The Nature of Time

Good pun!

No....time can relate to a single event, for example "how long have I been standing here?" is a time question that relates to a single event.

You don't need 3 factors, as I have said: at best, "how long have I been standing here" is 2 factors, the commencement of the standing and the postulating of the question.

That's one non-exclusive definition of time, yes.

correct for that non-exclusive definition.

Respectfully I disagree.

A wave is a pattern of energy moving through water, it isn't moving water....

Time may be many things. Perhaps different things to different people.

yes.

 

Time, AKA movement, AKA energy will and has always propagated through the infinite fabric of space with or without a conscious observer.

 

Yes, it is moving the water. peaks and valleys are being pushed perpendicular to the flow of the wave. A wave in water is a propagating displacement of water.

When energy propagates through space there is also a perpendicular force, magnetism. Magnetism is the displacement of space itself, as a wave of spatial displacement moves through space. Space is a substance, there is no such thing as nothing.

 

I meant that there isn't a discreet body of moving water, there is a pattern of energy that moves separate molecules of water as the wave moves.

Magnetism isn't the displacement of space, that's simply incorrect. "Spatial displacement" is a meaningless concept, and "space" isn't a substance.

 

Space bends and warps, it is a substance. There would be no gravity without it, energy waves could not propagate through it, if it was not something.

 

That's merely a re-statement of the old, and now discarded, ether theory, the one that required something for radio (and other waves) to travel through.

It's not correct, with respect.

Gravity is a separate concept, but it doesn't require the space you postulate. You can have gravity in an absolute vacuum.

 

a vacuum is not the absence of space, it is just an absence of atomic energy structures.

 

Made sense to me. My shorthand for it is we grow time and space, not only in time and space.

 

What happens to an event when it is no longer eventful and what makes it eventful?

Hehe, how long standing, one factor, here, two factors, I, (the object), three factors.

How do you explain then that when a wave of water hits you, you get wet, I mean if the water didn't move?

 

I think you got it a little mixed up.
The question itself may refer to a single event (although you chose a poor example), but the event in question is determined by 3 factors, when you started standing "there", when you stopped standing "there" and the interval of time that passed from the start of the standing to the conclusion of the standing.

The question and the act are not interrelated the way that you are suggesting.

Plus even though you are standing, you are far from motionless, so time could also be considered a measurement of the distance you moved (along with all other objects in space) during the standing exercise.

 

I'm out.

 

Dude, it isn't you. I just can't stand the twisting and total lack of logic that some others engage in.

 

And here's an example of a lack of logic. Where did I post that when I stopped standing there was relevant? I'm still standing there when I ask the question.

This is why I get out of these threads, because people either can't or won't read.

 

I think you are making a fundamental mistake here. Time does not need an object, space or motion, but it can act independently of each or any of those.
Sure, within your parameters that time is merely 'an object travelling from point A to B' you could say those three things are necessary, but I think time is much broader than that.

For example, time could be a thought; it doesn't occupy space, isn't an object and doesn't have any motion.

 

Time is the constant through which everything else moves...

 

your asking the question would denote the "end" of the particular standing session of which you are inquiring, and if you continue to stand in the same location, the beginning of a new "standing session" or did that simple fact elude you.


You are not going to ask the question, receive an answer, wait another ten minutes and then tell the person who answered your initial question that they were wrong because of the extra time you continued to "stand there", would you?

It would appear you are the one lacking in logic.



Then let's consider the fact that your "single event " is far from a singular event, but rather, like everything we experience, a sequence of singular events that thanks to our highly developed nervous system we are able to organize into past (memory), present (experience), future (projection) events that we connect to provide experiential continuity.
It is the organization of those cognitive functions that give rise to our sense of time and our position in it.


Defining the nature of time is a pretty big question with multiple possible answers depending on the foci of your inquiry.