Time does not exist.

[uwot]

Nothing is worse than idiots citing the work of others, because they'd have no clue otherwise...

I think you should go easy on the hyperbole. Nobody has such a charmed life that nothing is worse than people citing others. If we didn't cite the work of others, we would all be pretty much clueless. How, for example, did you find this out?

You do realize that the earth is surrounded by a magnetosphere, and is constantly being bombarded by the solar winds (electromagnetic radiation), don't you?

Incidentally; according to some people I am idiotic enough to believe, the solar wind is a stream of charged particles, rather that em radiation.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Nothing is worse than idiots citing the work of others, because they'd have no clue otherwise...

I think you should go easy on the hyperbole. Nobody has such a charmed life that nothing is worse than people citing others. If we didn't cite the work of others, we would all be pretty much clueless.
Hey uwot, good to see you around. Whether you like it or not, in my book, you're one of the good ones.

In truth I was insulted that it wasn't apparent to him, that I must understand those points he tried to 'school' me on, that I've understood them long ago, and was attempting to add other things to the mix, showing the complexity of truly understanding what's actually going on. So as often times is the case, it was one of those days where my life left me strangled, and I showed him intolerance of not giving me the benefit of doubt, instead trying to upstage me, thinking somehow my knowledge was lacking. Why do newbies seem to always do that? Is that what attracts them here, to join so they can tell, "that idiot?" I'm just super sensitive sometimes, I guess.

How, for example, did you find this out?
Of course by learning each thing separately, then being capable of putting them together, which to me shows much more promise, than simply reading one thing, swallowing it, hook, line and sinker, and then defending it with your life, as if you could necessarily know for certain, it's truth factor. So my work is to be found in the melding. But then I thought you'd know that already, i.e., your blog, your theories. By the way, sorry I didn't finish reading your blog. Life got busy and I had to answer.

You do realize that the earth is surrounded by a magnetosphere, and is constantly being bombarded by the solar winds (electromagnetic radiation), don't you?

Incidentally; according to some people I am idiotic enough to believe, the solar wind is a stream of charged particles, rather that em radiation.
Funny man, I never said I was perfect. As it also emits EMR, but got a little twisted with my reference, but the point remains the same, albeit complicated further. As I'm sure there are other contributing factors, we're currently unaware. Of course my point was that there are far too many things to account for, such that we can be certain, our conclusion was complete.

As a matter of fact I was just reading up on GPS, and found this pretty interesting: "Periodic corrections are performed to the on-board clocks to keep them synchronized with ground clocks."

[prothero]

In truth I was insulted that it wasn't apparent to him, that I must understand those points he tried to 'school' me on, that I've understood them long ago, and was attempting to add other things to the mix, showing the complexity of truly understanding what's actually going on. So as often times is the case, it was one of those days where my life left me strangled, and I showed him intolerance of not giving me the benefit of doubt, instead trying to upstage me, thinking somehow my knowledge was lacking. Why do newbies seem to always do that? Is that what attracts them here, to join so they can tell, "that idiot?" I'm just super sensitive sometimes, I guess.

Listen just because I quote you does not mean I disagree with you. Maybe your post inspired me to say something along the same lines. I agree that time in the Newtonian sense does not exist. I agreed that measurements of time are arbitrary and relative to change. The topic was time and the way time is treated in relativity seems relevant. Psychological time, subjective time or Bergsoian time seem an entirely different topic.

I am not here to engage in insults, only in ideas. I am not a newbie to science or to philosophy forums; only to this one, now that philosophyforums.com seems irretrievably damaged and out of control. Anyway, I don't think personal insults like "idiots" adds much to any discussion. I apologize if I have a didactic tone, it comes from many years of teaching (albeit not physics or philosophy).

[Belinda]

Time doesn't exist like atoms and other items exist. Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

[HexHammer]

Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

Fancy wording, but it doesn't seem you really understand Einstein's SRT.

[Belinda]

Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

Fancy wording, but it doesn't seem you really understand Einstein's SRT.

Thank you HexHammer. I do try to be concise and truthful and so do you. Either one of us may be deluded , but I guess it's not I.

[Terrapin Station]

Time doesn't exist like atoms and other items exist. Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

It's a process of matter, not matter itself in other words.

[Terrapin Station]

Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

Fancy wording, but it doesn't seem you really understand Einstein's SRT.

Einstein's SRT would only have time right insofar as it agrees with me.

[HexHammer]

Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

Fancy wording, but it doesn't seem you really understand Einstein's SRT.

Thank you HexHammer. I do try to be concise and truthful and so do you. Either one of us may be deluded , but I guess it's not I.

Time underwrites existence itself ..how?

time is the condition of change ..how?

[Terrapin Station]

time is the condition of change

It is (the ontological process of) change. That's an identity statement.

[prothero]

As a matter of fact I was just reading up on GPS, and found this pretty interesting: "Periodic corrections are performed to the on-board clocks to keep them synchronized with ground clocks."

There is also the half life behavior of accelerated particles in high energy particle physics, which corresponds to the time dilation effects predicted by general relativity. So on the whole I think the evidence favors time dilation as a real phenomena in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dila ... _particles

[prothero]

Time doesn't exist like atoms and other items exist. Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

It's a process of matter, not matter itself in other words.

On close examination, matter itself is a process. There is nothing static, inert, permanent or unchanging, just repetitive patterns.

[HexHammer]

time is the condition of change

It is (the ontological process of) change. That's an identity statement.

This is exactly why no one wants philosphers, they can't come up with something intelligent nor relevant, what they say is ALWAYS completely waste of time! Even tho big businesses spend billions each year on research, philosphers are not on their list.

[Terrapin Station]

Time doesn't exist like atoms and other items exist. Time underwrites existence itself: time is the condition of change.

It's a process of matter, not matter itself in other words.

On close examination, matter itself is a process. There is nothing static, inert, permanent or unchanging, just repetitive patterns.

I'd agree that everything is in motion relative to other things, but I wouldn't say that matter is "just process," as I think the idea of that is incoherent. "Process" is simply a term for relative motions, after all. Something has to be moving. It can't be "motion all the way down."

[Greta]

This is exactly why no one wants philosphers, they can't come up with something intelligent nor relevant, what they say is ALWAYS completely waste of time! Even tho big businesses spend billions each year on research, philosphers are not on their list.

Big businesses consider time to be money, so I don't suppose they'd appreciate those claiming that time doesn't exist. Bean counters aren't thrilled with esoteric scientific research either, but that doesn't render the work invalid.

For me as a nobody who tend to think a lot, it's about being interested in things that "sensible" people consider to be useless, perhaps because I can't/won't use what others consider to be useful. Viva la difference.

Re: the thread, whenever anyone says "x does not exist" I take that to mean, "I just realised that if I look at x sideways and squint, then it doesn't exist".

IMO everything that looks, feels or seems to exist, does exist, and that includes time. The question is then the nature of that existence, but time is famously one of the great enigmas. My speculative understanding is that time that passes is cumulative with the past piling up ever more on the Planck scale.