Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 118 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
pokey #55488 02/16/16 06:21 AM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
You are sort of correct pokey and caught up with the problem we have everyone trying to answer

The one most people will struggle with and may argue with you is this one
Originally Posted By: pokey
Time (perhaps a tool we use to make sense of what we term change) exists. Unless you’re a photon moving at c, as I understand they experience no passing of time.

Paul went down the path of making time not existing. He found the easy solution to change everything else into measurements and not existing, which he promptly did. In QM that idea is a form of holographic principle, that things only exist based on measurement and hence my little joke with Paul who is now a convert. There is a very famous exchange with Einstein over the existence of the moon.

So you are going down the time exists path. So your question I would like you to front is a little different. If time exists how can it be stopped for the photon (that is appear not to exist) and then the extension of that is can it go backwards? If it can't go backwards what stops it?

Extension thinking excercise:
The interesting part to ponder is time existing or not existing the only two choices. This one usually catches most people out who will swear that it is that black and white. So lets give you a couple of examples in shadows and rainbows. These things generally fall under a category of things called illusions of physical effects. As humans all our senses have illusions that can fool them and we often marvel at them. Can we definitively exclude time from being an illusion of a physical effect?

Last edited by Orac; 02/16/16 06:55 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
.
pokey #55497 02/16/16 01:25 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
...I understand they experience no passing of time.


http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/07/q-does-light-experience-time/#comments

Pokey, I've posted this link before, but in case you missed it, it is worth a look. One interesting aspect is the "Physicist's" reaction, or lack of it.

Last edited by Bill S.; 02/16/16 01:44 PM.

There never was nothing.
Orac #55498 02/16/16 01:43 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
The interesting part to ponder is time existing or not existing the only two choices. This one usually catches most people out who will swear that it is that black and white. So lets give you a couple of examples in shadows and rainbows.


If light exists, then shadows and rainbows exist.

The existence, or otherwise, of time is a question that leads to speculation and, possibly, metaphysics. It may not even be a question for science. Science needs time in order to make calculations, so “shut up and calculate” is undoubtedly the most practical approach.

I raised this question because I overheard someone mention a watch that was “accurate to 1 second in 1,000 years”, and I thought: what does that actually mean?

I think there is a possible third option in the existence/non-existence of time debate, but I’m trying to keep off infinity/eternity. We have enough repetitive crackpottery already. smile


There never was nothing.
Bill S. #55499 02/16/16 03:30 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
That statement you have made is actually very profound but missed the correctness by a tiny whisker. The shadows and rainbow only may exist they would depend on other things as well.

Originally Posted By: Bill S
If light exists, then shadows and rainbows exist.

That is called trinary logic and the form you have given goes like this

C = true, A or B may equal { true or false}
C = false A or B only equal false

your example
light = true, shadow or rainbow may equal { true, false }
light = false shadow or rainbow only ever false

What you will find is you can't change A & B into position C as they have a dependency on C.

Would you like a prompt to think about?

space = true, energy and time may equal {true, false}
space = false, energy and time only ever false.

What trinary logic is really good at is dealing with dependent conditions and help you recognize them. You might want to play around with more quantities in physics.

Yes I also gave you the WHITE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM you all left out in your discussion of time which was Energy.

I laughed when you said shutup and calculate because you didn't have anything to calculate with in your discussion so far. Not one of you remotely talked about it and for Paul and Pokey it is probably vital because it brings in the persistence.

The motion energy version goes along the lines a body in motion will tend to stay in motion and whatever else Mr Newton said. You have Energy and time connected together with persistence.

Last edited by Orac; 02/16/16 03:56 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Orac #55500 02/16/16 04:05 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
Paul you said you don't believe in QM smile

So the moon doesn't exist except when you look at it !!

Welcome to the darkside my new little QM convert. I can't believe you walked into that head first and yes I am the devil. However to be fair to me, you joined the conversation and walked yourself into a hole I didn't do anything.

I bet you want to revise some of your answers now my little QM believer


1) I don't believe in QM , Qm is BS like yourself.

2) the moon exist even if no one were looking at it.

3) I'm waaayyy to realistic to be converted into some
BS illogical realm of fantasy populated by idiots.

Quote:
I really am not a mean person


I never said you were mean , stupid yes , dumber that dirt yes , idiotic (not sure but most likely) yes.





3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #55501 02/16/16 04:07 PM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Settle my little padwan smile

We believe in the same things apparently laugh

You probably need to rethink your answers or are you happy and we call each other bro and hangout together now.

Last edited by Orac; 02/16/16 04:18 PM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Bill S. #55502 02/16/16 04:32 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Originally Posted By: paul
it (time) just passes......

....it (time) does not exist.


Originally Posted By: Bill S
How can something that doesn't exist do any passing, or anything else?


(time) used in the context I used is simply four letters
joined together to form a word that is used in communication.

its like (smart) , if (time) exist then (smart) exist.

likewise all other words used to communicate would exist.

