Does time exist?

[RainbowSingularity]

Nooooo

So called time, singular, is called NOW

NOW has no thickness but can be considered to be a non existent divide where PAST butts up against FUTURE

actually, now can stretch like a thin layer over then later.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Actually I don't , I just guessed .

Just get to the point

i edited that as i didnt want to publicly call you on it.
but since you ask.
your not guessing. your reacting emotionally
your saying how you think with words.

""each" what ?""

your "each" is the "other" of the self.
your "each" is the other emotion that you feel but cant put your finger quite on the connecting process to the other emotion.

you answer your own question in your question by making a statement of self.
(moving on)
does time exist between emotions ?

 

[Michael 345]

actually, now can stretch like a thin layer over then later.

Nope

NOW has no thickness

Any "stretch like a thin layer" instantly turns NOW into AGE

And the longer the strech the further away from NOW you become and turn AGE into a OLDER AGE

 

[river]

Back to what physicists of time .

In the big bang theory , time and space has speed .

How does time have speed ?

Since time has no physical qualities

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Nope

NOW has no thickness

Any "stretch like a thin layer" instantly turns NOW into AGE

And the longer the strech the further away from NOW you become and turn AGE into a OLDER AGE

lol
WRONG !
you are very wrong.

 

[Michael 345]

lol
WRONG !
you are very wrong.

Please explain the wrongness

 

[river]

i edited that as i didnt want to publicly call you on it.
but since you ask.
your not guessing. your reacting emotionally
your saying how you think with words.

""each" what ?""

your "each" is the "other" of the self.
your "each" is the other emotion that you feel but cant put your finger quite on the connecting process to the other emotion.

you answer your own question in your question by making a statement of self.
(moving on)
does time exist between emotions ?

In Memories no , but in experience , moments exists

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Please explain the wrongness

"now" is an existance of the self NOT the discription of where to be at a certain point.
thus being "now" can be anywhere.
when conceptualising the point, do you first build a box to sit within and then try and balance it on the edge of a cliff ?
probably not.
but your perception of the now, if taught to be only reliant on the concept of "other" is reliant on the self being only a reflection of anothers point of self.
this manifests the self into a position of limited time measurement that can only exist in relation to anothers singular liniar time perspective.
most liniar concepts are angular confinements.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

In Memories no , but in experience , moments exists

yes.
the compartmentalism of the nature of events to define deliniation points between aspects of relationshp can confine emotional association.

can a memory be a emotion and does it have a time reference that it relys on ?
can the emotion be non time related ?

 

[Michael 345]

"now" is an existance of the self NOT the discription of where to be at a certain point.

Please provide link where the above definition for such "now" is shown

now
\ˈnau̇\
adverb

• :at the present time
• :in the next moment: very soon
• :in the present situation

This definition can be found in Mirriam-Webster

Seems we have different views on the meaning of "now"

 

[river]

river said: ↑
In Memories no , but in experience , moments exists

yes.
the compartmentalism of the nature of events to define deliniation points between aspects of relationshp can confine emotional association.

Explain with more clarity

can a memory be a emotion and does it have a time reference that it relys on ?
can the emotion be non time related ?

Of course , odd question really .

How can emotion be non-time related ?

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Please provide link where the above definition for such "now" is shown

now
\ˈnau̇\
adverb

• :at the present time
• :in the next moment: very soon
• :in the present situation

This definition can be found in Mirriam-Webster

Seems we have different views on the meaning of "now"

Mirriam-Websterhas is your schrodinger bible ?

 

[RainbowSingularity]

How can emotion be non-time related ?

you have answered your own question

 

[Michael 345]

Mirriam-Websterhas is your schrodinger bible ?

It happens to be the easy access dictionary I have on my smart phone

I am willing to look at any other dictionary you care to nominate

 

[Michael 345]

you have answered your own question

If this is directed to me please show which question i have self answered

 

[river]

New
↑
How can emotion be non-time related ?

you have answered your own question

How so ?

 

[river]

Back to what physicists think of time .

In the big bang theory , time and space has speed .

How does time have speed ?

Since time has no physical qualities

 

[RainbowSingularity]

How can emotion be non-time related ?

How so ?

if you begin & end an emotion by time, you connect one boundary with another.
the boundary of thought.
when your thinking about a previous emotion does it stand out as an individual event ? (mostly kinda with most people?)
yet... schrodinger... posits that one is reliant on the other as a form of awarenes or non awarenes.
in the process of time acting out on the observer, does the perception of the emotion have any relation to time ? (mostly yes for most people because they percieve the relationship to other emotions)
... how is 1 emotion validating an observer as a connected relationship to other emotions ?
because without the duality of the boundary(dividing between one[emotion] and the other) there only exists a single state(or no state).
if the single state has no beginning or end, then it is unable to have a boundary relationship.
this is a nature of perception of emotions.
the connectivity is a relationship reliant on interconnected awarenes of the observer/expereincer.

does the emotion exist by its self ? not really. not as an observer/expereincer percieves because they must 'generically' expereince the emotion.(you can think of an emotion without feeling it? [mostly yes many can but without feeling the emotion completely probably not as they need a time reference to place themselves outside the expereince]
if time were(im not saying one way or theother) a perception then it would have a dual connectivity by its relationship to no emotion and/or no time.
this defines the relationship as singular and also combined by association.

as schrodinger suggests the alternate reality exists but does not exist until it is defined by observation.
thus in theory, you have 2 individual realities/time that exist co-dependant on each other yet remain seperated from time until such time as observed.

thus, is time a factor of emotion ?
is emotion a factor of time ?
is expereince as the observer devoid of emotion and or devoid of time ?
are they connected ?
can you perceive time without any observance of boundary as the perceptive expereince ? (mostly most people kinda cant)

it doesnt mean that it is not possible much like complex mathamatics still exists inspite of people comprehending it or knowing about it.

but... does time have an influencing factor on the nature of the content ? how subjective is the nature of the reality of that time ?

 

[RainbowSingularity]

If this is directed to me please show which question i have self answered

no. was directed at River

in short
my point is that does time exist without an observer ?
and... does the observer have to be human ?
if a non human observer measures time, does time exist as a solid state.
does that solid state change once it is observed by a human
[human Re machines, computers clocks etc that measure time as we know it]

 

[river]

if you begin & end an emotion by time, you connect one boundary with another.
the boundary of thought.
when your thinking about a previous emotion does it stand out as an individual event ? (mostly kinda with most people?)
yet... schrodinger... posits that one is reliant on the other as a form of awarenes or non awarenes.
in the process of time acting out on the observer, does the perception of the emotion have any relation to time ? (mostly yes for most people because they percieve the relationship to other emotions)
... how is 1 emotion validating an observer as a connected relationship to other emotions ?
because without the duality of the boundary(dividing between one[emotion] and the other) there only exists a single state(or no state).
if the single state has no beginning or end, then it is unable to have a boundary relationship.
this is a nature of perception of emotions.
the connectivity is a relationship reliant on interconnected awarenes of the observer/expereincer.

does the emotion exist by its self ? not really. not as an observer/expereincer percieves because they must 'generically' expereince the emotion.(you can think of an emotion without feeling it? [mostly yes many can but without feeling the emotion completely probably not as they need a time reference to place themselves outside the expereince]
if time were(im not saying one way or theother) a perception then it would have a dual connectivity by its relationship to no emotion and/or no time.
this defines the relationship as singular and also combined by association.

as schrodinger suggests the alternate reality exists but does not exist until it is defined by observation.
thus in theory, you have 2 individual realities/time that exist co-dependant on each other yet remain seperated from time until such time as observed.

thus, is time a factor of emotion ?
is emotion a factor of time ?
is expereince as the observer devoid of emotion and or devoid of time ?
are they connected ?
can you perceive time without any observance of boundary as the perceptive expereince ? (mostly most people kinda cant)

it doesnt mean that it is not possible much like complex mathamatics still exists inspite of people comprehending it or knowing about it.

but... does time have an influencing factor on the nature of the content ? how subjective is the nature of the reality of that time ?

Time in and of its self influences nothing . Time has no physical properties of any kind .

For example , if one changes time in an equation that does not influence the physical interaction between objects .

If though ones changes the movement in the equation , then this changes , time