|
Time Travel Question (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
whenever you want to discuss things in english you just let me know. |
whenever you want to get an education, you just let me know. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
whenever you want to get an education, you just let me know. |
I'd like an education nefardec!
Could you recommend anyone that doesn't babble incomprehensible bull in response to basic questions? Someone that doesn’t spend their whole day masturbating about nonsense concepts that only exist in their own fanciful imagination? Someone that could respond to honest questions with equally-honest answers, taking into account the person who asked the question and their possible lack of specialist knowledge or terminology?
Yeah, I don’t spose you know anyone like that, huh? |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I'd like an education nefardec!
Could you recommend anyone that doesn't babble incomprehensible bull in response to basic questions? Someone that doesn’t spend their whole day masturbating about nonsense concepts that only exist in their own fanciful imagination? Someone that could respond to honest questions with equally-honest answers, taking into account the person who asked the question and their possible lack of specialist knowledge or terminology?
Yeah, I don’t spose you know anyone like that, huh? |
since when is time travel a basic question? LOL
you're a dunce who spends his whole day masturbating about telling people they are masturbating about nonsense concepts |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
since when is time travel a basic question? LOL |
my statement regarding the assumption that 'time' is a human construct was rather simple i thought.
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
you're a dunce |
and youre a pseudo intellectual that can't explain themselves without sounding like a chronic wanker. |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
my statement regarding the assumption that 'time' is a human construct was rather simple i thought.
and youre a pseudo intellectual that can't explain themselves without sounding like a chronic wanker. |
do you realize i could really care less what you think of me? and that probably most people in the world could also care less what you think of me? stop wasting (y)our time. this is why you are a dunce.
your statement was overly simple and not even worthy of the title of 'psuedo intellectual'. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| The physicist's concept of time is a measurement of physical change. That doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with time as we experience it subjectively, which likely has more to do with the properties of the brain than anything else. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
The physicist's concept of time is a measurement of physical change. That doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with time as we experience it subjectively, which likely has more to do with the properties of the brain than anything else. |
The human definition of time is a construct based on experiences that we have on earth.
Time would be viewed differently by any other intelligent race in the universe. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| I suspect that any intelligent species would develop a technique for using regular physical processes, like the "rising" and "setting" of the sun, or the phases of a moon, to keep track of and plan less regular stuff. Once you do that you have a basic physical concept of "time." |
|
|
| tachobg |
| quote: | Originally posted by kadomony
But it wouldn't ever be 0. Since the limit of 1/x approaches 0 as x approaches infinity, the result would still be a real number, correct? |
I see what you mean. The formal analysis of this kind of stuff is the subject of a branch of math called measure theory. Intuitively the outcomes can't all have the same probability, because their sum wouldn't be 1. So there would have to be more probable and less probable universes, which seems to make sense. So the stuff I posted about a bell curve was kind of irrelevant because it's a continuous rather than discrete distribution.
But here's a question -- if there are many universes, why should there be only a discrete set of universes (countably many, such as {1,2,3,...}) as opposed to a continuous spectrum of them (uncountably many)? Just take the current universe and all of the physical things it contains -- you could continuously vary some or all of their physical properties (or can you? does quantum stuff forbid continuous variation?) to make uncountably many new universes. In that case, the probability of any particular one of those is indeed 0. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
do you realize i could really care less what you think of me? and that probably most people in the world could also care less what you think of me? stop wasting (y)our time. this is why you are a dunce.
your statement was overly simple and not even worthy of the title of 'psuedo intellectual'. |
it's couldn't care less, you dunce. |
|
|
| Meat187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
that time is a perceptual effect of physical and mental conditioning. |
| quote: | Originally posted by kadomony
i totally agree. the concept of "time" is a human (ego) created concept. |
No.
I can't believe that philosophical crap is that widespread. :stongue: |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
Why does nefardec get so much hate??? :stongue:
I value his posts and believe that he represents an 'educated' perspective on various topics - I didn't say insightful or 'right', and so far as I know, he has never claimed as such. But he always brings something supportable to the table, though it's strongly skewed towards academic theory. |
|
|
|
|
