Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2006, 05:20 AM   #91
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
Quote:
Philboid Studge wrote
I dunno, Cal. If we offered Jeebus a toke, He might say something like, 'No way man. My father will kill me -- again.' =|

P.S. I can perform the miracle of turning Grolsch into urine.
:lol:...hmm..I've dome the same miracle with Lowenbrau while walking over the tremulous waves of lake Oneida that had succumbed to -10 C weather during my education at Cornell 45 years ago.........:) AHHH..it is great to be a creator....
Syracuse U. here, similar time frame, and I can see Oneida lake from my front window. -10 C (30.9 F), must have been late June. -10 F would be typical for mid-March. Hail Cal.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 11:42 AM   #92
Rhinoqulous
The Original Rhinoqurilla
 
Rhinoqulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somewhere Not-So-Cold with Mountains
Posts: 4,829
If you don't mind Ten, I'll leave the musings of theoretical physics to you and Choob, and I'll stick with waxing the metaphysical (as that is what I'm trained in).

A few questions for you Ten.

1- From Einstein's theories, we can view time and space as being two sides of the same coin, hence space-time. If the universe is truly timeless, what do you think this means for space? Wouldn't spatial extension disappear along with temporal extension?

2- We experience the passage of time. If this is merely an illusion, what is it that is causing us to believe that time exists? What we essentially are (consciousness emerging from the functioning of our brains through time) is time-dependant; I fail to see how personal identity (or any type of consciousness) can be maintained in a timeless universe.

3- The laws of physics in a "timely" universe are descriptions of events. In a timeless universe the laws of physics would become descriptions between arrangements of shape-space (as there would be no processes to describe, only various shape-spaces that have relations to each other). Wouldn't this needlessly complicate what physics essentially is?

4- Lastly, I'd like to know why a timeless universe is more attractive to you than a timely one. What do you think timelessness explains better over a timely one?

Wait just a minute-You expect me to believe-That all this misbehaving-Grew from one enchanted tree? And helpless to fight it-We should all be satisfied-With this magical explanation-For why the living die-And why it's hard to be a decent human being - David Bazan
Rhinoqulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 12:40 PM   #93
calpurnpiso
I Live Here
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chandler- Arizona
Posts: 14,227
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
Quote:
Philboid Studge wrote
I dunno, Cal. If we offered Jeebus a toke, He might say something like, 'No way man. My father will kill me -- again.' =|

P.S. I can perform the miracle of turning Grolsch into urine.
:lol:...hmm..I've dome the same miracle with Lowenbrau while walking over the tremulous waves of lake Oneida that had succumbed to -10 C weather during my education at Cornell 45 years ago.........:) AHHH..it is great to be a creator....
Syracuse U. here, similar time frame, and I can see Oneida lake from my front window. -10 C (30.9 F), must have been late June. -10 F would be typical for mid-March. Hail Cal.
WOW...you live there?...Awesome...can you imagine a crazy Colombian infected with Christ-psychosis who barely spoke English but knew 6 other languages, drinking beer with crazy gringos while atending Cornell during the 60's...repeating the KEY English sentence he used to pretend he knew what the subject matter was?..The sentence was: ' Are you kidding me?". It fitted any occasion perfectly...till I used the slight variation "Are you shiting me?" on my English teacher wife during a foreign student party....AHHH...but since I laught at my own mistakes, it was the best way to learn this crazy language...the most embarrasing moment for me was when I told another teacher while talking about Germany: "....my grandfather on my mother side was a german 'cunt" instead of Count....no wonder my friends kept laughing at me....:lol:

Christians and other folks infected with delusional beliefs think and reason like schizophrenics or temporal lobe epileptics. Their morality is dictated by an invisible friend called Jesus.
calpurnpiso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 01:12 PM   #94
Rhinoqulous
The Original Rhinoqurilla
 
Rhinoqulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somewhere Not-So-Cold with Mountains
Posts: 4,829
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
...the most embarrasing moment for me was when I told another teacher while talking about Germany: "....my grandfather on my mother side was a german 'cunt" instead of Count....no wonder my friends kept laughing at me....:lol:
That reminds me of a phil proff I know from S. Korea. For the first couple years in the States whenever he said Kant it came out as "cunt".

