton bothered understanding philosophy as well as he does mathematics, which is to mean, not at all) for example the fact that the prime numbers AREN'T in actual fact infinite, despite there being 50 000 proofs showing that they are, they are merely eternal due to the fact that they must be computed, and there exists no recursive formula to identify every single one despite knowing the limitations of the number you need isn't eternal or infinite, strictly countable, strictly less than 5 in the naturals, and despite the potential for recursive algorithm to be atomistic, it's not.  6n+\-i for all numbers not divisible by some quantity 6k+\- the derivative of the absolute value of root negative one as identified in the tan quadrant of the quantities denoting trigonometry necessary to understand logs at all (by the use of graphs from histograms by way of a deviation that's standard across its entirety to make the data produced meaningful vis. as a report for the non-mathematically minded) that has the real as its shadow and depicts the existence of the imaginary values used by electrical engineers to understand how current operates to avoid killing anyone by the voltage since you need to know the resistances you're going to physically need due to the sheer amount of friction being dealt with respective to other media used by the potential energy (the current) producing the kinetic energy, (the force) whilst accelerating (operating via changes in speed going from one medium to another) that proves the existence of some real time quantity, by the existence of magnetism.  What this means is that only the current is necessary in order to define a magnet.  What that means is that only a magnet is necessary to produce voltage despite there being a current.  What that means is that photons don't actually act as waves, they act as particles.  And electrons aren't photons at the element level, despite being subatomic (quantum) so electrons must only act as waves, what that means is no electrical circuit will be closed if there isn't a base (battery) to produce the potential (current, think RAM, random access memory, as the current as potential, the volts as the power, and the GPU and CPU as the size of the speed that it contains, a value denoted in terms of its determinant arrived at through its double derivative depicted by the least constant  even if its speed is a function of acceleration it will never be greater than the maximum speed in the universe, c, the upper limited depicted by the maximum possible area within which it must exist, its domain, as c^2, within which the existence of the electron is identified subparticle, a wave, but as we know particles exists, individual photons that we're so sensitive and good at detecting that the illusion of an electromagnetic aura surrounding the particle is produced by the brain.  That is, the electrical potential of the electron it can morph into is measured by the abstract quantity via sense perception denoted by its Lumosity via the SI unit lumins.

 So what can we say about time in physics?  It exists because it has been identified as an SI unit in the same way that the length of a foot is identified by whoever is King in order to make the spaces that he operates within to his perfect fitting, and everything else structurally changed to befit the kingdom.  Why?  Because every inch increase in height is a cubic increase in mass and the amount of food one will eat, which will need to be prepared for in the lengths of years given there's only one season to harvest, one to see, and four across needing to consume, for the King, and consequently for his subordinates, then the size of his feet must be known because the feet tells you the size of the forearm anatomically that gives you the best prediction of what his height will be before they knew that you are double your the height when you are 2 years and 11 months old when an adult.  The imperial system is more dependable than the imperial system but if you're using the imperial system anywhere else in the world then time isn't relative, despite being relative, and thus proving time is relative finding the contradiction in imperial physics proving again its usefulness despite being something that didn't exist and is now something that does exist.

Why should I make real the fact that time doesn't exist?  I could, can do it.  But it doesn't exist yet.  It could.  Do I know for how long this has been going on for?  No, because I'm experiencing so much ****ing joy at being happy thinking about one of my favourite things.  Time.  I hope time is like God.  Infinite seeming in the depth of its analysis to allow me to stretch my legs intellectually when that passion, that drive, calls.  Be warned unexplained-mysteries, I've saved the peak of my intellectual aptitude, my Mathematical prowess, for the following 5 years of my life.  Pattern, numerical pattern, my IQ I scored a posteriori (skill) is 176 and the final problem on the set of items is almost in my grasp, for an IQ score of 180+.

I could shut the door on this topic but it's just too much fun isn't it? :D.  I seriously look forward to reading what you reply with!

