Re: time waves


"AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8Kydnb4pkL726hHfRVn-rg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:1116498068.684.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:BOKdnT7QrNgmEhbfRVn-sA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | news:1116439486.96078.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | >
| > | > "AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:YLCdnRTCcr8RsRbfRVn-oA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > |
| > | > | "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | news:1116388347.13147.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:FvSdnRH4RLEBSxTfRVn-vA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > | news:1116312040.25203.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > "AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > news:AaednZg3Dt7fJBXfRVn-2A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | "aquos" <idos2290ru3j@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > |
news:1116245302.886237.292750@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | > | > | > time is a complex deformated transform 4th order tensor,
| > waveing
| > | > | > | > | > differently regarding the unit component vectors
(i,j,k,l)
| > | > | > orientation,
| > | > | > | > | > whereas light only exists in 3d space all toghether
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > that is why we can see light, and no time
| > | > | > | > |
| > AllYou wrote
| > | > | > | > | We can observe light and not time, which proves that light
is
| > a
| > | > | > physical
| > | > | > | > phenomenon, and
| > | > | > | > | time is just a concept.
| > | > | > | >
| > Dr wrote
| > | > | > | > The observation of light includes the observation of time.
| >
| > <snip>.
| >
| > | There is nothing in what either of us has said that is mutually
| > exclusive,and so I don't
| > | see how you can disagree. The state of the universe has nothing to do
| > with out
| > | observation of it. Moreover, our observation of a single state of all
| > objects in the
| > | universe is impossible because if objects are at different distances,
the
| > observation of
| > | any single portion of any object will be state shifted from every
other.
| >
| > You have explained away your own position by stating above that any
position
| > is state shifted from any other. If you accept this then only from any
| > *particular* position can you claim a state of now and all other states
are
| > then.
|
| That's not it at all. I use the term *state* in place of what you would
call a *point in
| time*. To make my position clearere, I'll use your lingo for now. The
position of all
| objects in the universe at any one moment in time has nothing to do with
our observation
| of it, or our ability to know what the universe looked like at any single
moment.
|

In general yes, accept that my state of existence as an observer has or will
modify the state of all other objects, as will you.

| Therefore, our observation of light has nothing to do with our observation
of what you
| call time. Light is a physical phenomenon and we know this because it
stimulats our
| senses.
|

You have perhaps lost your place in this debate as the observation of then
from a state of now is an observation of duration at least and an
observation of time if you are in a position to record past energy states.

|
| >
| > |
| > | However, this difficulty in observation has nothing to do with the
actual
| > state of the
| > | universe. Determining the actual state from observation is an
| > intellectual process, and
| > | it's from this intellectual process that the notion of time is born,
and
| > not from any
| > | observation of it.
| > |
| >
| > I disagree as a field or particle observation/interaction of/with
| > adjacent particles or fields involves no intellectual process, in human
| > terms
| > anyway ?{:-) and that/they has/have exactly the same
| > duration/distance/energy position in regard to now and then as you or I
do.
| >
| > Although I do concede that a particle may be unable to upgrade its
response
| > to duration to the concept of time. Although in one sense it is able to
| > record time in its energy state as this is the sum of all past then
events
| > that
| > it experienced from the now pov of the particle or field.
| >
| > The now pov can be very lonely when you really understand it as in
Extremes
| > theory everything else but you/now could disappear and for an instant
and
| > dependent on your local propagation state you would not be aware of its
| > disappearance. A common example being the ~8 minutes it takes for us to
| > notice the sun has disapeared, if it could. Perhaps it was put back
before
| > you noticed. Human rights for fields and particles take the case to EU,
that
| > should keep them busy for a bit. {:-)
|
| You're still confused as to my position. You've given no counterargument
to the notion
| that the state of the universe at any one moment has nothing to do with
our observation of
| it.
|

That in general I do not disagree with except in the case I detailed above a
few paragraphs but your original position was 'We can observe light and not
time, which proves that light is a physical phenomenon, and time is just a
concept' to which I replied ' The observation of light includes the
observation of time' to which you replied 'Your unsubstantiated assertion is
noted' which I assumed was a dispute of my position that ' The observation
of light includes the observation of time'. If you are no longer in dispute
with my position then fine. I did not feel that I was confused as to your
position but was unsure if you were. Thank you for the debate and if you
have other points you dispute with me or that you think I dispute with you
please reply.
--
Dr *** duration/distance/energy
http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
Maybe updates. The turnips and leeks are coming up nicely. Ooh ah.{:-)


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: time waves
    ... The state of the universe has nothing to do |> with out ... Remembering them for further processing is an intellectual process. ... |> Although I do concede that a particle may be unable to upgrade its ... If you are no longer in dispute ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time waves
    ... The state of the universe has nothing to do ... > Although I do concede that a particle may be unable to upgrade its response ... > theory everything else but you/now could disappear and for an instant and ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time waves
    ... The state of the universe has nothing to do ... Although I do concede that a particle may be unable to upgrade its response ... theory everything else but you/now could disappear and for an instant and ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • TOTAL FIELD THEORY (Gravity, Electricity & Magnetism are the 4th, 5th & 6th Dimensions)
    ... (Is the entire physical-spatial universe a Total Field and Is Gravity ... Didn't Einstein say, 'There is no space empty of field'? ... When a circle representing a particle is divided into four 90o ... physical dimensions the right angle motion out of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • The cosmic revolution: Task force outlines role of particle physics in a new universe (Forwarded)
    ... Neil Calder, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center ... Task force outlines role of particle physics in a new ... percent of the universe. ...
    (sci.astro)