:lol::lol::lol:

Wait just a minute-You expect me to believe-That all this misbehaving-Grew from one enchanted tree? And helpless to fight it-We should all be satisfied-With this magical explanation-For why the living die-And why it's hard to be a decent human being - David Bazan
Rhinoqulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 01:34 PM   #95
Tenspace
I Live Here
 
Tenspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rocky Mountains, USA
Posts: 10,218
Quote:
Rhinoqulous wrote
1- From Einstein's theories, we can view time and space as being two sides of the same coin, hence space-time. If the universe is truly timeless, what do you think this means for space? Wouldn't spatial extension disappear along with temporal extension?
No, because both axes are spatial dimensions. I question why we blindly accept our flow through one direction, time at C, knowing that in the complementary direction (space) we move at essentially 0. As we increase speed through space, we must decrease speed through time - conservation of a finite sum. That is why I propose that it would more appropriately be called "spacespace", not spacetime. Both dimensions are reversable (except the Arrow, which is another discussion) and interchangeable. The "time" functions need to be ferreted out for what they are, which will be a whole lot more than just a flow through 3d space.

Quote:
2- We experience the passage of time. If this is merely an illusion, what is it that is causing us to believe that time exists? What we essentially are (consciousness emerging from the functioning of our brains through time) is time-dependant; I fail to see how personal identity (or any type of consciousness) can be maintained in a timeless universe.
Consciousness, I agree is the Big One here. We perceive a light wave of 640nm as Red, and we perceive this !T direction as time. Why? That's the direction I take in my atheist home-schooling. Right now, it's evolutionary biology that owns me. When I finish with Dawkins (and re-read Ramachandran), then I will start on Dirac, as Choob suggested.

Our dependence on time is no different than our dependence on gravity, yet we got along just fine between Newton & Einstein. Fundamentally, we should not look at time as relative rivers through space. This is the crux of the biscuit. Our perception doesn't change, but our foundational theoretical models are incomplete with regard to time. I think that if the theorists were motivated to poke it with a stick(stick metaphor (c) Lily 2006) we would possibly see the next great technological revolution on the horizon. As it stands, we're two-thirds of our way through the current one.


Quote:
3- The laws of physics in a "timely" universe are descriptions of events. In a timeless universe the laws of physics would become descriptions between arrangements of shape-space (as there would be no processes to describe, only various shape-spaces that have relations to each other). Wouldn't this needlessly complicate what physics essentially is?
Like Einstein complicated Newtonian physics? Newton thought we were measuring two variables in a trajectory, one through time and one through space. Einstein said, "Not really" - we are instead measuring the curvature of a 4-dimensional space called spacetime. I'm saying that the spacetime of Einstein is reallly spacespace and our experience of time is a separate unexplored mechanism.

Quote:
4- Lastly, I'd like to know why a timeless universe is more attractive to you than a timely one. What do you think timelessness explains better over a timely one?
You might as well ask a sailor to explain why he's attracted to the sea. I'm drawn to discovery, adventure, and knowledge. This subject fills all three vessels.

"Science and Mother Nature are in a marriage where Science is always surprised to come home and find Mother Nature blowing the neighbor." - Justin's Dad
Tenspace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 01:55 PM   #96
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
...the most embarrasing moment for me was when I told another teacher while talking about Germany: "....my grandfather on my mother side was a german 'cunt" instead of Count....
Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference?

