How can there still be ontological debate about time?
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
How can there still be ontological debate about time?
How can there still be debate over the existence of time, since we discovered hard evidence of time dilation and stuff?
Like wouldn't any position treating time as an illusory function of perception be completely squashed by a successful presentation of time as a external, physical function of nature?
So if you're hanging out with that one annoying guy at the party who smokes weed and says everything is happening at once, and everything that will happen and has happened still exists in simultaneity, and then you go "Fuck you, come to my private airport" and put two atomic clocks on two different jets and fly them all around the planet at different rates and then land them, and show him that they aren't in synch anymore and he drops his bong in suprise, is he still allowed to say that those events happened in a static state of happeningness and that that is no different than anything else you've ever considered about a linear procession of events?
And then you have to smoke weed too and become a rasta solipsist god of the universe?
I hate everything
Like wouldn't any position treating time as an illusory function of perception be completely squashed by a successful presentation of time as a external, physical function of nature?
So if you're hanging out with that one annoying guy at the party who smokes weed and says everything is happening at once, and everything that will happen and has happened still exists in simultaneity, and then you go "Fuck you, come to my private airport" and put two atomic clocks on two different jets and fly them all around the planet at different rates and then land them, and show him that they aren't in synch anymore and he drops his bong in suprise, is he still allowed to say that those events happened in a static state of happeningness and that that is no different than anything else you've ever considered about a linear procession of events?
And then you have to smoke weed too and become a rasta solipsist god of the universe?
I hate everything
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- Erik13
- Sir Posts-A-Lot
- Posts: 12347
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:27 am
- Location: Halifax, MA
- Contact:
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
James I have no idea what you're talking about
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
abyss
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- copstache
- Total Recluse
- Posts: 23008
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:29 pm
- Location: http://420.moe/
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
I think this kind of thing can wait until we can manage to convince everybody that dinosaurs were real and that the bones weren't put there by satan to test our faith in god
if there's anybody in the world who'd be fucking unobservant enough to actually damage themselves with trap-soap I guess it'd be the guy with dialup in 2007
Foot Foot wrote:that's enough. white girls.
- copstache
- Total Recluse
- Posts: 23008
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:29 pm
- Location: http://420.moe/
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
because somehow satan is more plausible than dinosaurs
if there's anybody in the world who'd be fucking unobservant enough to actually damage themselves with trap-soap I guess it'd be the guy with dialup in 2007
Foot Foot wrote:that's enough. white girls.
- Necrometer
- crippled god of the universe
- Posts: 64500
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:42 am
- Location: Feelin' fine.
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
no debate here - rules
- riley-o
- Chad Thundercock
- Posts: 38968
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 4:05 pm
- Location: Inside Crystal Mouvntain
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Isn't the fact that both clocks are reading different times at the smae time evidence that time is an artificial construct moreso than it's evidence of the opposite.. ? Not trying to start an awesome musclebound brainiacs vs. weird tragic self-aware juggahoez war here so all due respect
HEAD BOPPAZ RECORDS YOU BITCH-ASS HOES
- Erik13
- Sir Posts-A-Lot
- Posts: 12347
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:27 am
- Location: Halifax, MA
- Contact:
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Fucking lock this before my brain explodes
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
thanks a lot dickheadriley-o wrote:Not trying to start an awesome musclebound brainiacs vs. weird tragic self-aware juggahoez war here so all due respect
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- Necrometer
- crippled god of the universe
- Posts: 64500
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:42 am
- Location: Feelin' fine.
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
hahahariley-o wrote:at the smae time
I am generally agreeing with that post though
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
In fact quite the contrary??? All you've done is proven that clocks aren't perfect tools??riley-o wrote:Isn't the fact that both clocks are reading different times at the smae time evidence that time is an artificial construct moreso than it's evidence of the opposite.. ?t
If you can produce evidence of change in time by physically manipulating things in the real world, can't you say that time must be an existent material thing?
Like if time can be shown to be relative
then something is relative
and so that thing is definitely actually there?
I'm sure there must be a really good answer to why this isn't true because the argument hasn't been settled yet, I was just wondering things
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?
- bland ed
- Certified False.
- Posts: 1131
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:20 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
WILLOW: I mean, time for me, I can make it go slow or fast, however I please, and that’s how I know it doesn’t exist.
JADEN: It’s proven that how time moves for you depends on where you are in the universe. It’s relative to beings and other places. But on the level of being here on earth, if you are aware in a moment, one second can last a year. And if you are unaware, your whole childhood, your whole life can pass by in six seconds. But it’s also such a thing that you can get lost in.
WILLOW: Because living.
JADEN: Right, because you have to live. There’s a theoretical physicist inside all of our minds, and you can talk and talk, but it’s living.
