What is gravity, the electric and magnetic fields?

[StevenO]

If there is only "present" how would you explain history then?

I don't really understand the question, could you clarify?

You do not remember the word "history" anymore ? Must be your odd definition of time...

You seem to have an odd definition of motion. Motion is expressed in speed, which is a certain length covered in a certain time. These two things are inseparable.

You're defining motion in terms of time, so naturally (by definition) you state that there cannot be any motion without time.

I do not define motion in terms of "time", so naturally I do not state this. My reasons have been stated here and there, and elsewhere, and need not be reiterated in here (where it would be off-topic).

That is why I said you have an odd definition of motion. Movement is always a relation between space and time. One cannot change location without changing time also.

Indeed: Time is observed from motion. Just like space.

You observe time? Could you show it to me so I can observe it for myself?

Anything you observe moves both in space and time.

Since you state "clocks measure movement" I think we actually agree

Personally I've never seen a clock whip out its ruler, abacus, and compass to take a measurement. As far as I can tell a clock just goes tick-tock.

In fact I've never seen an inanimate object measure anything.

Don't take it too personal. The clock will still measure time even if you don't look at it.

I also agree that "concepts" are a human thing. Time is a physical thing.

Just define physical, thing, and concept and you're all set.

If you define "just","define", "and" and "all set" first.

[altonhare]

If there is only "present" how would you explain history then?

I don't really understand the question, could you clarify?

You do not remember the word "history" anymore ? Must be your odd definition of time...

Just don't know what you mean by "explain history".

You seem to have an odd definition of motion. Motion is expressed in speed, which is a certain length covered in a certain time. These two things are inseparable.

You're defining motion in terms of time, so naturally (by definition) you state that there cannot be any motion without time.

I do not define motion in terms of "time", so naturally I do not state this. My reasons have been stated here and there, and elsewhere, and need not be reiterated in here (where it would be off-topic).

That is why I said you have an odd definition of motion. Movement is always a relation between space and time. One cannot change location without changing time also.

Relation between space and time? I know of relationships, like between one object and another. Please point out this "space" object and this "time" object so I can observe their relationship.

Indeed: Time is observed from motion. Just like space.

You observe time? Could you show it to me so I can observe it for myself?

Anything you observe moves both in space and time.

Moves "in" space and time, like in a box? Space and time are a box?

Since you state "clocks measure movement" I think we actually agree

Personally I've never seen a clock whip out its ruler, abacus, and compass to take a measurement. As far as I can tell a clock just goes tick-tock.

In fact I've never seen an inanimate object measure anything.

Don't take it too personal. The clock will still measure time even if you don't look at it.

Could you illustrate this process of "measuring time" for me so I can observe it too? I just see objects moving. I don't see any "time".

I also agree that "concepts" are a human thing. Time is a physical thing.

Just define physical, thing, and concept and you're all set.

If you define "just","define", "and" and "all set" first.

You are using words to communicate your ideas, the definition of the key words in your idea are therefore 100% crucial to what you are saying.

[StevenO]

Just don't know what you mean by "explain history".

The question was: if there is only the "present" as tango suggests, how would you explain that you remember what you've done yesterday?

Relation between space and time? I know of relationships, like between one object and another. Please point out this "space" object and this "time" object so I can observe their relationship.

You seem to assume that objects are prior to the universe. That is not correct. The universe is build from space and time (as inseparable properties of motion). All physical constants can be expressed in dimensions of space and time. Only when the relation between space and time differs from the default ratio(lightspeed) physical objects can be identified.

Why can the travel of a photon not be observed? Because it does'nt travel according to our universe. Motion at lightspeed is space and timeless.

Anything you observe moves both in space and time.

Moves "in" space and time, like in a box? Space and time are a box?

I have trouble following your language associations. What if I would just say" anything you observe moves" ? (At a speed different from lightspeed to be complete).

Could you illustrate this process of "measuring time" for me so I can observe it too? I just see objects moving. I don't see any "time".

Well....most ordinary clocks measure time in second units, which are mostly derived from the vibration of a crystal at 32.768KHz. It all has to do with your odd assumption that movement does not include time.

I also agree that "concepts" are a human thing. Time is a physical thing.

Just define physical, thing, and concept and you're all set.

If you define "just","define", "and" and "all set" first.

You are using words to communicate your ideas, the definition of the key words in your idea are therefore 100% crucial to what you are saying.

Since you seem to have different interpretations of commonly used expressions I asked you to give your interpretations first. But to speed up I could start by explaining "physical" and "thing":
"physical" = having observable properties (measurable or perceivable)
"thing" = anything we can discuss or think of
So, "Time is a physical thing", could mean "Time is an observable and measurable property". We just do not acknowledge it as we should. Any object rotating or vibrating in space marks a certain amount of time. Any object rotating or vibrating in time demarks a certain amount of space (atoms do for instance).

[altonhare]

Just don't know what you mean by "explain history".

The question was: if there is only the "present" as tango suggests, how would you explain that you remember what you've done yesterday?

Becaues I have memory. which is unique to conscious entities. Things like rocks and atoms don't "remember". They exist only in present mode. A rock looks at itself and says "I just have shape and location". A rock doesn't "remember" falling off the cliff and does not anticipate being stepped on. It just is.

Relation between space and time? I know of relationships, like between one object and another. Please point out this "space" object and this "time" object so I can observe their relationship.

You seem to assume that objects are prior to the universe. That is not correct. The universe is build from space and time (as inseparable properties of motion). All physical constants can be expressed in dimensions of space and time. Only when the relation between space and time differs from the default ratio(lightspeed) physical objects can be identified.

The universe = all objects that exist. Neither is "prior" to the other.

Nature doesn't care how humans describe her, what units we use, or what "physical constants" we happen to measure. Nature is just a bunch of objects with location (physical presence).

Why can the travel of a photon not be observed? Because it does'nt travel according to our universe. Motion at lightspeed is space and timeless.

"Photons" cannot be "observed" because they are the mechanism by which you observe. Light is how you see, it's not what you see. It has nothing to do with "timeless" or whatever.

Anything you observe moves both in space and time.

Moves "in" space and time, like in a box? Space and time are a box?

I have trouble following your language associations. What if I would just say" anything you observe moves" ? (At a speed different from lightspeed to be complete).

Everything I observe moves is fine. Whether I can observe something moving at light speed or not seems irrelevant and debatable. Maybe one day I will be able to.

Could you illustrate this process of "measuring time" for me so I can observe it too? I just see objects moving. I don't see any "time".

Well....most ordinary clocks measure time in second units, which are mostly derived from the vibration of a crystal at 32.768KHz. It all has to do with your odd assumption that movement does not include time.

I just see the clock and its little hand. "Measuring time" is something I do, not the clock. I compare how far the little hand went to how far my car went. My car went 100 miles and the hand moved 1/12th of a turn, and I just call 1/12th of a turn an "hour" for convenience. The clock, by itself, just sits there going tick tock. I'm the one that imagines and measures something I decide to call "time". A clock does not measure time, a person measures time.

I also agree that "concepts" are a human thing. Time is a physical thing.

Just define physical, thing, and concept and you're all set.

If you define "just","define", "and" and "all set" first.

You are using words to communicate your ideas, the definition of the key words in your idea are therefore 100% crucial to what you are saying.

Since you seem to have different interpretations of commonly used expressions I asked you to give your interpretations first. But to speed up I could start by explaining "physical" and "thing":
"physical" = having observable properties (measurable or perceivable)
"thing" = anything we can discuss or think of
So, "Time is a physical thing", could mean "Time is an observable and measurable property". We just do not acknowledge it as we should. Any object rotating or vibrating in space marks a certain amount of time. Any object rotating or vibrating in time demarks a certain amount of space (atoms do for instance).

So anything we cannot measure/perceive is nonphysical?

"Thing" is a word without any restriction whatsoever, and basically meaningless? Additionally the def is circular since it includes "thing".

Physical: Shape, thing, object

[junglelord]

A clock does not measure time?
Thats your definition....and a illogical one at that. it is non sequitar.

[altonhare]

A clock does not measure time?
Thats your definition....and a illogical one at that. it is non sequitar.

Please show me a clock, or any other inanimate object, performing a measurement.

[StevenO]

The question was: if there is only the "present" as tango suggests, how would you explain that you remember what you've done yesterday?

Becaues I have memory. which is unique to conscious entities. Things like rocks and atoms don't "remember". They exist only in present mode. A rock looks at itself and says "I just have shape and location". A rock doesn't "remember" falling off the cliff and does not anticipate being stepped on. It just is.

I don't agree. A rock remembers how to be a rock, that is not the same as "it just is"(in the present). Most rocks were rocks yesterday too and they were created and are falling apart into dust in due time. That means a rock moves in time, just like we do. Does that mean the rock is conscious? I guess rocks just don't communicate like humans...

The universe = all objects that exist. Neither is "prior" to the other.

Nature doesn't care how humans describe her, what units we use, or what "physical constants" we happen to measure. Nature is just a bunch of objects with location (physical presence).

That is a meaningless statement for me. This is a discussion forum between humans where we try to decipher the universe. I don't care what the universe thinks about that even though I would appreciate her opinion I also don't agree that nature is a just a bunch of objects since objects can be converted into eachother: food into living beings, matter into light, gamma rays into electrons and positrons. There must be common denominator for all objects and that is motion (or space and time, whatever one prefers).

Why can the travel of a photon not be observed? Because it does'nt travel according to our universe. Motion at lightspeed is space and timeless.

"Photons" cannot be "observed" because they are the mechanism by which you observe. Light is how you see, it's not what you see. It has nothing to do with "timeless" or whatever.

So, how do photons travel from one side of the universe to the other without losing energy then?
Physics is not human centric. Things can be observed by electrons, neutrons or neutrino's too.

I just see the clock and its little hand. "Measuring time" is something I do, not the clock. I compare how far the little hand went to how far my car went. My car went 100 miles and the hand moved 1/12th of a turn, and I just call 1/12th of a turn an "hour" for convenience. The clock, by itself, just sits there going tick tock. I'm the one that imagines and measures something I decide to call "time". A clock does not measure time, a person measures time.

If you define time as "human time of day" that could be a justifiable position. If you look at time as a physical property a clock is a measure of time just like a ruler is a measure of length, independent of how it is perceived by humans.

So, "Time is a physical thing", could mean "Time is an observable and measurable property". We just do not acknowledge it as we should. Any object rotating or vibrating in space marks a certain amount of time. Any object rotating or vibrating in time demarks a certain amount of space (atoms do for instance).

So anything we cannot measure/perceive is nonphysical?

"Thing" is a word without any restriction whatsoever, and basically meaningless? Additionally the def is circular since it includes "thing".

Physical: Shape, thing, object

That's just wordgames for me. I have given my definitions.

[junglelord]

A clock does not measure time?
Thats your definition....and a illogical one at that. it is non sequitar.

Please show me a clock, or any other inanimate object, performing a measurement.

Show me a clock that does not measure and it is broken.

[Riposte]

Anyone can see for themselves that time is an illusion and does not really "exist." Bring your mind to stillness through meditation and you will notice that there is only this one eternally present moment.

Experience it for yourself. Don't believe what anyone else tells you. Don't think about it either, or you'll miss it.

[bboyer]

Anyone can see for themselves that time is an illusion and does not really "exist." Bring your mind to stillness through meditation and you will notice that there is only this one eternally present moment.

Experience it for yourself. Don't believe what anyone else tells you. Don't think about it either, or you'll miss it.

That's the ticket. Too simple for most. Especially those with non-stop, bizzy minds.

[StevenO]

Anyone can see for themselves that time is an illusion and does not really "exist."

Quite the contrary. Time is what gives solidity to material objects or brings force in fields. It is the "inside" of all physical objects.

Bring your mind to stillness through meditation and you will notice that there is only this one eternally present moment.

Experience it for yourself. Don't believe what anyone else tells you. Don't think about it either, or you'll miss it.

That's what I said. Bringing your body/mind into harmonic motion will allow to closer experience time.

[junglelord]

Yeah, there is only the NOW.

[Solar]

Yeah, there is only the NOW.

/Applaudes

And thank you.

[Influx]

Yeah, there is only the NOW.

Define NOW! Sorry, couldn't resist

Yeh I agree, the past are our memories, hope, our future.

[altonhare]

A clock does not measure time?
Thats your definition....and a illogical one at that. it is non sequitar.

Please show me a clock, or any other inanimate object, performing a measurement.

Show me a clock that does not measure and it is broken.

None of my clocks measure, they just go tick-tock. None of my rulers measure either, they just sit there. I must be purchasing faulty apparatus.