(ouch) is also a four letter word used to communicate a feeling of pain or discomfort , if (time) exist then
(ouch) also exist.

every word in every language used for communication
purposes would have to exist if (time) exist.

does (orac) exist independently from the person that
is named (orac) for communication purposes on this forum?

can you think of any other four letter words that do not
have any physical properties that can be said are
attached to them?

what about one letter words such as (a)?

what is a (a)?

(a) is a letter , but it does not exist as anything except
a letter of the alphabet and is used for communication purposes.

(t) is a letter but it does not exist.
(i) is a letter but it does not exist.
(m) is a letter but it does not exist.
(e) is a letter but it does not exist.

time is a word but it has no physical properties and
is only used for communication purposes.

the word (passes) is used for communication purposes also
exactly like the word (time) is used , when using the
two words (time) and (passes) together
as in (time passes) the word (passes) is used as
descriptive text of the word (time).

as in the time seems to be passing so slow when Im at
work these days.

none of the words in the above sentence exist and are
only used for communication purposes.

can you claim that any of the words in the above sentence
have any physical properties attached to them?



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Bill S. #55503 02/16/16 04:54 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Quote:
...I understand they experience no passing of time.


http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/07/q-does-light-experience-time/#comments

Pokey, I've posted this link before, but in case you missed it, it is worth a look. One interesting aspect is the "Physicist's" reaction, or lack of it.



Thanks for the link Bill S. Will need to spend some time to sort through the opinions given.

Orac #55504 02/16/16 05:08 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
Can we definitively exclude time from being an illusion of a physical effect? [/quote]

Thanks for the reply, I had to take some sleep time.

I can't definitely exclude anything.

Good grief, Time is going to lead into "double slit" and "delayed choice" isn't it?

Orac #55505 02/16/16 05:13 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136


Quote:
We believe in the same things apparently


absolutely not ... no way.
you believe that time can dialate , I dont.
you believe that time exist , I don't.
you believe that light has a speed limit, I don't.
you believe that mass has a speed limit, I don't.
you believe so many illogical things that I don't.
you also believe you are intelligent , I don't.


Quote:

You probably need to rethink your answers or are you happy and we call each other bro and hangout together now.


I'll keep my answers , and I'll have to pass on the
hanging out part as well.

so you can stop patting yourself on your own back
as if you had somehow won over a new recruit into your
fantasy realm of illogical nonsense.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #55514 02/17/16 03:25 AM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: paul
you believe that time exist , I don't.

Nope I am happy to have it not exist, so we can get down and hang out like Soul brothers.

Lay some skin on me bro, you are my homeboy now.

Group hug time ... too soon?

Last edited by Orac; 02/17/16 07:36 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
pokey #55515 02/17/16 04:00 AM
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: pokey
I can't definitely exclude anything.

Good grief, Time is going to lead into "double slit" and "delayed choice" isn't it?

Nope we are playing the game of Einstein and GR distilled down to a very layman level.

He connects the trinary logic between space, time and energy and imagines a space where at every point along it time and energy are an illussion of space itself.

For his time every point in his space can be imagined to have a different clock running at a different time dependant only on the properties of space at that point.

For energy it disappears locally at any point in space, you can't measure it at a single point, well it measures zero. You have to pick two points separated in spacetime (a metric) to measure energy between them.

So in Einsteins framework a photon may experience time stopped but that is a local value of zero you are not entitled to project it to any other point in space. That is why time stopping for a photon is not an issue and it doesn't mean time doesn't exist under GR.

Don't get me started on the person falling into a black hole and time stopping that layman always can't get straight in there head smile

What all of you instantly did was take Time as a universe wide global thing (you excluded it being local as in relativity) and none of you connected it to energy.

As you had all gone global and then broken it to exit/non exist, I was trying to work out how the hell I give you all the hint they aren't the only options. Time exist or not is a non issue if it is a local illusion you can take either. Would you argue over a rainbow existing or not because its sort of a nonsense argument.

So I guess we have a way to go in our science education.

Last edited by Orac; 02/17/16 07:23 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
paul #55522 02/17/16 09:49 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Paul, you should make a good physicist. Most of what you say in #55502 is absolutely right but (in this context) completely useless. It does a few things, but does not address the question of how something that does not exist can be said to “pass”, or do anything else.

What your logic does say is quite interesting.

Quote:
(t) is a letter but it does not exist.
(i) is a letter but it does not exist.
(m) is a letter but it does not exist.
(e) is a letter but it does not exist.


Letters do not exist

Quote:
none of the words in the above sentence exist


Words do not exist, presumably because they are composed of letters that do not exist.

Quote:
time is a word


Therefore it doesn’t exist.

If things designated by words do not exist, what does exist?

Let’s think about that.

That’s it!!! I’m thinking, therefore I exist, but my existence must be wordless.

Everything else is described/defined by words, therefore it does not exist.

Have you hit on the best argument yet for solipsism?


There never was nothing.
Orac #55523 02/18/16 05:21 AM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
"He connects the trinary logic between space, time and energy and imagines a space where at every point along it time and energy are an illussion of space itself."

So you’re saying that Albert E said:
If Space = true, Energy and Time = false.

Bill S. #55524 02/18/16 02:15 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
If things designated by words do not exist, what does exist?

Let’s think about that.



things that have physical properties exist...

Quote:

That’s it!!! I’m thinking, therefore I exist, but my existence must be wordless.


so you wouldnt exist if you did not think?
you could certainly exist if you could not think as long as
your bodies life support systems were functioning.

If you think that there is a giant purple hippo jumping up
and down on top of your head would that create the hippo?
try it ... now look up and see if the hippo exist.

basically what you have said is that all words would have never
existed if man did not invent them as a form of communication.

so since the words time , temperature , speed , or any words
that are used only for communication purposes did
not exist until man first existed and invented tools to measure
them with and used them for communication purposes
then time , temperature , speed or any measurement
did not exist before man existed.

drawing the letter A in the sand with a stick does not equate
to the letter A existing , the only thing that would now exist
due to your actions would be the shape of the lines drawn in the sand.

the sand was already there.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #55526 02/18/16 10:55 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
so you wouldnt exist if you did not think?


Now; there’s something I certainly did not say.

Quote:
If you think that there is a giant purple hippo jumping up
and down on top of your head would that create the hippo?


I very much doubt it; but having had, while driving, had a “Stone Tape” experience of such startling clarity that it caused me to brake very sharply, I tend to have an open mind about reality.

Quote:
basically what you have said is that all words would have never
existed if man did not invent them as a form of communication.


That seems reasonable, but not provable.

Quote:
so since the words time , temperature , speed , or any words
that are used only for communication purposes did
not exist until man first existed and invented tools to measure
them with and used them for communication purposes
then time , temperature , speed or any measurement
did not exist before man existed.


All that says is that the words for these things did not exist before our ancestors invented them. It makes no case for claiming that the things described did not exist before there were words for them.

Quote:
drawing the letter A in the sand with a stick does not equate
to the letter A existing , the only thing that would now exist
due to your actions would be the shape of the lines drawn in the sand.


Remind me; have we defined “existence”?


There never was nothing.
Bill S. #55527 02/19/16 01:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Originally Posted By: Bill S

Remind me; have we defined “existence”?


I defined existence when I wrote

Originally Posted By: paul

things that have physical properties exist...


Originally Posted By: Bill S

That seems reasonable, but not provable.


are you saying that the many languages used by humans on
the earth were not invented by the humans on earth?

Quote:

All that says is that the words for these things did not exist before our ancestors invented them. It makes no case for claiming that the things described did not exist before there were words for them.


certainly it does , the things I described do not exist
time, temperature, speed, etc... they have no physical
properties therefore they cannot exist other than in our
own minds (like your stone tape halucination) you certainly
do not believe that the halucination that your mind generated
actually existed anywhere except in your own mind do you?


perhaps we should define the word define before we
define other meanings of other words in order to have
a strong foundation to build upon.

SAGG could use a running open dictionary that we can use
to reference our definitions of words.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #55528 02/19/16 01:43 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
we can carry this into physics if you like.

motion does not exist
force does not exist
acceleration does not exist
direction does not exist
distance does not exist
length does not exist
depth does not exist
width does not exist
height does not exist
area does not exist
diameter does not exist
radius does not exist
circumference does not exist
spin does not exist
angle does not exist
degree does not exist
radian does not exist
etc ... etc ... etc ...

the words above are words that humans invented to
use to describe objects that do exist and
do have physical properties.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #55531 02/20/16 03:43 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
things that have physical properties exist...


That might be part of the definition of “things that have physical properties”, but it is not a definition of existence.

Quote:
are you saying that the many languages used by humans on
the earth were not invented by the humans on earth?


From what obscure corner of your imagination did that arise?

I was suggesting that we have no way of knowing if there are other beings that invented language before we did. Even discounting “little green men”; you impress as a person of religious conviction; do you not think God and other spiritual beings might have been ahead of us?

Quote:
certainly it does , the things I described do not exist
time, temperature, speed, etc... they have no physical
properties therefore they cannot exist other than in our
own minds


If you were hit by a car travelling at 5mph, then by the same car travelling at 50mph; would you notice no physical difference; and if you did, would it really be physical or only in your mind?

Quote:
…you certainly
do not believe that the halucination that your mind generated
actually existed anywhere except in your own mind do you?


The experience was totally in my mind, of course. However, I had no way of knowing that some 25 years earlier two, slightly inebriated, young women were walking along that pavement (sidewalk) and that one turned her ankle on the kerb and lurched into the road in front of an oncoming vehicle and was killed. The hallucination was in my mind, but where did the information come from?


There never was nothing.
paul #55532 02/20/16 03:55 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Let’s take the first example from your list.

Quote:
motion does not exist


Let’s accept that, and move on.

Quote:
the words above are words that humans invented to
use to describe objects that do exist and
do have physical properties.


Would I be right in thinking that this somewhat ambiguous statement is not intended to say that motion is a physical property?


There never was nothing.
Page 2 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5