 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

On 8/25/2022 at 2:58 PM, PsiSeeker said:

The dimension above must necessarily contain the dimension below even though objects within its range need not be expressed within its domain or the abstract effect.  2 dimensions are needed in order to quantify everything, which is why I had to say that mathematics is the 2nd dimension.  Its presence doesn't find expression again until the 9th dimension linguistically.  Science thinks it is beyond mathematics like how the Aristotelian defined meta virtues are beyond the cardinal, concerned with good and evil as they are, and further along deduced that is explicitly handled by Plato in his analysis of the cardinal virtue Justice, where I think his synopsis of it is synthesized further, later on, by the church in their identity of 4 cardinal virtues in total.  The only one that I didn't understand, and realised I hit a fundamental wall in philosophy, which I knew due to my inability to ground ethics as a morality in anything tangible, probably due to it being an abstract from dynamic discovery, namely the identifying of the rules that govern a particular elementisable algorithm identifying the atomistic components that comprise the building blocks for the measurable limit of a mass quantity itself, within space, which is where we identify compounds from chemicals from atoms from atoms from isotopes and from chemicals from RNA necessary for DNA as a platform on which it acts able to capture the shadows cast onto the RNA and measuring a different component of reality, namely the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum where what remains is the non-visual components, or stimuli producing, non-visual cortex.  Some idiot piped up "what can not be measured does not exist", the fool.  I can't measure a dream, in fact even if I were able to identify that someone is dreaming I would never in a hundred million years be able to identify whether or not Delta frequency dominance or theta frequency dominance identified by rapid eye movement is a dream without the person only being identifiable as knowledgeable (knowing what they're talking about) by their word, it's actually the correct comprehension of their word where sometimes one is forced to produce the synthesis when the gab comes in the form of good or Evil.  The good in good is identified by Plato in his analysis of justice.  If the theleme characterised as act is set in its Genesis by a closing set of the antithesis (so the thesis is embodied, the antithesis must always be used to denote awareness of the thesis, such as with atheism where it, atheism, is beyond good and Evil.  It is an Aristotelian virtue.  It is a priori of the antithesis that is demonstrably a posteriori inclusive of both the antithesis and its summation as either heaven or hell depending on the choices on chose.  Heaven if one chose justly, the antithesis, and hell if sin, presuming to have attained the best not realising the tangible, immeasurable, quality of the affect mind has upon the thinking, in the same way the affect infinity has in avoiding the eternity of calculation it takes to identify existence of certain mathematical objects via the fundamental tenet of calculus identifying the existence of a quantity, immeasurable, that must exist if there is some change in the domain despite there being no change in the range for the same quantity of the range identifying a new point along the range that is, again, immeasurable but is identified by the change (some arbitrary quantity) in the domain.  That is, a change in the y axis as you graph for x and Z= a + bi, where we're interested in |Z| in order to represent quantities above two dimensions completely in 2 dimensions since either the x or y plains can be used to denote 2 dimensional quantities without evoking discrete mathematics furthering complexity of the scaffolding needing to comprehend the language through holistics when it takes years in order to instinctively identify holistics by the jargon, the dogmatic language (i.e. comprehensible only by those practicing it) such as 1, 2, 3, instead of (, @#, 980.  The quantity is second nature, a habitual thing, one identified immediately up to 4, 1234.  After / *%+* one must actually count the individual quantities 5, 4, 2 or 3 times in order to see that there are 5.  It took so long for this notion to take hold that the roman system for counting is still used to denote different supersections in books authored.

So we know the mind and infinity doesn't exist, by way of our ability to measure them, but who uses a photon measuring instrument to capture the existence of electrons?  If it can't be measured doesn't exist is correct then so too is the virtuous way of saying it.  If it exists then it is measurable however like IQ won't tell you how successful you'll be once you've turned ability into skill how difficult it is to measure may very well be impossible to identify even within the bounds of its domain or range only.  Why is this so?  Because from Godel we know it is perfectly possible to have constructs that exist and are true but can never be proven to be true.  To mean there is no sufficient claim to prove the existence despite it being sufficient to say that it's evidence.  In other words evidence is not sufficient, and never will be, to claim something must exist.  In other words correlation does not imply causation.  Causation of course implies correlation, so it's not commutative.  Otherwise the laws of motion, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction, bodies in motion stay in motion, and inertia, which identifies the root of the existence of force, despite not being measurable without producing it, so there's evidence for it, it must exist, but this is not sufficient to prove that it actually exists due to not knowing whether or not there's some substrate underlying it that causes illusion or paradox (contradiction) to occur.  For example we can measure waves, but they don't actually exist.  It's a useful holistic however but we don't get to find out about their actual existence until we travel to subatomic (quantum, not micro) magnitudes of the inverse of size.  Micro is atomistic, elementary.  Macro is compound.  Chemical is evidence of an existential layer superseding the building blocks of the quantum because it fully embodies the limits of what can be said to be order at the largest sizes of the Universe, but isn't sufficient to cause proof, once more, of the existence of something underpinning it.

So, from what you have said, after that speel by me, is the following in reply:. Just because time doesn't exist doesn't mean that it won't, can't, or ever will exist despite being necessary for determinism to be true therefore arguing in favour of free will that is something only a postmodernist would do.  Someone who thinks they're a telepath.  Once more, it exists, but evidence isn't sufficient because you can't prove it exists so what you think exists as you think it does might very well be bull-**** even though how you think it exists, despite very well not existing, very well could.  Time is identified in mathematics as precisely e, as far as I'm concerned.  It's a value that can be enumerated.  When talking about orders of magnitude or inverses (logarithms) then time and time again it proves more useful, unless dealing with data sets in linear algebra, to use the natural log when dealing with populations that change, not ones that stay the same, because by its behaviour it's possible to identify asymptotes that must exist, if not then wave good-bye to evolution because there's no time.  What all of this means is that there are some quantities in mathematics for which mathematics will never by sufficient enough to proof but necessary to show.  Otherwise physics, the ancestor of mathematics and philosophy, would be purely mathematical, and not a holistic language dealing with measurement phenomena.  The thing with time is that I can not measure below the Planck second.  This is what the person who said if it can't be measured it doesn't exist.  He is a fool showcasing his limitations of mathematics, a fundamentally limited thing where you can only understand all and any of it if your IQ is 120+.  Gargantuan ****ing effort if 120 and monstrous effort if your IQ is 160, but it's possible because it becomes purely intuitive once your IQ is at, or close to, 180.  All of those stats based on evidence that is necessary, once more to prove the existence, but not sufficient because experience or subsequent reiteration must prove them, even though there will come a period in the universe, entropy death, that makes it potentially forevermore impossible to show.  What this also means from Godels theorems and analysing them is that the proof of a thing isn't sufficient for its reality!  In other words there really is an a priori reality.  Plato's world of forms, in other words.  Once more though, none of those objects exist, yet they are, actually, physically, real.

Before I go on I want to pause with this to make it a dialogue.  Time doesn't exist.  Why do you say that?  I imagine because you see and understand why it doesn't.  Tell me how you understand it?  And I'll tell you why you're wrong in reply.  Now tell me why time does exist.  And I'll tell you you're wrong again.  Two times you sin.  Look...  Harder.  Give me the synthesis.  The rate of change of time is itself.  The kilogram is a quantity that doesn't exist, but is precisely defined in empirical means covered by a glass dome where I can physically point shoe and let you feel the existence of what I've come to the conclusion is precisely the instrument of SI unit I use for kilogram.

