Time -- An invention of man
S D Rodrian
"John Leonard" <remove_for _spamjohn...@wwc.com> wrote:
> If time doesn't exist, then how can
> SR predict the relativity of
> simultaneity of events?
Are you asking how two watches can tell time
while existing apart from each other... and, if
by some chance the guys wearing them meet and
notice that their watches are showing different
times... how they can be synchronized?!
I'd say... rather easily (provided one of the
two men works for the other man, so there's no
doubt whose watch is on time & whose isn't).
S D Rodrian
web.sdrodrin.com
re:
> "François Bourassa" <franc...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:Zxo86.1594$pY3....@weber.videotron.net...
> >
> > "SDRodrian" <Don_Q...@mindless.com> a écrit dans le message news:
> > 93io32$lkg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > In article <93g960$ndo$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>,
> > > "sprinkle" <spri...@probability.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > > ... To put it simply: The
> > > > > ONLY "thing" that's required for motion to exist is
> > > > > only the three dimensions of existence alone. If ever
> > > > > something that exists (necessarily three-dimensional)
> > > > > can exist in some greater/lesser number of dimensions
> > > > > I'd sure like to see that! [But if all you wish to do
> > > > > is to create mathematical manifold dimensions and
> > > > > stuff them with mathematical manifold objects... in
> > > > > your dreams (wakeful or asleep), then God bless you
> > > > > for I often have had such dreams myself... albeit,
> > > > > mostly when I've been very soundly asleep--I snore.]
> > > > >
> > > > >> thanks for the fascinating and bewildering subject.
> > > >
> > > > If I wanted to travel to a distant galaxy,
> > > > and I already have a spacecraft
> > > > capable of taking me there, what dimensions
> > > > would I need to input into my
> > > > navigation computer to get me there?
> > >
> > > Only the zero ["0"] dimension, as you are
> > > already there [here]. Far out, man! *
> > >
> > > S D Rodrian
> > > web.sdrodrian.com
> > > wisdom.findhere.org
> > >
> > > * And you didn't even have to fill'er up
> > > or nutt'n.
> >
> > Ohwa, cool:)
> >
> >
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
S D Rodrian
Gravity...@webtv.net (tj Frazir) wrote:
> one last time.
I'll take you at your word.
> curve in space time
An F-15 over Iraq.
> electrons apear in a patern in time.
Or they crash?
> time ...A unit of space
Spaced-out time is meaningless:
Time is simply the timing of
one motion vs another motion(s).
> is ( presure in a piriod of time. ) All space
> is presure maintained.
Well, you have you work cut out
for you... explaining how gravity
and pressure can exist in the same
space at once! Good luck!
> Mater contibutes less presure to space
> than empty space dose.
And water burns, so in order to dowse it
one must pour gasoline over it.
> Electrons
> are part of space not mater.
Everything ultimately reduces to
motion. The problem we have in defining
"energy" ultimately as "motion" is that
our idea of physicality is exclusively based
upon its materiality (so motion without
something material moving is impossible
for our brains to compute).
> HO well....sigh
> Im taking my 1465mpg 88 cadalac
> to detroit this week. !
Wow! Impressed! (Them things's gotta
weigh a ton!) Are you going to throw it
over your back, or just drag it to Detroit
with a rope?
S D Rodrian
wisdom.findhere.org
sdrodrian.com
web.sdrodrian.com
S D Rodrian
"sprinkle" <spri...@probability.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Time as a dimension is only needed when
> 2 sentient lifeforms need to
> function together in the universe.
Hey, I said that!
> If there is one/no sentient lifeform/s in
> the universe then there does not
> have to be a time dimension.
> The Universe has no concept of past, present,
> or future - it is not aware.
Hey, I said that!
> An example: If I want to travel to a galaxy,
> I do not need 'time' to get
> there, I just need to know where it is
> as I take off. As I travel I just
> keep adjusting my ships direction to stay
> aligned with the galaxy. It may
> well be a long way of going about it,
> but it will work.
I wouldn't say that: If that galaxy
were distant enough from ours that
the two galaxies were receding from
each other at +100 times the speed of
light... you'd have a pretty hard time
cranking it up to where you could even
say your ship was no longer moving away
from your goat by +99.999 or so
the speed of light.
> However, if I want to meet someone
> at the galaxy, I now need to incorporate
> 'time' into the equation otherwise
> the chances are we will never meet.
True. But why don't you try
some of our local girls first?
> The
> same goes for communicating a description
> of the journey to other sentient
> life.Time is an invention of man, it
> enables us to communicate ideas,
> memories, plans. We use it as a tool
> to enable us to take the universe apart
> and understand it. Time as an invention
> is simple and uncomplicated. SDR way
> is so complicated as a function.
Hey: I've always said, "Time is
but our habit of timing one motion
against/by some other motion(s)."
I think that's pretty simple & succinct.
> In fact I would like SDR to explain
> how 2 sentient lifeforms could arrange
> to meet in a distant galaxy,
Boy, you're really intent on
going out with an E.T., aren't ya?
> from 2 separate departure points in his
> timeless universe. How would they communicate
> the details of the journey?
Simple: "See ya there!" *
S D Rodrian
web.sdrodrian.com
* Nothing else is required, since
it's a cinch the girl's parents
aren't gonna let her go out with
a creature from another galaxy!!!
Andy
incarceration . Two hands and a clock face is an invention of modern
man which has served to enslaved us all.
We ALL have to be at a certain time and place (regardless of age) in
our lives whether it be work, appointment, ect. We count the years,
days, hours and minutes to a so called important event such as a
birthday or death.
This all surely adds to ones demise, especially if you are susceptible
to worry or fear and even more impotantly stress.
If we had no concept of time I am sure we would live in a world which
would be more carefree and dare I say more secure.
What is time?
It doesn't benefit you. You cannot consume it, you cannot feel it, you
cannot see it. Yet we are doomed from the first instance we are
conceived. From this first instance our kismet is sealed.
'time is a fire in which we all burn'
Andy
In article <93tmtl$drk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, S D Rodrian
EE...@nunyabiz.net
but I can't leave this one alone.
Time monitoring (watches, clocks, calandars, etc) is a convention of
man designed to monitor, log, track, the passing of days, seasons, etc
in a manner that is most understandable from our perspective. If we
did not do this, time would still pass just fine without us. Nobody
and nothing needs to be cognizant of its passing. Just as the tree
that falls in the woods with nobody to hear it DOES make a sound, time
passes without observers regardless. Granted, it becomes cumbersome
to define something when you use that something as part of the
definition, however, anytime you can say there was a day before and
there will be a day after this day that we now exist in, you have just
defined to a degree, that events come and go, they take a span of our
lifetime to accomplish this, and we have labeled this span.....time.
Our present method of labeling the passing of time is based strictly
on our planetary movement within a larger moving field (planets within
solar systems, solar systems with galaxies, galaxies within the
cosmos, ad nauseum) and is segmented to take into account the geometry
of our planet, dividing it into 24 segments that enable us to
continuously divide time down into manageable segments that we can
apply to our daily routines. Why 24? I have no idea. I suppose we
could have just as easily divided it into 10, or 50, or 13.446.
Maybe someone out there knows why we chose 24. If I remember
correctly from my high school days some 25+ years ago, it has
something to do with the half life of an atomic element (strontium?)
that enables us to precisely measure the passing of a particular time
segment (one second?), but I'm not sure. If memory serves, I believe
it was because this time segment that could be so accurately and
consistently observed, just mathematically worked out to 24. At the
same time (no pun intended) I don't think mankind knew about this
element thousands of years ago, or even 100 years ago so...there you
go.
EEng
S D Rodrian
EE...@nunyabiz.net wrote:
> I should know better by now than
> to reply to anything from SDRodrian,
> but I can't leave this one alone.
Well, at least you started your stumble
on the right foot.
> Time monitoring (watches, clocks, calandars,
> etc) is a convention of
> man designed to monitor, log, track,
> the passing of days, seasons, etc
> in a manner that is most understandable
> from our perspective. If we
> did not do this, time would still pass
> just fine without us. Nobody
> and nothing needs to be cognizant of
> its passing. Just as the tree
> that falls in the woods with nobody
> to hear it DOES make a sound, time
> passes without observers regardless.
> Granted, it becomes cumbersome
> to define something when you use
> that something as part of the
> definition, however, anytime you can say
> there was a day before and
> there will be a day after this day
> that we now exist in, you have just
> defined to a degree, that events come
> and go, they take a span of our
> lifetime to accomplish this, and we
> have labeled this span.....time.
I am glad you understand that (which is universally
true, so it can be reduced to, "Things do not come
in/out of existence but merely change forms"). But
not everyone has a head on his shoulders like you;
and it's not unusual to find people who cannot make
the distinction between OUR being there to time the
changes AND the fact that said changes continue
whether we're there to time them or not.
> Our present method of labeling the
> passing of time is based strictly
> on our planetary movement within a larger
> moving field (planets within
> solar systems, solar systems with
> galaxies, galaxies within the
> cosmos, ad nauseum) and is segmented
> to take into account the geometry
> of our planet, dividing it into
> 24 segments that enable us to
> continuously divide time down into
> manageable segments that we can
> apply to our daily routines. Why 24?
> I have no idea. I suppose we
> could have just as easily divided it
> into 10, or 50, or 13.446.
Perhaps not as easily: From the earliest times
it was a lot more important to keep track of the
year's months than of the day's hours, so the
system of hours inherited its conventions from
the older (traditional) system of months. The
lunar year is approximately 29.5 days long, so
there are "about" 12 lunar months in a year (of
354 days, of course). It is therefore no great
mystery why practically every early civilization
on earth placed a high premium on the "sanctity"
of the number 12... since it was a matter of
life/death that those early agricultural societies
make sure their crops were planted about the same
day every year. [I know there are 10 fingers to
a man; but those early societies were not heavily
"into" mathematics or accounting.] However we do
owe the development of Science itself to the dire
repercussions to early societies if they did not
reconcile with crucial accuracy the discrepancies
between the lunar and the true "solar" year (which
we basically inherit from the Egyptians... probably
as a result of the yearly flooding of the Nile
being more important to them than the lunar 12).
> Maybe someone out there knows why
> we chose 24. If I remember
> correctly from my high school days
> some 25+ years ago, it has
> something to do with the half life
> of an atomic element (strontium?)
> that enables us to precisely measure
> the passing of a particular time
> segment (one second?), but I'm not sure.
> If memory serves, I believe
> it was because this time segment that
> could be so accurately and
> consistently observed, just
> mathematically worked out to 24. At the
> same time (no pun intended) I don't think
> mankind knew about this
> element thousands of years ago, or
> even 100 years ago so...there you go.
Well... it went on far longer than it was
justified to go; but, trust me on this one:
The modern hour comes out of the fact that
an egg takes exactly 3 minutes to be done to
perfection ... and that it was a weakness of
Samson, few knew about, to always have exactly
twenty 3-minute eggs for breakfast... which
weakness Samson was so faithful to that people
soon realized that if they but timed Samson's
breakfast and multiplied it by 24 it resulted
in a day almost perfectly divided into 24 of
Samson's breakfasts... which would result not
only in Samson taking exactly "one hour" for
breakfast, but in that he could not start on his
eggs at exactly the same time every morning (as
well as making him very strong AND less tragic
that he died the way he did, since odds are he
would've died from arteriosclerosis at an early
age anyway). Not to mention our traditions of
having eggs for breakfast AND having breakfast
at the start of the day (instead of somewhere
in the middle of it).
Just kidding,
S D Rodrian
web.sdrodrian.com
wisdom.findhere.org
sdrodrian.com
music.sdrodrian.com
re:
S D Rodrian
Kimberly & John <kenpo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Many people will walk in and out of your life, but
>only true friends will leave foot prints in your
>heart.
Don't you just hate that! Especially the so-called
"friends" who ALWAYS seem to "find" the dog duty
before tramping all over your heart. (This is
probably why the Japanese make all their friends
take off their shoes before lett'n'em in their
house--I mean, hearts.)
>To handle yourself, use your head;
>To handle others, use your heart.
Trans.: "Use your head: Throw a fit."
> Anger is only one letter short of danger.
So's a saucy banger (which is actually
two letters off: b,c,d--while anger is
three letters off; one single letter off
is eanger, which is an archaic form of
anger... probably no longer as angry,
obviously).
>Great minds discuss ideas;
>Average minds discuss events;
>Small minds discuss people.
Neverminds all this [,] cuss everything.
(And this can be interpreted 2 ways,
besides, depending on that comma.)
> Love Kimberly
Only if she's very, very dear (as
you get what you pay for).
re:
In article <3A6E7715...@earthlink.net>,
Kimberly & John <kenpo...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I think time was invented.
>
> It was invented by the government so they could
> tell me when to pay my taxes.
> I think the idea was given the go-ahead
> by all other bill collectors.
> Time was also invented to that when I want
> to eat at Burger King and the counter
> person holds out their hand for the money,
> I would not be not permitted to just walk
> away, but pay them at that 'time.'
> Time makes it so that if a police officer
> pushes the barrel of his shot gun into my
> face, I might have enough 'time' to piss
> my pants, before he pulls the trigger.
> I do not, however, believe that the same
> rules regarding time-as the government so
> graciously laid down for us- exists the same
> or even at all, for those people who are
> telemarketers by trade; their time
> has to be much slower, because they talk faster
> than I do, and they call me at 3 am. Or
> better yet the answers might lie in: what
> is up their ass?
>
> Disclaimer: My Philosophy is hardly mainstream,
> and I have no cult followers, and
> intend to keep things that way.
>
> S D Rodrian wrote:
>
> > In article <k3je6t42aj6ic3mn8...@4ax.com>,
> > EE...@nunyabiz.net wrote:
> > > I should know better by now than
> > > to reply to anything from SDRodrian,
> > > but I can't leave this one alone.
> >
> > Well, at least you started your stumble
> > on the right foot.
> >
> > > Time monitoring (watches, clocks, calandars,
> > > etc) is a convention of
> > > man designed to monitor, log, track,
> > > the passing of days, seasons, etc
> > > in a manner that is most understandable
> > > from our perspective. If we
> > > did not do this, time would still pass
> > > just fine without us. Nobody
> > > and nothing needs to be cognizant of
> > > its passing. Just as the tree
> > > that falls in the woods with nobody
> > > to hear it DOES make a sound, time
> > > passes without observers regardless.
> > > Granted, it becomes cumbersome
> > > to define something when you use
> > > that something as part of the
> > > definition, however, anytime you can say
> > > there was a day before and
> > > there will be a day after this day
> > > that we now exist in, you have just
> > > defined to a degree, that events come
> > > and go, they take a span of our
> > > lifetime to accomplish this, and we
> > > have labeled this span.....time.
> >
> > I am glad you understand that (which is universally
> > true, so it can be reduced to, "Things do not come
> > in/out of existence but merely change forms"). But
> > not everyone has a head on his shoulders like you;
> > and it's not unusual to find people who cannot make
> > the distinction between OUR being there to time the
> > changes AND the fact that said changes continue
> > whether we're there to time them or not.
> >
> > > Our present method of labeling the
> > > passing of time is based strictly
> > > on our planetary movement within a larger
> > > moving field (planets within
> > > solar systems, solar systems with
> > > galaxies, galaxies within the
> > > cosmos, ad nauseum) and is segmented
> > > to take into account the geometry
> > > of our planet, dividing it into
> > > 24 segments that enable us to
> > > continuously divide time down into
> > > manageable segments that we can
> > > apply to our daily routines. Why 24?
> > > I have no idea. I suppose we
> > > could have just as easily divided it
> > > into 10, or 50, or 13.446.
> >
> > Perhaps not as easily: From the earliest times
> > it was a lot more important to keep track of the
> > year's months than of the day's hours, so the
> > system of hours inherited its conventions from
> > the older (traditional) system of months. The
> > lunar year is approximately 29.5 days long, so
> > there are "about" 12 lunar months in a year (of
> > 354 days, of course). It is therefore no great
> > mystery why practically every early civilization
> > on earth placed a high premium on the "sanctity"
> > of the number 12... since it was a matter of
> > life/death that those early agricultural societies
> > make sure their crops were planted about the same
> > day every year. [I know there are 10 fingers to
> > a man; but those early societies were not heavily
> > "into" mathematics or accounting.] However we do
> > owe the development of Science itself to the dire
> > repercussions to early societies if they did not
> > reconcile with crucial accuracy the discrepancies
> > between the lunar and the true "solar" year (which
> > we basically inherit from the Egyptians... probably
> > as a result of the yearly flooding of the Nile
> > being more important to them than the lunar 12).
> >
> > > Maybe someone out there knows why
> > > we chose 24. If I remember
> > > correctly from my high school days
> > > some 25+ years ago, it has
> > > something to do with the half life
> > > of an atomic element (strontium?)
> > > that enables us to precisely measure
> > > the passing of a particular time
> > > segment (one second?), but I'm not sure.
> >
> > > If memory serves, I believe
> > > it was because this time segment that
> > > could be so accurately and
> > > consistently observed, just
> > > mathematically worked out to 24. At the
> > > same time (no pun intended) I don't think
> > > mankind knew about this
> > > element thousands of years ago, or
> > > even 100 years ago so...there you go.
> >
> > Well... it went on far longer than it was
> > justified to go; but, trust me on this one:
> > The modern hour comes out of the fact that
> > an egg takes exactly 3 minutes to be done to
> > perfection ... and that it was a weakness of
> > Samson, few knew about, to always have exactly
> > twenty 3-minute eggs for breakfast... which
> > weakness Samson was so faithful to that people
> > soon realized that if they but timed Samson's
> > breakfast and multiplied it by 24 it resulted
> > in a day almost perfectly divided into 24 of
> > Samson's breakfasts... which would result not
> > only in Samson taking exactly "one hour" for
> > breakfast, but in that he could not start on his
> > eggs at exactly the same time every morning (as
> > well as making him very strong AND less tragic
> > that he died the way he did, since odds are he
> > would've died from arteriosclerosis at an early
> > age anyway). Not to mention our traditions of
> > having eggs for breakfast AND having breakfast
> > at the start of the day (instead of somewhere
> > in the middle of it).
> >
> > Just kidding,
> >
> > S D Rodrian
> > web.sdrodrian.com
> > wisdom.findhere.org
> > sdrodrian.com
> > music.sdrodrian.com
> >
> > re:
> --
> Many people will walk in and out of your life, but
> only true friends will leave foot prints in your
> heart.
>
> To handle yourself, use your head;
> To handle others, use your heart.
>
> Anger is only one letter short of danger.
>
> Great minds discuss ideas;
> Average minds discuss events;
> Small minds discuss people.
>
> Love Kimberly