Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Captain Chaos · Oct 10, 2006, 08:39 pm

I don't follow the motion creating a triangle thing.

I guess I find mechanistic explanations easier to follow. Supposedly, some phycisists look down upon mechanistic reasoning, but it works better for me.

Captain Chaos · Oct 10, 2006, 08:48 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer

Is this backwards?

I don't think so.

If spacetime is like a matrix that holds 4-D information about reality, then motion is a 3-D object that changes location over time - meaning it uses time units to move. So, the faster it moves, the more time is used in defining that motion, and hence the less that is used in defining internal motion.

Fonceai · Oct 10, 2006, 08:49 pm

You're overthinking it.

It's really not that complicated.

But it is something that can't be explained clearly over forums.

Lullaby Chainer · Oct 10, 2006, 09:42 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Captain Chaos

I don't think so.

If spacetime is like a matrix that holds 4-D information about reality, then motion is a 3-D object that changes location over time - meaning it uses time units to move. So, the faster it moves, the more time is used in defining that motion, and hence the less that is used in defining internal motion.

Ah, I think I get what you're saying now.

Why are there like so many different ways of trying to explain this? Are they different theories or just desperate attempts at the same thing?

Captain Chaos · Oct 10, 2006, 10:58 pm

Different theories.

Relativity does not point to a granular spacetime. Quantum gravity does (sometimes).

Also, relativity says all motion is relative. But, if you view motion as waveforms moving through spacetime, then spacetime itself would be the absolute reference for motion (except that spacetime appears to be expanding).

Nathan Struth · Oct 15, 2006, 01:42 am

Lullaby I disagree with you

Quote:

No, time isn't something we just "make up" or percieve. It's a living breathing dimension, just as real as depth or length.

. Time is definitely a concept we percieve. If you can explain it mathematically it wouldn't matter because that's a concept as well. What you see may not be what actually is in a true reality. As our vision is usually a computed universe. A 1 or 0. Photon being reflected or absorbed to stimulate our cones and rods, making the sensation of our brains known as "color". I can describe time as a concept synonomous to color which is a concept. Do you get what I'm saying? Time may be a dimension (agreed) but it may be one we percieve.

Fonceai · Oct 15, 2006, 11:16 am

Like we perceive time along a certain frequency... 1 second per second...

And others might perceive time along a different frequency... 1 second for us is 1 minute to them?

Lullaby Chainer · Oct 15, 2006, 02:52 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Nathan Struth

Lullaby I disagree with you. Time is definitely a concept we percieve. If you can explain it mathematically it wouldn't matter because that's a concept as well. What you see may not be what actually is in a true reality. As our vision is usually a computed universe. A 1 or 0. Photon being reflected or absorbed to stimulate our cones and rods, making the sensation of our brains known as "color". I can describe time as a concept synonomous to color which is a concept. Do you get what I'm saying? Time may be a dimension (agreed) but it may be one we percieve.

Please watch the video on "Imagining the Tenth Dimension." If you still disagree, please post again with an understanding of my stance on the matter.

Nathan Struth · Oct 15, 2006, 10:54 pm

I allready saw it I thought it was really cool if you read my earlier post.

**Jason** · Oct 15, 2006, 10:58 pm

Perhaps interesting food for thought: Consciousness cannot exist without time. Or, another way to say it: Time allows consciousness to exist.

Nathan Struth · Oct 15, 2006, 11:07 pm

definitely. Electrical signals need time to do their thing.

Oct 10, 2006, 08:39 pm	#41 (permalink) (top)
Captain Chaos Shifting Paradigms Location: Flowery Branch, GA Posts: 3,102	I don't follow the motion creating a triangle thing. I guess I find mechanistic explanations easier to follow. Supposedly, some phycisists look down upon mechanistic reasoning, but it works better for me. Do all things with love.

Oct 10, 2006, 10:58 pm	#45 (permalink) (top)
Captain Chaos Shifting Paradigms Location: Flowery Branch, GA Posts: 3,102	Different theories. Relativity does not point to a granular spacetime. Quantum gravity does (sometimes). Also, relativity says all motion is relative. But, if you view motion as waveforms moving through spacetime, then spacetime itself would be the absolute reference for motion (except that spacetime appears to be expanding). Do all things with love.

Oct 15, 2006, 10:54 pm	#49 (permalink) (top)
Nathan Struth don't care Location: NY Posts: 267	I allready saw it I thought it was really cool if you read my earlier post. I'm just a fool caught in the rat race of life (Nathan Struth) please help me solve world hunger, It's hard to do it alone.

Oct 15, 2006, 10:58 pm	#50 (permalink) (top)
Jason westernstreet7.com Location: Houston, TX Posts: 2,852	Perhaps interesting food for thought: Consciousness cannot exist without time. Or, another way to say it: Time allows consciousness to exist. Read my new biweekly column, The Western Street 7. Follow the rules. Please show your appreciation by donating.

Oct 15, 2006, 11:07 pm	#51 (permalink) (top)
Nathan Struth don't care Location: NY Posts: 267	definitely. Electrical signals need time to do their thing. I'm just a fool caught in the rat race of life (Nathan Struth) please help me solve world hunger, It's hard to do it alone.

Oct 10, 2006, 08:49 pm	#43 (permalink) (top)
Fonceai BANNED Location: New York Posts: 4,217	You're overthinking it. It's really not that complicated. But it is something that can't be explained clearly over forums.

Oct 15, 2006, 11:16 am	#47 (permalink) (top)
Fonceai BANNED Location: New York Posts: 4,217	Like we perceive time along a certain frequency... 1 second per second... And others might perceive time along a different frequency... 1 second for us is 1 minute to them?