The reason I know time exists is because I can identify it irrationally as a fraction of a whole quantity in terms not breaking the wholeness of the quantity, so it's necessarily also in the realm of natural number, but further, it is in the realm of counting numbers, integers, because if I can identify its quantity I can identify an origin, and if I can identify an origin then I can identify the lack of it, and if I can identify the lack of it then I have time.  The existence of the lack of quantity is necessary and sufficient to prove the existence of time via the existence of negative numbers.  Are they just a useful mathematical holistic or actually real?  Both, actually.  The hardware running our computers wouldn't work to produce anything, neither would our brains, if we couldn't identify an a priori state (the power grid) to produce an a posteriori state, mechanical physical storage (hard drive, the brain minus the neurochemical soup) due to absurd things like reverse correlation in quantum mechanics causing the break down of what we think of as quantities from wave states into physical ones.  Why does this occur?  Why, because waves don't exist, despite the fact that we can measure them.  From this what can be measured doesn't exist.  But this is a contradiction to what can't be measured doesn't exist.  So this must necessarily be true, by mathematical law, by discrete mathematics its opposite must be literally, physically, true.  What can be measured doesn't exist.  What exists is determinism.  And if determinism exists then there also exists myth, and very few people know their myths despite the discovery of the future.  Chaos can't be measured because its measurement would render it order.  So, by the reality lemma, chaos must exist.  Yet this seems at first glance to run into the face of determinism suggesting free will, or man is the centre of the Universe, is the case, and even though this night be demonstrably true, it isn't actually true, as an example of something that should be true, seems to be true, is good, buy still, is sin.  Seeing like the genius does automatically is seeing that philosophy is like science in that it is static, and thus a complete field.  Like music.  Like language.  The expansion of its range, even if infinitely interpretable by its domain, approaches some finite quantity that is true, that we know is true having experienced it, but impossible to show indefinitely meaning that new knowledge producing new tests to check the fact of a thing can only hope to run into the is ought problem.  The existence of the is ought problem is once more, the existence of time.  In order for the is ought problem to exist determinism must fail.  It's never is ought.  It's is and was.  Another point of evidence for the existence of time.  This is why the rule of the game is don't assume.  Because you take it on board yourself and it's impossible to take the light of Ra off of you when grossly prostated backwards on the top of a pyramid facing him, (the Sun), so do not assume.  Instead assume that.  Therefore it's a thing of analysis, as justly intended in the beginning and finally the synthesis is produced.

It is a highly presumptuous act to make the claim time does not exist.  It is beyond good and Evil to claim beyond the Cardinals their predecessor, virtuously instead, assume THAT time does not exist.

Finally we're getting somewhere.  If time didn't exist then all of science fails because the friction in the universe would be infinite.  And, the true words spoken by the gentleman, fool as he needed to be to open the eyes, mine at least, that what can not be measured doesn't exist.  This is the oddity of the 4th dimension, or dimensions higher than one's own, it is still there with real world quantities despite not touching any dimension lower than it so there is something there to measure it.  If a tree fell in the woods does it make a sound?  In its original context, such as the original time doesn't exist, (ASSUME 'THAT' time does not exist for else you evoke all of psychology, far too early) no sound exists because there's nothing there to measure it.  With the discovery of the 4th dimension by Einstein special and general relativity, we know that time is relative, yet like an idiom it exists but there's absolutely no way you're going to be able to prove it, so it's a theory, despite being fact.  Fact isn't sufficient to make claims of proof because anything that is proven is probable a hundred million different ways and despite this notion it simply takes one piece of counter evidence, such as with Einstein's predecessor, scientifically at least, Newton, in order to render Law as rule (religion and state mixing if the dumb ass Newton bothered understanding philosophy as well as he does mathematics, which is to mean, not at all) for example the fact that the prime numbers AREN'T in actual fact infinite, despite there being 50 000 proofs showing that they are, they are merely eternal due to the fact that they must be computed, and there exists no recursive formula to identify every single one despite knowing the limitations of the number you need isn't eternal or infinite, strictly countable, strictly less than 5 in the naturals, and despite the potential for recursive algorithm to be atomistic, it's not.  6n+\-i for all numbers not divisible by some quantity 6k+\- the derivative of the absolute value of root negative one as identified in the tan quadrant of the quantities denoting trigonometry necessary to understand logs at all (by the use of graphs from histograms by way of a deviation that's standard across its entirety to make the data produced meaningful vis. as a report for the non-mathematically minded) that has the real as its shadow and depicts the existence of the imaginary values used by electrical engineers to understand how current operates to avoid killing anyone by the voltage since you need to know the resistances you're going to physically need due to the sheer amount of friction being dealt with respective to other media used by the potential energy (the current) producing the kinetic energy, (the force) whilst accelerating (operating via changes in speed going from one medium to another) that proves the existence of some real time quantity, by the existence of magnetism.  What this means is that only the current is necessary in order to define a magnet.  What that means is that only a magnet is necessary to produce voltage despite there being a current.  What that means is that photons don't actually act as waves, they act as particles.  And electrons aren't photons at the element level, despite being subatomic (quantum) so electrons must only act as waves, what that means is no electrical circuit will be closed if there isn't a base (battery) to produce the potential (current, think RAM, random access memory, as the current as potential, the volts as the power, and the GPU and CPU as the size of the speed that it contains, a value denoted in terms of its determinant arrived at through its double derivative depicted by the least constant  even if its speed is a function of acceleration it will never be greater than the maximum speed in the universe, c, the upper limited depicted by the maximum possible area within which it must exist, its domain, as c^2, within which the existence of the electron is identified subparticle, a wave, but as we know particles exists, individual photons that we're so sensitive and good at detecting that the illusion of an electromagnetic aura surrounding the particle is produced by the brain.  That is, the electrical potential of the electron it can morph into is measured by the abstract quantity via sense perception denoted by its Lumosity via the SI unit lumins.

 So what can we say about time in physics?  It exists because it has been identified as an SI unit in the same way that the length of a foot is identified by whoever is King in order to make the spaces that he operates within to his perfect fitting, and everything else structurally changed to befit the kingdom.  Why?  Because every inch increase in height is a cubic increase in mass and the amount of food one will eat, which will need to be prepared for in the lengths of years given there's only one season to harvest, one to see, and four across needing to consume, for the King, and consequently for his subordinates, then the size of his feet must be known because the feet tells you the size of the forearm anatomically that gives you the best prediction of what his height will be before they knew that you are double your the height when you are 2 years and 11 months old when an adult.  The imperial system is more dependable than the imperial system but if you're using the imperial system anywhere else in the world then time isn't relative, despite being relative, and thus proving time is relative finding the contradiction in imperial physics proving again its usefulness despite being something that didn't exist and is now something that does exist.

Why should I make real the fact that time doesn't exist?  I could, can do it.  But it doesn't exist yet.  It could.  Do I know for how long this has been going on for?  No, because I'm experiencing so much ****ing joy at being happy thinking about one of my favourite things.  Time.  I hope time is like God.  Infinite seeming in the depth of its analysis to allow me to stretch my legs intellectually when that passion, that drive, calls.  Be warned unexplained-mysteries, I've saved the peak of my intellectual aptitude, my Mathematical prowess, for the following 5 years of my life.  Pattern, numerical pattern, my IQ I scored a posteriori (skill) is 176 and the final problem on the set of items is almost in my grasp, for an IQ score of 180+.

I could shut the door on this topic but it's just too much fun isn't it? :D.  I seriously look forward to reading what you reply with!

 

 

Excuse me for a moment, as my head is still spinning from running into your wall-of-text. By-the-way, what does it say?

[+joc]

10 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Excuse me for a moment, as my head is still spinning from running into your wall-of-text. By-the-way, what does it say?

 

On 8/25/2022 at 1:58 PM, PsiSeeker said:

The dimension above must necessarily contain the dimension below even though objects within its range need not be expressed within its domain or the abstract effect.

The first sentence says it all.  

Let me splain it to you:

The dimension above is The Sky.  The dimension below is The Earth.  The Sky contains the Earth, but the Earth does not necessarily contain the Sky.  Birds of a Feather Flock together, but they can still land on Earth.  As is above, so is it below.  For Earth Below.  

I'm sure you understand completely now! 

[MGB]

Time is simply a measurement. If there was no life anywhere throughout all eternity, planets would still be rotating around their stars, there would however be no one to measure time.

[qxcontinuum]

On 5/8/2022 at 7:06 AM, PsiSeeker said:

 "I have seen the dark universe yawning, where the black planets roll, without luster, or Knowledge, or name: the Haunter of the Dark."

Me too...