WILLOW: It’s the action of it.
JADEN: It’s proven that how time moves for you depends on where you are in the universe. It’s relative to beings and other places. But on the level of being here on earth, if you are aware in a moment, one second can last a year. And if you are unaware, your whole childhood, your whole life can pass by in six seconds. But it’s also such a thing that you can get lost in.
WILLOW: Because living.
JADEN: Right, because you have to live. There’s a theoretical physicist inside all of our minds, and you can talk and talk, but it’s living.
WILLOW: It’s the action of it.
- FVBTVS
- Total Recluse
- Posts: 20353
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:14 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
bland ed wrote:WILLOW: I mean, time for me, I can make it go slow or fast, however I please, and that’s how I know it doesn’t exist.
JADEN: It’s proven that how time moves for you depends on where you are in the universe. It’s relative to beings and other places. But on the level of being here on earth, if you are aware in a moment, one second can last a year. And if you are unaware, your whole childhood, your whole life can pass by in six seconds. But it’s also such a thing that you can get lost in.
WILLOW: Because living.
JADEN: Right, because you have to live. There’s a theoretical physicist inside all of our minds, and you can talk and talk, but it’s living.
WILLOW: It’s the action of it.
Google it. My name is "Varg Vikernes".
I have 8 children.
I have 8 children.
- FVBTVS
- Total Recluse
- Posts: 20353
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:14 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Google it. My name is "Varg Vikernes".
I have 8 children.
I have 8 children.
- Zerohero
- Total Recluse
- Posts: 24495
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:21 am
- Location: Space
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
fart on tits
rileyo wrote:i like that she's wearing high heels &stockings to get fucked by dead pigs,that's some real forward thinking metal right there
LordDarksoul wrote:Thanks for the concern, Fucktractor.
BUNGVOX wrote:i don't want metallica to shit their pants. i want metallica to shit MY pants.
- nomb
- Don't mess with my shit.
- Posts: 1852
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:53 am
- Contact:
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Twitter shaman Jaden Smith
- spacehamster
- Sweet Lord _______
- Posts: 19207
- Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 5:57 pm
- Location: just a-passin' thru
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
I think the disagreement is more about whether time is what we perceive it to be or something more like a dimension of space, which to me sounds pretty plausible if it's relative to your movement speed.james wrote: If you can produce evidence of change in time by physically manipulating things in the real world, can't you say that time must be an existent material thing?
I also fundamentally disagree with the idea that any sort of experiment provides insight into an "objective" universe that's underlying your argument here, but I don't know if I want to have this discussion right now. Intersubjectivity is not objectivity, is what I'm sayin', feel me?
storm shadow wrote:This is what happens when people use the internet to get through adolescence, instead of drugs and heavy metal.
-
- Olde Timer
- Posts: 5682
- Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:30 am
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
PSN ID- doomeddisciple wii code doomed 0207 2840 2718 1053 Xbox Live - doomtildeath
- THE KILL
- O.G. Interwebber
- Posts: 4981
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:52 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
Quite sure I'm talking out of my ass here, but the thing that bugs me about statements like "it's all just one eternal moment" is the implication that there are no real choices and above all that there's no chance. Quantum physics postulates essential chance in quantum events eg when you check whether a particle is where you think it is. It looks to me as if these two ideas exclude each other.
The Bill wrote:Kids today with their artificially flavored kunt hands!
- Chad
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9083
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 9:08 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
moments, feelings, instantaneous things exist...in a mind-bogglingly cold void. it is clear to me that time is an illusion, and that surges of Truth we feel here are sparks of a blinding blissful eternity, cracking through to us in a plane of demons, lies, history, and body-shells.
calling us to timelessness, to eternity, to death and away...far, far away from this life.
it's why we love God and girls and drugs and alcohol
calling us to timelessness, to eternity, to death and away...far, far away from this life.
it's why we love God and girls and drugs and alcohol
- THE KILL
- O.G. Interwebber
- Posts: 4981
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 12:52 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
The Bill wrote:Kids today with their artificially flavored kunt hands!
- Necrometer
- crippled god of the universe
- Posts: 64500
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:42 am
- Location: Feelin' fine.
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
does it really say that, or maybe does it say there are some things we are infinitely bad at predicting?THE KILL wrote:Quantum physics postulates essential chance in quantum events eg when you check whether a particle is where you think it is.
- james
- (ó ì_í)=óò=(ì_í ò)
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 3:56 pm
Re: How can there still be ontological debate about time?
a lot of people think this and it bugs me the fuck outTHE KILL wrote:there are no real choices and above all that there's no chance.
Honky Kong 64 wrote:I use this daily and it scrobbles my Lil B songs just fine?