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 02:37 PM   #97
Rhinoqulous
The Original Rhinoqurilla
 
Rhinoqulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somewhere Not-So-Cold with Mountains
Posts: 4,829
Quote:
Tenspace wrote
Our dependence on time is no different than our dependence on gravity, yet we got along just fine between Newton & Einstein. Fundamentally, we should not look at time as relative rivers through space. This is the crux of the biscuit. Our perception doesn't change, but our foundational theoretical models are incomplete with regard to time. I think that if the theorists were motivated to poke it with a stick (stick metaphor (c) Lily 2006) we would possibly see the next great technological revolution on the horizon. As it stands, we're two-thirds of our way through the current one.
Bad analogy. Newton-to-Einstein was a re-description of what gravity was and how it worked (a new solution to the ol' spinnin' bucket in an empty universe problem), not the removal of gravity entirely (which I assume is the point of a timeless universe). Even if you can give a complete description of the universe with "timeless" physics (which, while holding to ontological relativity, is something I must admit is possible), you still need to explain what it is we actually experience as "time". I know Barbour didn't present such an explanation, I'm wondering if in your research you've come across an explanation.
Quote:
Quote:
3- The laws of physics in a "timely" universe are descriptions of events. In a timeless universe the laws of physics would become descriptions between arrangements of shape-space (as there would be no processes to describe, only various shape-spaces that have relations to each other). Wouldn't this needlessly complicate what physics essentially is?
Like Einstein complicated Newtonian physics? Newton thought we were measuring two variables in a trajectory, one through time and one through space. Einstein said, "Not really" - we are instead measuring the curvature of a 4-dimensional space called spacetime. I'm saying that the spacetime of Einstein is really spacespace and our experience of time is a separate unexplored mechanism.
I'm having problems putting this point across, and that is my fault. What I'm concerned with is that physics would work entirely different in a timeless universe. Physics would be based wholly on relations, instead of being descriptions of events/processes. I have a feeling this would cause more problems than it could possibly solve (though I'm not sure).

Quote:
Quote:
4- Lastly, I'd like to know why a timeless universe is more attractive to you than a timely one. What do you think timelessness explains better over a timely one?
You might as well ask a sailor to explain why he's attracted to the sea. I'm drawn to discovery, adventure, and knowledge. This subject fills all three vessels.
I'm still uncertain what it is that a timeless universe would give us over a timely one. I don't know what solutions we would gain by throwing time out the window (insert bad joke here).

Edit: I forgot to ask you Ten; Does the "future" exist in your timeless universe? I know in philosophy of time, Timeless theories are attractive because they solve "being-becoming" problems (which I don't buy), as well as rapid-property transfer problems (gaining the property of being present and then immediately losing that property to gain one of becoming past, etc., something else I don't buy), by appealing to the ontological equality of past-present-future. Long edit short: does your theory endorse a "block-eternal" universe, where all space-shapes, past, present and future, have equal existence?

Wait just a minute-You expect me to believe-That all this misbehaving-Grew from one enchanted tree? And helpless to fight it-We should all be satisfied-With this magical explanation-For why the living die-And why it's hard to be a decent human being - David Bazan
Rhinoqulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 02:55 PM   #98
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
Rhino, I am essentially in agreement with you. However, I don't think it is encumbent on a theory that deals with cosmology and particle physics to explain human perception. At least, not until we have a better concept of what consciousness is.

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 03:28 PM   #99
Tenspace
I Live Here
 
Tenspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Rocky Mountains, USA
Posts: 10,218
Quote:
Rhinoqulous wrote
Bad analogy. Newton-to-Einstein was a re-description of what gravity was and how it worked (a new solution to the ol' spinnin' bucket in an empty universe problem), not the removal of gravity entirely (which I assume is the point of a timeless universe). Even if you can give a complete description of the universe with "timeless" physics (which, while holding to ontological relativity, is something I must admit is possible), you still need to explain what it is we actually experience as "time". I know Barbour didn't present such an explanation, I'm wondering if in your research you've come across an explanation.
I disagree about the analogy. We didn't know what gravity was in Newton's time. He derived laws of gravitation that were nonlocal. Can we not be in the same scenario with regard to time? It is not analogous with the removal of gravity. It is a modification on existing physical laws, just like relativity. Damn, I'm gonna have to solve this, aren't I. ;) Choobus, can I borrow your copy of Perturbation Theory and Non-Linearity for Dummies? ;)

Quote:
I'm having problems putting this point across, and that is my fault. What I'm concerned with is that physics would work entirely different in a timeless universe. Physics would be based wholly on relations, instead of being descriptions of events/processes. I have a feeling this would cause more problems than it could possibly solve (though I'm not sure).
It all comes down to the granularity, just like gravity. Newtonian laws were fine at gross scales. Inconsistencies were measured at finer scales, and that planted the seed for the next wave of understanding.

