Re: Consistent definitions of time

fuminggreen_at_yahoo.com
Date: 06/03/04 

Date: 3 Jun 2004 07:41:04 -0700

wiffle.the.wuff@ntlworld.com wrote in message news:<fdf8ff81.0405311104.980cb8c@posting.google.com>...
> Hi,
>
> It is not time which is subjective: it is the "observed" speed of
> light.
>
> Time, inasmuch as it indicates a stage in the universe's development -
> St. Augustine of Hippo through Sephen Hawkins'"Big Bang" theory -
> cannot be a variable.
>
> It was only the observed "constant" speed of light which caused time
> to be regarded as a variable; and the "time" talked about was not
> properly defined: as this discussion indicates.
>
> The chances of our "observation" of the speed of light being in error
> are much more likely than the rolling backwards and forwards of the
> whole universe's development to accommodate an observed glitch in the
> movement of an electron.
>
> wiffle.the.wuff
>
> www.universalforcehypothesis.info
>
>
> fuminggreen@yahoo.com wrote in message news:<1b3b53b2.0405291822.7a4dfbc6@posting.google.com>...
> > mhelland@techmocracy.net (Mike Helland) wrote in message news:<ad157aec.0405291341.2b8e8076@posting.google.com>...
> > > fuminggreen@yahoo.com wrote in message news:<1b3b53b2.0405290822.48a3990d@posting.google.com>...
> > >
> > > > > Defintion: Time is present in the context of multiple states.
> > > >
> > > > That is an assinine attempt at proving time objective when it is in
> > > > fact assumed subjective in every aspect.
> > >
> > > I have presented my defintion in several forms:
> > >
> > > Time is present in the context of change.
> > > Time exists in the analysis of multiple states.
> > >
> > > Both forms are subjective requiring analysis and observation. Thank
> > > you for your comments, but they are mistaken.
> >
> > You argue in the same poor form as before, except you essentially
> > admit to its usage intentionally to insult only?
> >
> > It is common to write to philosophers in a complete form of discourse.
> > Making every word part of the arguement. And an ending statement to
> > transform the arguement in a nice fashion is a common habit.
> >
> > So, since you are not admitting to this form, then you are right.
> > Time is subjective.
> >
> > Douglas Eagleson
> > Gaitherbsurg, MD USA

A constant such as the quanta transit is as any other. And the
amazing relativistic property to all such transit or interaction is
even more amazing.

Douglas Eagleson
Gaithersburg, MD USA