Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Time in deep space
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SelfSim" data-source="post: 74112084" data-attributes="member: 354922"><p>As discussed previously with you, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_physics" target="_blank">time in science is defined operationally</a>, meaning it is only what we can measure:Time is also required by the human brain in order to makes sense of everything we perceive. Try making sense of <em>anything</em> <u>without</u> using the simple verb: 'to be', (or 'is') or any of its tenses, and you will see what you come up with, will simply not make sense. That is a demonstration of how fundamental the consistent (constant) concept of time is, to the way the human mind functions. The semantics embedded in all languages is hard evidence for the human mind's reliance on the fundamentality of that same concept.</p><p></p><p>Observations of the remote universe are objectively recorded perceptions.</p><p>In order to make sense of those perceptions, science invokes its above (in quotes) measurable concept of time.</p><p></p><p>Time is regarded in physics as a scalar quantity (see above reference). <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_(physics)" target="_blank">Scalar quantities</a> are defined as only having magnitude <u>and no other characteristics</u>. Your assignment of time as depending on various other sub-regions of the universe, <u>is</u> assigning time with <em>'<u>other characteristics</u>'</em> .. which violates the definition of 'scalar quantity', where there is no supporting objective evidence for doing this.</p><p></p><p>Formally, a scalar is unchanged by coordinate system transformations.</p><p>Your assignment of time to various sub-regions of the universe represents a co-ordinate system transformation and you assert that time may change by doing this. This also violates the definition of 'scalar quantity' where there is no supporting objective evidence for doing this.</p><p></p><p>Time in science does not verify or falsify the notion of 'it being real', (or 'exists in reality'), in the sense of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism" target="_blank">Philosophical Realism</a>. Such philosophies are untestably ignorable (ie: treated with neutrality) in science, as objective testing proceeds. It seems this is what your argument ultimately relies solely upon .. and is <u>not</u> what science basis it perspective about time on.</p><p></p><p>I strongly recommend that you recognise these clear distinctions as this conversation proceeds, as they are very different viewpoints and your commentaries about what 'science can or cannot observe' are based on your philosophical realism viewpoint (inferred from your above post).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SelfSim, post: 74112084, member: 354922"] As discussed previously with you, [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_physics']time in science is defined operationally[/URL], meaning it is only what we can measure:Time is also required by the human brain in order to makes sense of everything we perceive. Try making sense of [I]anything[/I] [U]without[/U] using the simple verb: 'to be', (or 'is') or any of its tenses, and you will see what you come up with, will simply not make sense. That is a demonstration of how fundamental the consistent (constant) concept of time is, to the way the human mind functions. The semantics embedded in all languages is hard evidence for the human mind's reliance on the fundamentality of that same concept. Observations of the remote universe are objectively recorded perceptions. In order to make sense of those perceptions, science invokes its above (in quotes) measurable concept of time. Time is regarded in physics as a scalar quantity (see above reference). [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar_(physics)']Scalar quantities[/URL] are defined as only having magnitude [U]and no other characteristics[/U]. Your assignment of time as depending on various other sub-regions of the universe, [U]is[/U] assigning time with [I]'[U]other characteristics[/U]'[/I] .. which violates the definition of 'scalar quantity', where there is no supporting objective evidence for doing this. Formally, a scalar is unchanged by coordinate system transformations. Your assignment of time to various sub-regions of the universe represents a co-ordinate system transformation and you assert that time may change by doing this. This also violates the definition of 'scalar quantity' where there is no supporting objective evidence for doing this. Time in science does not verify or falsify the notion of 'it being real', (or 'exists in reality'), in the sense of [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism']Philosophical Realism[/URL]. Such philosophies are untestably ignorable (ie: treated with neutrality) in science, as objective testing proceeds. It seems this is what your argument ultimately relies solely upon .. and is [U]not[/U] what science basis it perspective about time on. I strongly recommend that you recognise these clear distinctions as this conversation proceeds, as they are very different viewpoints and your commentaries about what 'science can or cannot observe' are based on your philosophical realism viewpoint (inferred from your above post). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Time in deep space
Top
Bottom