What is time?

[kevin]

TIME,
Time is a consequence of information contained in DNA spiral information flows, as that information flows around universe and circulates about the 3D created mass, it constantly changes content, downloading and uploading information.
Every single part of 3D forgets perhaps so many times as to be beyond comprehension time wise, and resets , thus as this continuous on/off switching is taking place, the change in information is what we assign the name TIME, and ageing.
All of time exists at once but the condition of the relevant mixture as such is in constant flux.
If a method of remembering the relevant condition relative to each second of time could be created, then if that condition was created about anyone or thing, there they would be in the other time.
Nothing is permanent or solid, the apparent movement of planets etc is merely ourselves been able to see the alteration of where an object forgot it was, and then remembered it was , in the flows of DNA space.
Our limited short distance detector senses are fooled by the spiral pathways that our signals travel both ways upon, the objects are not moving as per recognised and accepted thought, but are merely switching on/off.
Kevin

[seasmith]

Altonhare wrote:

“Time: The distance-traveled by an object B as object A traverses the distance D. Again object A and B are assumed to be moving uniformly with respect to each other.”

With due respect, my friend, this time it is your equation/definition which is “circular”.

Kevin wrote:

Time is a consequence of information contained in DNA spiral information flows, as that information flows around universe and circulates about the 3D created mass, it constantly changes content, downloading and uploading information…”

Spot on

Time is Succession and nothing else; Space is Position and nothing else; Matter is Causality and nothing else.

“For it only by means of time and space that something~ which is one and the same, according to its nature and our concept, appears as different; as a plurality of coexistent and successive things.”

A. Schopenhauer
World as Will and Representation
1818

I would submit that source of Kevin’s “flows”, ( and for our perception, the “flows” ), would be “one and the same”.

Motion is relative.
Time is inherent.
I/O is a priori

~s~

[Grey Cloud]

Bravo, Seasmith.
There is only the Eternal Now. Life is just a big flicker-book.

[altonhare]

With due respect, my friend, this time it is your equation/definition which is “circular”.

I offered a mathematical definition of time. The physics definition is simply before/after, cause/effect. Objectively there are simply objects changing location. Nature knows nothing about "time". What we perceive as time is simply because we remember where an object was, we have memory.

In effect I think I agree with Grey Cloud, at least I like the "flip book" analogy. BG and I often talk about "frames in a movie" to talk about dynamic concepts and time.

But why, specifically, is it circular?

[seasmith]

altonhare on Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:50 am

Thing/Object: Shape, finite.

Distance: Separation between two objects

Location: The set of distances from an object to every other object.

Concrete object: Shape and location

Motion: Two or more locations of an object.

Velocity: The distance-traveled by an object A as object B traverses the distance D. Object A and B are assumed to be moving uniformly with respect to each other (over any distance-traveled d by either, the other always travels a distance n*d, where n is constant).

Time: The distance-traveled by an object B as object A traverses the distance D. Again object A and B are assumed to be moving uniformly with respect to each other

So:
M=D/T
D=M*T
and
T= Db/Da ?????????????

[kevin]

Altonhare,
What is your fixed point to measure anything from?
Do You know if the space that any object is in is stationary?
If not what constant velocity and direction is it taking?

I consider that not one second can be said to be equal to another.
But, and it's a big but, if as I find, the lattice structure of space is fixed, and never moves or varies, then perhaps, just perhaps, it may give DEVINE measure?, said the deviner.
I can measure to perfection what I detect, perhaps, perhaps I am the man with the rod that will measure the universe?, not just the world.
You and all of science have nothing to measure, not a single solitary thing.
Kevin

[altonhare]

So:
M=D/T
D=M*T
and
T= Db/Da ?????????????

I'd like to emphasize that this is a mathematical definition of time, it simply defines time as a useful parameter and poses how to measure it.

On the other hand, "motion" is defined simply as two locations of an object. This is not a mathematical definition. Humans may use math and standards to measure location, but Nature does not. The definitions I give for object, location, and motion are used to establish these notions qualitatively, before we get to questions of their quantification (surely we must know what we're talking about before we can measure it!)

Velocity is the way we, as humans, quantify and measure the motion of A relative to B. We measure it by measuring relative distances. Physically distance is just the separation between two objects. The way we quantify it is by counting the number of standard-objects that fit between the two objects we are inquiring about. If you want to look at it from the most basic standpoint, we lay down n standard bricks and let object A and B move along it. When A has traversed 5 standard bricks and B has traversed one we say A's relative velocity is 5. Mathematically we define its inverse, time. The time it takes for B to traverse a brick relative to A is 1/5. Or you could say that the time for B to traverse 5 unit bricks is 5 and the time for A to do so is 1. Reporting these numbers would be technically misleading, because you would be describing a situation where B actually traversed 5 unit bricks. In this experiment it didn't.

Now, what's the problem seasmith?

[altonhare]

Altonhare,
What is your fixed point to measure anything from?
Do You know if the space that any object is in is stationary?
If not what constant velocity and direction is it taking?

Space is not an object which can "be stationary". "Stationary" only has meaning in the measurement of the positions of one object relative to one or more objects. To be stationary means there is no relative velocity, objects A and B are at a distance D.

Velocity is always relative, of course. There is no such thing as velocity in a universe of only a single object. Velocity is a dynamic concept. Concepts always require two or more objects in a relationship.

Here we need to distinguish between velocity, the measurement of motion, and the motion itself. When I measure motion I get a velocity. I can say, with equal technical validity, that the ant traversed an inch across the ruler or alternatively that the ruler moved one inch. But Nature cannot be fooled. In Nature, either the ant moved or the ruler moved or they both moved at the same time. Only one of these situations actually happened.

Thus, motion is different from velocity.

So again, what's the problem?

[Grey Cloud]

Altonhare wrote:

But Nature cannot be fooled.

Define Nature and explain how you know it cannot be fooled.

[kevin]

whats the problem?

How can anyone measure anything unless they KNOW that the objects exist and are in a fixed envioronment.
This is basically the whole problem facing ourselves, we know nothing of how this 3d reality is created or continues to exist, and yet laws of physics are stated, this prof or that prof is quoted and thus it must be, it's all total crap.

We are locked down in a treacle like quick sand of total bile , it is all nonesense.
it is impossible replying to you,
you state that you are not conforming to the normally accepted, but act as a rigid defender of the accepted, you demand that things must adhere to your concept of reality, when none of us have any pissing idea of what this place is, or if it's real or a dream.
How do You know that this planet moves at all?
what are you measuring against, and how do you know that is fixed?
How do you know that this planet is turning as we have been TOLD?
What the f88ing hell is there to measure against?
How do you know that anything is what it appears to be to your senses?
how do you know that the accepted physical body of the planet , actually is the planet?
how do you know that your body is actually you?
I detect SOMETHING totally different about living things and many so called inaminate objects, what I detect about people passes through walls and other people, how the hell do I measure that?
What happens when any living thing dies, what is the difference in your measure of a second that occurs for something to be alive and then dead?
How do you measure that, you can stick a probe onto the living and then declare an electrical signal has stopped, how, who threw the switch and where did the signal origonate and go to>

our whole basis of thinking is corrupt and bile, we are imprisoned in a reality that we think we are masters of, when in truth we have not one single idea of what the hell this is all about.
we have been conned , and there must be an adjenda and reason behind that?
I totally reject all the accepted so called sciences, the whole thing is a lie from top to bottom.

We have to wake up fast, realise that this universe is alive and we are part of it, not the biological temporary bodies we inhabit, or the temporary planet and universe.
It's a system of flowing life, nothing is solid or exists as we percieve, it's all a hologram of changing inputs, thats what we need to find out what it is and how it operates, the rest is a mere consequence, no-thing more.
kevin

[altonhare]

what are you measuring against, and how do you know that is fixed?

The answer is that we do not, measurement always involves a reference standard, which is assumed to be "fixed" or "immutable" etc. This is why I like to keep math/measurement out of physics, which the mainstream "scientists" are incapable of doing.

