Re: Scientifically valid definitions.

From: AllYou! (idaman_at_conversent.net)
Date: 11/05/04 

Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:01:54 -0500

"shevek" <shevek4@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c2ee115b.0411042050.6cbc5755@posting.google.com...
> "AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote in message
news:<Id-dncdxs5xG1RfcRVn-jg@conversent.net>...

> > > > So you assert and so I question. If your whole argument boils down to
> > > > reasserting that
> > > > which we're debating, then there is no debate to be had. Besides, it
> > > > amazes me that you
> > > > can assert that unintelligent life *uses* time. Even if time is what
> > > > you say it is, that
> > > > life form is affected by time but certainly doesn't use it.
> > > > Does it have little tiny watches?
> > >
> > > Yes. Every atom is a watch. Can you give me an example of
> > > "unintelligent life" ? (please resist obvious flaming opportunity as
> > > I have :) )
> >
> > And so we're back to discussing what a clock does. A clock produces events based upon
> > motion. A clock is *used* to compare it's motion to that of other motions in order to
> > order whatever events which might be of interest. As such, bacteria does not use time
> > because it can perform no such comparison. It is certainly affected by motion, but it
> > does not use time.
>
>
> Well although it is off the topic slightly, I must point out that
> there are bacteria that perform exactly that comparison. They sample
> glucose concentrations, move a bit, and sample the concentration
> again. If the second concentration is lower that what it had been,
> they change direction.
>
> But although I'd love to talk about what intelligence is, or how
> phototropism is consciousness, maybe this is off topic too.

Maybe so. but there's nothing in what yu describe which demonstrates the use of time. In
fact, all of it demonstrates the use of motion.

> > > Try to look at it the other way, which is equally consistent:
> > > Time is not a tool, it simply is. DIstance is a tool which humans
> > > use and is not a fundamental property of nature. Also, distance is
> > > not the readings on roadside mile markers. Time is the reading on
> > > roadside mile markers.
> >
> > I did try to look at it that way but it defies logic. Distance is the spatial >
interval
> > between two points in space.
>
>
> What is this thing called "space" you speak of?
>
> Do you mean that which takes a time to travel across?

No, that which has the properties of distance, which is tangible, and motion, which is
tangible. Time is just the function by which we apply some quantity to the combination of
these properties. Your only sense of time comes from the whole of man's evolution in
trying to order the events of history by observing motion. He first did it when he came
out of the caves and observed how the Sun orbited the Earth in relation to all other
motions and that process, although altered somewhat by the knowledge that the Earth
rotates on it's axis, is still practiced today. What's seared into our consciousness to
the point of making it almost impossible to escape is the mistaken belief that all of this
is controlled by this mystic property of nature we call time.

> > > It was your assertion earlier I was relying on. Now you deny that
> > > time is change?? OK, lets go with your fundamental property of
> > > velocity. What is it? How can I sense it directly?
> >
> > I deny that time is change because I never asserted it. However, as a result of some
> > discussions I've had here with the more reasonable folks like yourself, I've adjusted
my
> > position. Sorry if that will cause you confusion. I've now come to the hypothesis
that
> > motion and distance, and not speed, are fundamental. However, that changes nothing in
my
> > belief that time is just a calculation. So if your question is how do you sense
motion
> > directly, then just look around. It there's any part of your body that changes
position
> > relative to any other part, then you just saw motion.
> >
>
> You're too kind. OK, so we can somehow sense that positions of things
> change. But that's pretty advanced.. already we have position and
> change..

Right. We have position and we have the process of change. The position denotes space,
and the change in position denotes motion. Again, I never equated time with change.

> > > Well I'm likely wasing "time" here, as I already said this, but again:
> > > calculated values are all things we think about. Velocity, mass,
> > > time, etc. etc. are calculated values.
> >
> > Then we'll have to simply disagree because I believe that mass and distance are not
> > calculated but are fundamental as is motion, and that velocity (a revision to my
earlier
> > claim) and time are calculated values.
>
> You thought about it, therefore you calculated it. But of course
> there are fundamentals: objects exist, and they can move. On this we
> agree.

I observed it.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Define a clock
    ... I'm observing the sound this motion emits. ... >> their path at some velocity to another point in space. ... > a device is called a clock. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Define a clock
    ... I'm observing the sound this motion emits. ... > What you're observing when you watch the blinking light or listen to the ... To assert that the details of what makes a clock operate is irrelevant is to ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Define a clock
    ... >>particular measurement that's made by a measuring device called a clock, ... what is it that you're observing? ... I'm observing the sound this motion emits. ... a device is called a clock. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Have you ever wondered.....
    ... The thing we are measuring is the same thing. ... by black box I mean the atomic clock ... equivalent to motion which tiggers the generation of events. ... able to say with any degree of reasonableness that "In physics, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
    ... It is well known from experiments that the rate of a clock, ... while being affected by motion, ... it is NOT the acceleration itself that causes the ... Seacrh for "inertia" and see for yourself: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast