Staredit Network

I don't think time, as we know it can exist. Time's a way to just organize man's day, and thats how its commonly used. But sometimes it is used for history, but that can't work can it? Isn't time different in some places? We base our time on the sun, but the sun can't be the same in every place on Earth now can it? So when someone says "[Name] died at 3:00pm". Wouldn't they have to tell you what timezone they're talking of. I mean I know whoever said it is talking of their own timezone but how about when you DON'T know where he is, you get no idea when it actually happened.

So the sun is basically what time is resembling right? Time is just where the sun is in a given moment and that helps you know what to do.

Parth. Time, as we know it, does exist. And they wouldn't have to tell you the timezone; they'd translate it into your timezone if they had smarts.

But timezones are useless. We should have one "earth" timezone.

But anyways, if you want to know what time IS, time is the fourth or fifth dimension that we travel through at a constant pace.

The sun is just an easy way to show time with little calculation. If someone dies at 3pm, it means the Sun was about there were he died. If we really wanted, we could build a computer who's only purpose was to count seconds, and be able to keep track of time without the sun as a refrence.

The hours the day just tell us how bright it is outside, given a cloudless day, what animals are sleeping etc. The fact that we can use it to measure how long we've been doing something as well is just a pleasent side effect.

Don't tell me this is from our AIM convo, is it?

Interesting thing I thought of quite a while ago:

If numbers can have infinite decimal places and time is simply numbers, then time can have infinite decimal places. If time has infinite decimal places, then it would take forever for it to reach the next "interval" because it would have to go through all of decimal places, which is impossible because even though the numbers way down there are small, they still take up some time!

Time... has nothing to do with the sun. The sun was simply used to help but we have more high tech gadgets now.

Why did you start this new thread when there was already a thread like this......?

Time in my eyes, is just a way that man has figured out, to comprehend and percieve the evolution of the universe. I'm not saying that i'm right, or any of you guys are wrong, that's just what I think time is.

But before you keep making threads, pleeaaaaase look and see if there is already one like it?

Thank you.

Time is abstract

Not necesarily. For all we know, the 4th dimension could be another axis of physical reality. So could the fifth to fourth.


Well, every decimal counts up faster than the last. So to reach infinite decimal places, time would be counting up infinitely fast at the last one. Which would mean that it would be counting up infinitely fast in the rest too... so there's still a problem... bleh.

Since we are talking about dimentions, I would like to point this site out

Kabbalah

Read the History, and History Makers, and you will see how many dimentions there really are.

But I believe there is no time because evolution cannot go backwards.

Without time there's nothing, simple as that, it's just that you can't actually perceive what time really is, you can just create things to somewhat measure it.

Time has always existed, because we aren't ifinite.

However, measurements of time are man made.

ROFL!!
I could just imagine:
"I'll be in New york by noon, we could stop for lunch."
"Man, thats twilight hours here!"

The thing is. is that time zones are vgery helpfull. Because you could say what time you would be in another place, and based upon that you could find some iformation as to what to expect there. If we had one unified time, we would all have to calculate in the time zone where we are.
Measurements of anything are man made. Time itself is used as a measurement, without us to interpret it, would it exsist. (This is like, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is near, does it make a sound, we can't be certain)

Isn't GMT our one timezone, its referred to most right?

Just a little thing about what devilisk said earlier, we actually can percieve time, but only one aspect of it. We percieve the Present.

i agree with kelly. before makeing a topic. check to see if there arnt one.......or two in this case..already there. oh, and time is not realy there. its how we measure existance

Sorry, I usually check the first page for the active topics, and I never thought you guys would've brought this kinda thing up.

There is still stuff that exists, we don't know how to measure it though, like outer space.

That's like saying how can you be sure anything other than what you see is real? How do I know someone is living outside of this house right now if I can't see it with my own eyes? How do I know anything in the past happened before me? Sure there could be historical evidence but how do I know if it's actually true?

Also I think it depends on what you think would qualify as sound, I'm sure there are sound waves, but for it to be sound do the sound waves have to actually reach someone's ears? What's your definition of sound.

But I think just because YOU or anyone else is not there to witness anything doesn't mean nothing exists or happened.

But the fact is, is that you cannot be sure of anything untill you see some sort of evidence of it being there.
Much of what we believe is simply the most probable action for the path of an event to take.
The compression and expantion of the relationship of atoms in a spacial volume over a period of time.

Prove it. If you have no evidence saying that an event did happen, other than it was likely to happen, you aren't able to say for certain that it did.
If you were to put a bear and a fish (alaskan analogy) in a soundproof airtight box, you could not be sure of the outcome unless you opened the box. You could not absolutely be certain that when you open the box the fish would be eaten, or if the bear would have suffocated from carbon-dioxide poisoning, untill you saw what had happened inside.

??? My statement just says you can't rule out the possibility of something existing or not existing just because no one is there to WITNESS IT, if you can have some sort of other evidence that leads one to infer that SOMETHING could be there, then you can't rule out that possibility that something is there.

It's like you see a puddle of blood on the floor, but no one was there to witness how it got there. What I said before was basically saying, just because no one was there to witness how the blood got there, it doesn't mean that it just appeared there spontaneously, "something" happened, or something existed once before.

Also, I was never talking about certainty, you can't be certain of anything, even about our "laws".

And if you can't be certain, like you said, how can you be certain that "YOU or anyone else is not there to witness anything doesn't mean nothing exists or happened" is false and that if no one is there to witness something then nothing must have existed. Prove that. See I don't understand what you are trying to argue, and how it goes against what I was saying.



Okay so first of all, how do you know the tree fell down if no one is there to hear it make a sound? If you do know the tree fell down then it, then tell me how can it NOT make a sound? Is it possible for it to not make a sound if it fell?


ADDITION: And actually what you said:


Is exactly what I was saying in the previous post.