Every six months or so,* a time thread kicks up. What is time? Can it even be defined without tautology?
Per Smelly's suggestion, I wanted to shift this discussion over here, so that such frivolities do not sully the Shitlord thread. (Now that I've read the whole thread to this point, I see rhinoq formally requests we launch a new thread. Start with this one; if it's too bollixed, just delete and launch a purdier one.)
The time tangent starts here --
http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showpost.php?p=448007&postcount=1579 -- more or less.
Choobus: "Time is best defined as
a variable quantity of motion that describes the seperation of events in terms of the inertial frame in which they occur. It's a shit description and when we get a better one we will start to unlock more secrets of Nature."
(As I recall, another time thread once ended with Choobus (?) stating that time won't be figured out until we unlock more secrets of
the brain.)
AJFuchs and Rhinoq weighed in, as did Rat Bastard, (Choobus must have him on 'ignore' because he repeated him, unless my understanding of the sequence of posts is distorted by some phenomenal event).
There's more in the Shitlord thread; please bring it over here.
Can we get a theist to weigh in? I can't decide whether a believer would be reluctant to consider time-as-an-illusion ['illusion' isn't quite right] because that would cut the balls off an atemporal god, or that timelessness would be a welcome addition to the apologetics' repertoire, since it would unravel certain contradictions that have been giving their theology wedgies for millennia. Lurker?
Please post links or references of further reading!
Rhinoq did, this one:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Unreality_of_Time
I haven't picked up Julian Barbour's
The End of Time: The Next Revolution in Physics yet, but I plan to. He has a long interview
here, which includes a few appetizing basics.
*By "six months" I mean the Eternal Now