Cecil Moore wrote:

John Smith wrote:

You surprise me, Einstein thought, eventually, one equation would be
found, probably about one-inch long--which would explain all...
You follow in his footsteps, you are adept at seeing relationships!!!!


If one just takes existence at face value, one lives closer
to that which actually exists. Time, like language, may
be just a human characteristic.

A great mystery for sure. I think that the beginning-being-end of
things - as related to the experience of humanity - makes for a
necessary concept. That would be time.

At least in this existence, we have a finite appearance. So time is
very real. Here.


Ever try to talk about
time without using time-sensitive words, e.g. the tenses
of verbs? :-)

Verbs can make one very tense....

- Mike KB3EIA -

Cecil Moore wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Yes, we have a precise measurement of that exact moment!!! (when the
Earth began its' first revolution!!!)


Precisely 4.5 billion years ago. :-) Strange as it may seem,
there is evidence, gathered by comparing Bristlecone Pine
rings to atomic dating methods, that a second today is
shorter than a second was yesterday. Shortening the length
of a second gives a whole new meaning to the Red Shift.

I had the great fortune of attending a talk given by a paleontologist,
in which he noted that microgrowth rings of fossil shells do indeed show
that the day length has indeed shortened. Although he was careful not to
draw any definitive conclusions - yet - it was apparent that due to the
changes in the Earth's orbit over time were giving rise to changes in
the length of the solar day, which in turn end up changing the length of
all the units that we use to measure time.

That time occurs is not all that arguable to me. Our measurements of it
is a modifiable thing tho'.

- Mike KB3EIA -



- Mike KB3EIA

Cecil Moore wrote:

Reg Edwards wrote:

"Cecil Moore" asks -

Did time exist before man?


Entirely insignificant mankind could not possibly have had any
influence on the course of the Universe.


That's exactly what I am saying, Reg. Before man, the
universe got along just fine without the existence of
time. Why does the universe need time now that we are
here?

Something has to tell me when to get to work..........

- Mike KB3EIA -

What is "time?" If I trapped it in a bottle--what would I be looking at?

Regards,
John

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
| Cecil Moore wrote:
|
| John Smith wrote:
|
| Yes, we have a precise measurement of that exact moment!!! (when the
| Earth began its' first revolution!!!)
|
|
| Precisely 4.5 billion years ago. :-) Strange as it may seem,
| there is evidence, gathered by comparing Bristlecone Pine
| rings to atomic dating methods, that a second today is
| shorter than a second was yesterday. Shortening the length
| of a second gives a whole new meaning to the Red Shift.
|
| I had the great fortune of attending a talk given by a paleontologist,
| in which he noted that microgrowth rings of fossil shells do indeed show
| that the day length has indeed shortened. Although he was careful not to
| draw any definitive conclusions - yet - it was apparent that due to the
| changes in the Earth's orbit over time were giving rise to changes in
| the length of the solar day, which in turn end up changing the length of
| all the units that we use to measure time.
|
| That time occurs is not all that arguable to me. Our measurements of it
| is a modifiable thing tho'.
|
| - Mike KB3EIA -
|
|
|
| - Mike KB3EIA

Mike Coslo wrote:
Certainly life forms that presumably
do *not* have consciousness, such as bacteria, have a beginning, a being
and an end. So is time dependent upon a life form possessing sentience?
If a sentient being such as man is not there to invent the concept of
time, do all those constructs that have a beginning and end cease to exist?

It's even more complicated than that. When a bacteria divides,
the two resulting individuals are identical, not parent and
child. So, barring mutations, any bacteria that is not extinct
is immortal. Time is absolutely meaningless to such an organism.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Mike Coslo wrote:
At least in this existence, we have a finite appearance. So time is
very real. Here.

How would your life change if time didn't really
exist and your calendar and clock simply marked
changes in degrees of rotation of the earth?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Mike Coslo wrote:
That time occurs is not all that arguable to me. Our measurements of
it is a modifiable thing tho'.

Try assuming that time doesn't exist and you are keeping track
of change referenced to the rotation of the earth on its axis
plus earth's orbit around the sun. What is different?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Mike Coslo wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
That's exactly what I am saying, Reg. Before man, the
universe got along just fine without the existence of
time. Why does the universe need time now that we are
here?

Something has to tell me when to get to work..........

The existence of time is not necessary for that function.
A mechanical device synchronized to the roatation of the
earth on its axis can do that. A piece of paper marking
4/1461 of the earth's orbit around the sun can keep track
of days of one year. Or just make a mark every time the
sun rises.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

WOW, flash--I'd never thought of that!!!
When I am i'll, it isn't trillions of bacteria making me i'll--IT IS ONLY
ONE!!!

Thanks...

Warmest regards,
John

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
| Mike Coslo wrote:
| Certainly life forms that presumably
| do *not* have consciousness, such as bacteria, have a beginning, a being
| and an end. So is time dependent upon a life form possessing sentience?
| If a sentient being such as man is not there to invent the concept of
| time, do all those constructs that have a beginning and end cease to
exist?
|
| It's even more complicated than that. When a bacteria divides,
| the two resulting individuals are identical, not parent and
| child. So, barring mutations, any bacteria that is not extinct
| is immortal. Time is absolutely meaningless to such an organism.
| --
| 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
|
|
| ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
| http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
| ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

No, you would be listening to Jim Croche...

How long is a piece of string.

"John Smith" wrote in message
...

What is "time?" If I trapped it in a bottle--what would I be looking at?