How do you know that this planet is turning as we have been TOLD?

The answer is that I do not. In science we don't know or prove that the earth goes around the sun. In science we explain why we observe this or that with a theory. Whether you believe the theory or not is up to you. The primary criteria for a scientific theory is consistency, which demands non contradiction. If the theory is inconsistent or contradictory it's not scientific.

our whole basis of thinking is corrupt and bile, we are imprisoned in a reality that we think we are masters of, when in truth we have not one single idea of what the hell this is all about.

If this is true why do you insist on thinking? Why do you keep posting trying to say what time or energy or etc. is? According to you, all your thoughts are "corrupt and bile" and you have "no idea". Indeed, according to you, you can't even trust your own assertion that your thoughts are "corrupt and bile"!

[junglelord]

what are you measuring against, and how do you know that is fixed?

The answer is that we do not, measurement always involves a reference standard, which is assumed to be "fixed" or "immutable" etc. This is why I like to keep math/measurement out of physics, which the mainstream "scientists" are incapable of doing.

How do you know that this planet is turning as we have been TOLD?

The answer is that I do not. In science we don't know or prove that the earth goes around the sun. In science we explain why we observe this or that with a theory. Whether you believe the theory or not is up to you. The primary criteria for a scientific theory is consistency, which demands non contradiction. If the theory is inconsistent or contradictory it's not scientific.

our whole basis of thinking is corrupt and bile, we are imprisoned in a reality that we think we are masters of, when in truth we have not one single idea of what the hell this is all about.

If this is true why do you insist on thinking? Why do you keep posting trying to say what time or energy or etc. is? According to you, all your thoughts are "corrupt and bile" and you have "no idea". Indeed, according to you, you can't even trust your own assertion that your thoughts are "corrupt and bile"!

Well number one, if you have a branch of physics without measurement, aka chain theory, its going nowhere.

Number Two we do KNOW the Earth is Spinning.

Number Three Kevin was talking about those who spout the "Knowledge" of the system.
Kevin is one of the few members who is outside all system knowledge.
Therefore what he says is the only thing that matters.

[lizzie]

Junglelord said: Kevin was talking about those who spout the "Knowledge" of the system. Kevin is one of the few members who is outside all system knowledge. Therefore what he says is the only thing that matters.

I will certainly second that!

When I first heard Kevin describe his "energy grid," I had no idea what he was talking about. I didn’t disbelieve him; I simply felt that what he was describing was beyond my understanding. He sees beyond the matrix. He defines the Universe based on totally totally different constructs from what I was taught. At the same time I have come to realize that all of what I have been taught is a lie, an illusion. So I depend upon Kevin to serve as a beacon of light to expose the fog of lies and distortions.

Kevin has described the aether just as Keely did – the same basic pattern. He knows it intuitively. I think that’s pretty funny. He never had to crack a physics book.

I feel that all people should be able to interact with Nature and the Universe in such an intuitive way. It was the way the ancients did it.

JL, you came back!

[Influx]

The universe could care less about time and our limited systems of measuring the universe. That is, if it could care! We are, as humans, who die and are imperfect, are simple projecting our fears and shortcomings onto the cosmos and expect it to behave as such. Time is nothing more than an invention of the human condition and suffering. The universe has only movement of the celestial objects, a movement IN THE volume of space that can only be seen in relation to the celestial bodies that occupy that volume. There is NO inherent value or condition that can be linked to time in the structure of space. The illusion of time arises only in our minds due to the cyclical nature of objects that move in the volume of space. A volt meter measures volts that ARE present in the structure of the wire! The clock does NOT measure the "something" in the universe, but is rather an imaginary synchronization device made to organize our lives. Movement controls the universe not time!

[kevin]

Influx,
Good post, particuraly,
"Movement controls the universe, not TIME"
But the movement of what?
I sense it is the movement of the STUFF flowing on straight carrier sheets, the mass is nothing but the consequence, and needs to be removed from the picture , to better comprehend what is moving, imo.
kevinw