What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Age
Posts: 3605
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Age » Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:50 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:43 pm
But did I give the correct answer to your question ?
'Correct' in relation to 'what' exactly?

Only you know if you have the correct answer or not.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:43 pm
And how do you know what the correct answer is ?
The 'you' KNOWS when it has the correct, in absolute sense, answer because it KNOWS that it is the same answer for every one.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3636
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by surreptitious57 » Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:43 pm

I think it may be some time before the answer is the same for everyone
I dont think that that time will come anywhere within my own lifetime

Age
Posts: 3605
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Age » Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:06 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:43 pm
I think it may be some time before the answer is the same for everyone
I dont think that that time will come anywhere within my own lifetime
Fair enough.

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by attofishpi » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:09 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:35 pm
attofishpi wrote:
Speakpigeon wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2019 5:09 pm
I think it's phrased clearly and the question is straightforward: What keeps clocks ticking together if not time itself?
Please answer the question as asked. And if you don't know the answer, fair enough but please don't post irrelevancies. Assuming a number of clocks are set to read the same as some master clock, why would they stay synchronised with it if time doesn't exist?
- Time DOES exist.
- TIME does NOT keep a clock ticking.
- The events that occur within matter are what IS time.
- Time is purely a man made measurement of events.
- Clocks no matter how synchronised with a 'master' clock will eventually never read the same.
That doesn't address the question.
Well that can only because you are not contemplating that CLOCKS are also made of matter, things that are a construct of events, or something more fundamental at the core of one's consciousness - perhaps that of a pigeon.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 964
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Speakpigeon » Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:47 pm

attofishpi wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:09 pm
Speakpigeon wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2019 7:35 pm
attofishpi wrote: - Time DOES exist.
- TIME does NOT keep a clock ticking.
- The events that occur within matter are what IS time.
- Time is purely a man made measurement of events.
- Clocks no matter how synchronised with a 'master' clock will eventually never read the same.
That doesn't address the question.
Well that can only because you are not contemplating that CLOCKS are also made of matter, things that are a construct of events, or something more fundamental at the core of one's consciousness
What you SAID didn't address the question.
And that's because the question assumes time doesn't exist while you reply starts by asserting time exist.
So, just a derail.
EB

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Logik » Sat Apr 20, 2019 11:02 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:47 pm
What you SAID didn't address the question.
And that's because the question assumes time doesn't exist while you reply starts by asserting time exist.
So, just a derail.
I don't know what you mean by "time doesn't exist". We invented it - it exists.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3636
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:23 am

We did not invent time but the means by how we could measure the passing of time
Time as a physical phenomenon has existed since at least the Big Bang if not before

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by attofishpi » Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:38 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:23 am
We did not invent time but the means by how we could measure the passing of time
Time as a physical phenomenon has existed since at least the Big Bang if not before
Sure, we put a word to describe the occurrence of events, many of which are very predictable...and we assigned the term TIME. Interesting when talking of events, such as when a photon 'ejects' from an electron - EMIT.
Wow...weren't we clever, the fastest thing in the universe, the most eventful little particle, a photon EMIT from an electron ergo TIME.
(TIME reversed EMIT)

www.androcies.com

User avatar
Noax
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Noax » Fri May 10, 2019 2:01 am

Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Apr 19, 2019 7:52 pm
So, why do they stay so synchronised if time doesn't exist?
EB
Time seems to exist in the same way that space does. Not saying that either exists or not, just that if one does, so does the other.
Two clocks measuring the same thing tend to thus give the same result, sort of like a measure of the length of the north and south side of a rectangular building are more or less the same. So it is the same as asking why the opposite sides of a rectangle would be the same length if the rectangle doesn't exist. The answer seems to be that it doesn't matter if the rectangle exists or not, but hopefully the one side has the same ontological status as the other.

If the building is not rectangular then those two length measurements might be quite different. Similarly if time is not measured along parallel lines, two clocks might measure significantly different values.

atto was sort of alluding to that, without coming out and saying it. It seemed to be more of a tease to Logik who seemed not to get it.
For instance, a pair of accurate clocks on different floors of the same building will not stay in sync.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 964
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Speakpigeon » Fri May 10, 2019 10:02 am

Noax wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 2:01 am
Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Apr 19, 2019 7:52 pm
So, why do they stay so synchronised if time doesn't exist?
EB
Time seems to exist in the same way that space does. Not saying that either exists or not, just that if one does, so does the other.
Two clocks measuring the same thing tend to thus give the same result, sort of like a measure of the length of the north and south side of a rectangular building are more or less the same. So it is the same as asking why the opposite sides of a rectangle would be the same length if the rectangle doesn't exist. The answer seems to be that it doesn't matter if the rectangle exists or not, but hopefully the one side has the same ontological status as the other.

If the building is not rectangular then those two length measurements might be quite different. Similarly if time is not measured along parallel lines, two clocks might measure significantly different values.

atto was sort of alluding to that, without coming out and saying it. It seemed to be more of a tease to Logik who seemed not to get it.
For instance, a pair of accurate clocks on different floors of the same building will not stay in sync.
You know, I'm quite sure I understand all there is to understand about the relativity of time as per Einstein's Relativity to see none of it is relevant to my question. So, your relativistic angle is a derail.
The question is rather simple: If time doesn't exist, then what keeps two clocks, that have been properly synchronised at some point, synchronised over any period of time?
If you don't know the answer to that, fine, but please don't answer another question instead, because that is a derail and I have other things to do than answering derails.
EB

User avatar
Noax
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Noax » Sat May 11, 2019 2:30 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 10:02 am
The question is rather simple: If time doesn't exist, then what keeps two clocks, that have been properly synchronised at some point, synchronised over any period of time?
For one, two clocks have no reason to stay synchronized any more two cars log different distance to grandma's house if they take different routes. So what makes those two cars agree on the distance is if they take the same route, not them being real.
My answer was that the reality of time or the lack of such reality has no bearing on how/if they stay in sync or not. I find that answer relevant. I'm saying you're asking the wrong question.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 964
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Speakpigeon » Sun May 12, 2019 12:27 pm

Noax wrote:
Sat May 11, 2019 2:30 pm
Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri May 10, 2019 10:02 am
The question is rather simple: If time doesn't exist, then what keeps two clocks, that have been properly synchronised at some point, synchronised over any period of time?
For one, two clocks have no reason to stay synchronized any more two cars log different distance to grandma's house if they take different routes. So what makes those two cars agree on the distance is if they take the same route, not them being real.
My answer was that the reality of time or the lack of such reality has no bearing on how/if they stay in sync or not. I find that answer relevant. I'm saying you're asking the wrong question.
You didn't understand the question.
I didn't assume that the two clocks be separated, that one should travel and not the other, or that they should travel different routes. Keep the two clocks together if you like.
And then, tell me why they should remain synchronised at all if time doesn't exist.
EB

User avatar
Noax
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Noax » Sun May 12, 2019 6:42 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 12:27 pm
I didn't assume that the two clocks be separated, that one should travel and not the other, or that they should travel different routes.
You didn't say otherwise, so I'm glad you clarified.
And then, tell me why they should remain synchronised at all if time doesn't exist.
I didn't answer the question, except to say that it existing or not is irrelevant to the answer.
Why do they stay in sync then if time does exist? You seem to be under the impression that there is an obvious answer to that question but not the other.

Atla
Posts: 2491
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Atla » Sun May 12, 2019 6:45 pm

How can someone know all about Einsteinian spacetime and also say that there's no time?

User avatar
Noax
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:25 am

Re: What's your answer to the most fundamental question concerning time?

Post by Noax » Sun May 12, 2019 7:57 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 12:27 pm
You didn't understand the question.
And then, tell me why [clocks] should remain synchronised at all if time doesn't exist.
I overcomplicate things I think. It is quite simple.
P1: Two clocks are in sync.
P2: Time does not exist
So far so good. Nothing inconsistent.

P3: The clocks are not in sync.
C1: P3 contradicts P1. The clocks are in sync and not in sync, and in the same way. Thus P3 is false. If time doesn't exist, clocks in sync must be in sync.

If we remove P2 we can have the clocks be in sync at one time and not in sync at another time.
So your question is trivial. If time doesn't exist, then a pair of clocks in sync and not in sync is a contradiction. If time does exist, it isn't a contradiction anymore since time allows them to change from being in sync to being not in sync. So the more relevant question is why (accurate) clocks stay in sync if time exists. If time doesn't exist, the answer is trivial.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest