Does time exist?

[river]

So how can it still exist during the very short time I'm watching it? It takes eons to break down.

Eons of movement , indeed

 

[DaveC426913]

Eons of movement , indeed

And yet, in the last hour I have been watching it, it has neither moved nor stopped existing.
Thus it follows that duration cannot be movement.

 

[river]

And yet, in the last hour I have been watching it, it has neither moved nor stopped existing.
Thus it follows that duration cannot be movement.

Thus it follows , watch longer .

 

[DaveC426913]

Thus it follows , watch longer .

Not the point. In the mere hour I've been watching it, it has already contradicted your assertion.
Watching longer won't change that.

 

[river]

Not the point. In the mere hour I've been watching it, it has already contradicted your assertion.
Watching longer won't change that.

Are you sure ?

 

[DaveC426913]

Are you sure ?

Think it through. You have all the time you need.

"Duration is movement."
"I watched this rock for an hour. It has not moved. Clearly it has endured for an hour without movement. This falsifies the above assertion."
"Wait longer."
"And waiting longer will ... defalsify what has already been falsified? Not without traveling back in time time it won't."

 

[river]

Think it through. You have all the time you need.

"Duration is movement."
"I watched this rock for an hour. It has not moved. Clearly it has endured for an hour without movement. This falsifies the above assertion."
"Wait longer."
"And waiting longer will ... defalsify what has already been falsified? Not without traveling back in time time it won't."

You don't have all the time you need to understand , duration .

 

[DaveC426913]

You don't have all the time you need to understand , duration .

You're playing Mister Deep and Mysterious again.
I take it that means you have no serious response.

 

[river]

You're playing Mister Deep and Mysterious again.
I take it that means you have no serious response.

Yes what I'm trying to do is to have people think deeper . And ask questions .

Some long drawn out explaination is never my thing . I give curt short answers to encourage thinking upon .

I don't think of my attitude as a problem , rather I think my attitude is an encouragement to think and to explore knowledge .

 

[Write4U]

This is a deepity. On the surface, its sounds profound.
But all you're saying is: a duration has a start and an end, and the time of the duration is ... well, the duration.

Yes, the duration of the event. In context of the above , a rock which exists according to a limited chronology of nows (existence in reality) which add up to the duration of the event of being a rock. This duration may be measured and translated into arbitrary numerical time values of seconds, hours, years, centuries or by the probabilistic term "half-life", which measures the duration for a rock to lose half its mass.

 

[river]

durationYes, the duration of the event. In context of the above , a rock which exists according to a limited chronology of nows (existence in reality) which add up to the duration of the event of being a rock. This duration may be measured and translated into arbitrary numerical time values of seconds, hours, years, centuries or by the probabilistic term "half-life", which measures the duration for a rock to lose half its mass.

Explain more clearly .

 

[Write4U]

Explain more clearly .

IMO, duration is a measurement of a limited existence in reality.
However, the term "enduring" implies an abstract concept, i.e. a universal constant which remains unchanged over time.

 

[river]

IMO, duration is a measurement of a limited existence in reality.
However, term "enduring" implies an abstract concept, i.e. a universal constant which remains unchanged over time.

In what way is duration a measurement ? Explain further

 

[NotEinstein]

To your last statement ; why do you think so ?

Because the definition of duration is dependent on time, and not the other way around.

 

[Write4U]

In what way is duration a measurement ? Explain further

Duration is a result, which can only be defined after something which had existence in reality ceases to exist.

 

[NotEinstein]

Original post was by NotEinstein, Today at 6:36 AM

I know what happened , which only proves my definition of potential as "that which may become reality" depending on the input and permissible output.

I don't follow; what are you trying to say?

The condition permitted your variable input. Of course the output was garbage.

Please define what you mean by "variable input".

How long did it take you to get it right?

Are you trolling?

 

[river]

river said: ↑
In what way is duration a measurement ? Explain further

Duration is a result, which can only be defined after something which had existence in reality ceases to exist.

So .... your point ?

 

[river]

Because the definition of duration is dependent on time, and not the other way around.

No the definition of duration , is based on movement .

And movement is based on the Nature of any object , and the dynamics of the interaction between objects .

 

[NotEinstein]

No the definition of duration , is based on movement .

Please point me to a (scientific) definition of duration that is based on movement, not (the passing of) time.

And movement is based on the Nature of any object , and the dynamics of the interaction between objects .

I don't disagree there.

 

[river]

Please point me to a (scientific) definition of duration that is based on movement, not (the passing of) time.

You probably won't find it .

Point to me , the scientific definition of time .