Quote:
I'm still uncertain what it is that a timeless universe would give us over a timely one. I don't know what solutions we would gain by throwing time out the window (insert bad joke here).
Time, as we know it would not cease to exist by the discovery of a fundamental set of theories to describe time in finer detail, but you know that. ;) I see the biggest impact in quantum physics and the realization of a fundamental understanding time's arrow, especially with regard to consciousness. It's not like I can predict whether a new set of equations will solve a problem like Mercury's perihelion, but as I read more about spintronics and quantum computing, I get the feeling that time can be manipulated separate from space, in the sense of calulable information sets. As you can probably tell, that's a weak answer, but then again, I'm not classically trained to present theoretical physical arguments.

Quote:
Edit: I forgot to ask you Ten; Does the "future" exist in your timeless universe? I know in philosophy of time, Timeless theories are attractive because they solve "being-becoming" problems (which I don't buy), as well as rapid-property transfer problems (gaining the property of being present and then immediately losing that property to gain one of becoming past, etc., something else I don't buy), by appealing to the ontological equality of past-present-future. Long edit short: does your theory endorse a "block-eternal" universe, where all space-shapes, past, present and future, have equal existence?
The future exists as potential configurations of space. The past exists as realized configurations of space. The present is the current configuration, and they are causally linked through probability functions. Past and present don't exist in a physical plane as they do with existing theories. There is only one shape space called the present. Past and future shape spaces are conceptual representations of a configuration.

Out of time, gotta beat the tourist traffic to the bay bridge so it don't take an hour to get home.

"Science and Mother Nature are in a marriage where Science is always surprised to come home and find Mother Nature blowing the neighbor." - Justin's Dad
Tenspace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2006, 03:29 PM   #100
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Rhinoqulous wrote
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
...the most embarrasing moment for me was when I told another teacher while talking about Germany: "....my grandfather on my mother side was a german 'cunt" instead of Count....no wonder my friends kept laughing at me....:lol:
That reminds me of a phil proff I know from S. Korea. For the first couple years in the States whenever he said Kant it came out as "cunt".

:lol::lol::lol:
Heh- reminds me of one of my physics profs, who was hard-of-hearing. That was a great class, he was not a native english speaker (from China) and being hard of hearing, he never did pick up the pronunciation. It took awhile for most kids to catch on to what he really was talking about in a topology lecture (a rubber sheet stretching, in this case), as it came out "Robber Shit".
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2006, 05:31 AM   #101
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Quote:
calpurnpiso wrote
:lol:...hmm..I've dome the same miracle with Lowenbrau while walking over the tremulous waves of lake Oneida that had succumbed to -10 C weather during my education at Cornell 45 years ago.........:) AHHH..it is great to be a creator....
Syracuse U. here, similar time frame, and I can see Oneida lake from my front window. -10 C (30.9 F), must have been late June. -10 F would be typical for mid-March. Hail Cal.
WOW...you live there?...Awesome...can you imagine a crazy Colombian infected with Christ-psychosis who barely spoke English but knew 6 other languages, drinking beer with crazy gringos while atending Cornell during the 60's...repeating the KEY English sentence he used to pretend he knew what the subject matter was?..The sentence was: ' Are you kidding me?". It fitted any occasion perfectly...till I used the slight variation "Are you shiting me?" on my English teacher wife during a foreign student party....AHHH...but since I laught at my own mistakes, it was the best way to learn this crazy language...the most embarrasing moment for me was when I told another teacher while talking about Germany: "....my grandfather on my mother side was a german 'cunt" instead of Count....no wonder my friends kept laughing at me....:lol:
English "as she are spoke" is indeed crazy. Only in English is a "slim chance" equivalent to a "fat chance". There are perfectly legal sentences that cannot be gramatically parsed. "Fruit flies like a banana"

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:05 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational