If You Believe That Time Does Exist, please try to explain 1., 2. or 3.

If you think time exists then you should be able to explain either:

1. where/how you think it gets the energy to influence every bit of matter in the universe consistently and simultaneously.

or

2. how you think it manages to influence every bit of matter in the universe consistently and simultaneously without the use of any energy.

or

3. where/how you think it gets the energy to influence clocks and satellites if not everything else in the universe.

so please try.

Troll thread.

Do not respond.

Have you ever seen such a FINE example of a FALSE DICHOTOMY?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma



Arthur

I was very confident that none of the time huggers can make any real attempt to answer basic questions like that, but I didn't expect anyone to be so afraid of them. Apparently there really is no reason to believe it at all...you were told something, you don't know why you believe it, yet you cling to it maniacally . So much in forums is both amusing and sad at the same time...amusing because it's so , and sad because it's so pitiful.

BUT! I always like to give people ANOTHER opportunity to try to explain what they think they think even after they have given the impression that they don't really have a clue as you have. So here is another chance for you to try to explain what you think you're trying to talk about if you think you have any idea:

If you think time exists then you should be able to explain either:

1. where/how you think it gets the energy to influence every bit of matter in the universe consistently and simultaneously.

or

2. how you think it manages to influence every bit of matter in the universe consistently and simultaneously without the use of any energy.

or

3. where/how you think it gets the energy to influence clocks and satellites if not everything else in the universe.

I wish you good luck trying to explain what you think you think.

You have pretended to believe the more likely possibility that time does not exist in a physical but was a concept developed by humans as clearly appears to be the case. But if you think time speeds up clocks then explain where you think it gets the energy in order to do so, or how you think it does it without using any energy, or whatever you think you have in "mind".

It doesn't take energy to do anything to the clock.
The clock is unaffected from it's frame of reference.
It's the nonphysical time that changes.

Do you understand how rulers work?

It takes energy to do something to the clock. Also you've led me to believe that you think time is what prevents everything from happening simultaneously, which would require enough energy to restrict everthing in the universe consistently and simultaneously. Considering the huge amounts of energy it would require over such unimaginably vast distances, it sort of seems like it should be easy to explain how it deals with the tiny fraction of energy required to change the performance of clocks and satellites.

They don't detect anything, and they don't truly measure anything either. They represent an idea. They certainly don't slow clocks down either, any more than time doesn't.

Then how do you measure length of anything?

If I'm asked for two inches of heat shrink tubing, how do I determine how much that is?

YOU measure it. The ruler or whatever only represents ideas, and a person uses that representation to do the measuring. Clocks don't measure time either. They represent an idea as well. When clocks slow down it is never because time slowed down and the clocks detected it...

THE REST OF US measure time by noting the number of ticks of a clock.
You should learn how to someday, it's really handy.

Not really.

Shall we call for a vote?

If I understand the clock-slowing logic, it happens because in lower-gravity or faster velocity situations, the ratio between energy and momentum decreases.

I'm not sure I said this exactly right. What I mean is that the same amount of energy added to an object results in less momentum. Is this what is meant by "time slowing down?"

You seem to want to be heard and understood. Well and good.

Go and avail yourself of the many articles on Wikipedia relating to SR and GR. If you need help with the definitions of those two terms, perhaps you shouldn't be here arguing...

Easy to answer your stupid questions NopEda

1. I requires the same energy that an inch requires to be an inch.

2. It influences all matter that same way that length does and uses the same energy.

3. It uses the same energy that length uses to influence all matter everywhere.


Done.