Jim Kelley wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
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?

The units.

Not even that. It would still be a day and a year.
Nothing would change if time doesn't exist.
--
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 =---

Jim Kelley wrote:
I think bats existed before man. They seem to have pretty good
perception of time.

Bats have very good perceptions of change and movement.
No perception of time required.
--
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 =---

Roger Conroy wrote:
You guys are ducking the question - Can you define "Changes" without
referring to time?

Referring to God doesn't prove the existence of God except
as a concept in the human mind. Referring to time doesn't
prove the existence of time except as a concept in the human
mind.
--
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 =---

Cecil:



Now you told 'em that, they will know we can TALK about "God" (the concept)
without, necessarily, BELIEVING in "God."



You are as bad as Richard, you spoil the fun!!!! wink



Warmest regards,

John

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
| Roger Conroy wrote:
| You guys are ducking the question - Can you define "Changes" without
| referring to time?
|
| Referring to God doesn't prove the existence of God except
| as a concept in the human mind. Referring to time doesn't
| prove the existence of time except as a concept in the human
| mind.
| --
| 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 =---

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Jim Kelley wrote:
I think bats existed before man. They seem to have pretty good
perception of time.

Bats have very good perceptions of change and movement.
No perception of time required.
--
73, Cecil

Ah, but they echo range. (Time.) Only way you ever nail one is with a tennis
racket. They "hear" the racket itself and miss the strings. This has GOT to
be one of the dumbest threads John Smith has ever started.

W4ZCB

W4ZCB

Harold E. Johnson wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote:
Bats have very good perceptions of change and movement.
No perception of time required.

Ah, but they echo range.

And they were doing so long before the concepts of time,
perception, echo, and range were invented. Those things
are part of the malleable human model of reality and
probably do not even exist in the bat's hard-wired
model of reality.
--
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 =---

On Mon, 02 May 2005 22:35:39 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Jim Kelley wrote:
I think bats existed before man. They seem to have pretty good
perception of time.

Bats have very good perceptions of change and movement.
No perception of time required.

Dear Cecil,

Depends upon what you really mean by "perception". I don't think
"perception" has to mean that they consciously think about it, any
more than a human has to consciously think about it. In both cases,
animals and humans are able to make inferences from listening to
echoes. They can and do infer that the reflections are further away
when the elapsed time for the echo is greater. The big difference is
that bats don't make such a big deal about RADAR.

Bob, W9DMK, Dahlgren, VA
Replace "nobody" with my callsign for e-mail
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://zaffora/f2o.org/W9DMK/W9dmk.html

W9DMK (Robert Lay) wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Bats have very good perceptions of change and movement.
No perception of time required.

Depends upon what you really mean by "perception".

I mean there is no need to perceive time. Change is all
that needs to be perceived. We perceive what we label as
time by correlating changes to each other. The perceived
lapsed time between the sending of a sound and the receiving
of an echo is simply the correlation of external and internal
changes by some sophisticated biology. One of the earliest
Greek philosophers, Parmenides, maintained that there was
neither time nor motion, only change.
--
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 =---

Harold E. Johnson wrote:
This has GOT to
be one of the dumbest threads John Smith has ever started.

He may have started the thread but the idea is presented
quite well in "The End of Time - The Next Revolution in
Physics", by Julian Barbour, (c) 1999, Oxford University
Press, ISBN 0-19-511729-8 Dropping the concept of time
resolves all the apparent contradictions within quantum
physics, e.g. entanglement and effects preceding causes.
--
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 =---

Cecil Moore wrote:


Dropping the concept of time
resolves all the apparent contradictions within quantum
physics, e.g. entanglement and effects preceding causes.

So does Faith-Based Physics! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -