HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > The Lounge
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Lounge "...Where the parking lot of the Igloo meets the concourse of the Nassau County Coliseum and the bathroom line of the Skyreach..." - Wickedbsfan

Does Time exist?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-16-2008, 03:40 AM
  #51
glucker
Registered User
 
glucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: London, ON
Posts: 4,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by climbingbill View Post



It's Plato's allegory of the cave and it's in The Republic.
there we go, that's the one


damned puppet masters... I wanna go take a peek at the cave mouth

glucker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:49 AM
  #52
Dolemite
The one...the only..
 
Dolemite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 38,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Beyonder View Post
Here’s something I’ve been thinking about and debating, and learning/gaining different opinions on. Does time exist? I know it’s such a “out there” question to ask, but does it exist? Is it just a human perception, in which us humans what to give ourselves a sense of who we are, where we are, and where we’re going?

The thing is, man is so consumed with time. Whether we're thinking about something we’ve just done in the past, or are going to do or become…Giving us a sense of self and place. Is life just an eternal now? Really our past is memory and our future is fantasy; perceptions within our minds. So, does time exist anywhere past our perception?

Just wanted some thoughts on this. So let me know what you’re thinking.
No it doesn't. Break time is over. Quit farting around on the internet. We don't pay you to surf the internet all day long. We pay you to work for 8 hours a day.

::edit::


__________________
http://halfboards.com/
Follow along on Twitter: http://twitter.com/azvibesports

Last edited by Dolemite: 09-16-2008 at 04:46 AM.
Dolemite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 09:26 AM
  #53
goalie311
Registered User
 
goalie311's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,662
vCash: 500
Interesting thread/topic - I've thought about this too.
I mean, who decided 'wait, wait, ok, that's 1 minute!'??
I know time is measured by the sun, or rotation of the earth around the sun, but Still, why not 20 hours in a day? with 80 minutes to each hour? Something like that....just curious as to how it all came about.

Here's another thought to ponder: for those that believe there is a heaven, what form does one assume in heaven?
I was having a disucssion with a co-worker about heaven, and she said she was worried when she got there, she might not be able to identify her grandparents, or they wouldn't be able to recognize her - I asked her what form she thought she would assume, and she couldn't really answer that.
Is it the form/body that you died with?
Or do you get to choose? 'Cause if you get go to choose, then heaven will be nothing but teens and people in there early '20's - and that will make for a hell of an orgy......

goalie311 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 11:00 AM
  #54
Warpt1
Registered User
 
Warpt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 2 Far From Staples
Country: United States
Posts: 65
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic Devil View Post
Go read Kant.
You can't just through people into Kant. I'm not knocking anyone's intelligence, but it takes a special kind of dedication to get through his work.

Critique of Pure Reason... my own personal war. It's not that I don't get the material, it's just that the man has NO concept of puncuation, and one sentence could take up two paragraphs...

... that's right... I said it.

On the other hand, if you are trying to prove that time exists, then sure... go for it. You'll know in the marrow of your bones exactly how much time it took to read that.

To the OP... NICE THREAD!

Warpt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 01:15 PM
  #55
Hippasus
recovery for octopi
 
Hippasus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bridgeview
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glucker View Post
there we go, that's the one


damned puppet masters... I wanna go take a peek at the cave mouth
Ahh, it's not that bad, at least we get to play on the internets. I bet even the puppet masters are in their own gigantic cave.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EGA View Post
You can't just through people into Kant. I'm not knocking anyone's intelligence, but it takes a special kind of dedication to get through his work.

Critique of Pure Reason... my own personal war. It's not that I don't get the material, it's just that the man has NO concept of puncuation, and one sentence could take up two paragraphs...

... that's right... I said it.

On the other hand, if you are trying to prove that time exists, then sure... go for it. You'll know in the marrow of your bones exactly how much time it took to read that.

To the OP... NICE THREAD!
So true. I took 18 philosophy classes in college and Kant is by far the toughest imo. Hegel, Heidegger, and Derrida are supposed to be difficult as well (especially Hegel has that reputation). But reading Kant is like swimming in an ocean of obscure words. He's supposed to be the best thinker of all-time according to a lot of contemporary philosophers. His system is perhaps the most intricate of them all. It would be so much easier if he could be boiled down into a few basic principles without so much first-hand studying. He's super influential in that he recast the age-old debate between empiricists and rationalists by means of his notion of synthetic a priori iirc. He's kind of like an Enlightenment version of Aristotle. It's worth it if one really has a passion for knowledge for the sake of knowledge. I still haven't finished the first critique--gave up years ago (smoked too much). There's actually been deeper (although less comprehensive) philosophers since then. But as far as this question of time goes, Kant and Heidegger are the best two that I know about. Space and time are conditions for the possibility of perception. But we can't know if they're real in and of themselves because we can't imagine otherwise.

Hippasus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 02:43 PM
  #56
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
According to the Late George Carlin it doesn't. here is a short excerpt.

The major calendars disagree by thousands of years. To the Chinese, this is 4699; the Hebrews think it's 5762; the Muslims swear it's 1422. No telling what the Mayans and Aztecs would say if they were still around. I guess their time ran out.
Remember, folks, these are calendars we're talking about, instruments specifically designed to keep track of time. And they'll all different. And they're not off by a couple of weeks, this is thousands of ******* years we're talking about. How did this happen?
Our current (Georgian) calendar is such an amuature show that every four years we have to cram in an extra day just to make the whole things work. We call it February 29. Personally, I don't believe it. Deep down, I know it's really March 1. I mean it just feels like March 1, doesn't it?
But even that simple quadrennial adjustment doesn't fix things, so every 100 years we suspend that rule and dispense with the extra day. Unless, of course, the year is divisible by 400, in which case we suspend the suspension and add the extra day. But that's still not quite enough, so every 4000 years we suspend that rule to, and back comes February 29!
Here's how we got into this sorry state: The Julian calendar was introduced in 46B.C., the Roman year 709, but it was off by eleven minutes a year, so by 1582 there was an accumulated error of ten days. Accordingly, that year Pope Gregory XIII decreed that the day following October 4 would be called October 15. They just skipped ten days. Threw them out. Officially, in 1582, no one was born in France, Italy, Spain or Portugal during the period of October 5 through October 14. Weird, huh?
But even weirder, Britain didn't adopt the Gregorian calendar till 1752, where they dropped 11 days out of September. Since this also applied to the American colonies, officially, no one was born here from September 3 through September 13, 1752. Except Indians. By the way, during that same year New Year's Day was moved from March 25 to January 1. That was it had been handled before, for example that was March 24, 1750, would be followed by March 25, 1751. Pretty f***ed up, huh? And you thought that big millennium party you went to was being held right on time.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 03:50 PM
  #57
Warpt1
Registered User
 
Warpt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 2 Far From Staples
Country: United States
Posts: 65
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
According to the Late George Carlin it doesn't. here is a short excerpt.

The major calendars disagree by thousands of years. To the Chinese, this is 4699; the Hebrews think it's 5762; the Muslims swear it's 1422. No telling what the Mayans and Aztecs would say if they were still around. I guess their time ran out.
Remember, folks, these are calendars we're talking about, instruments specifically designed to keep track of time. And they'll all different. And they're not off by a couple of weeks, this is thousands of ******* years we're talking about. How did this happen?
Our current (Georgian) calendar is such an amuature show that every four years we have to cram in an extra day just to make the whole things work. We call it February 29. Personally, I don't believe it. Deep down, I know it's really March 1. I mean it just feels like March 1, doesn't it?
But even that simple quadrennial adjustment doesn't fix things, so every 100 years we suspend that rule and dispense with the extra day. Unless, of course, the year is divisible by 400, in which case we suspend the suspension and add the extra day. But that's still not quite enough, so every 4000 years we suspend that rule to, and back comes February 29!
Here's how we got into this sorry state: The Julian calendar was introduced in 46B.C., the Roman year 709, but it was off by eleven minutes a year, so by 1582 there was an accumulated error of ten days. Accordingly, that year Pope Gregory XIII decreed that the day following October 4 would be called October 15. They just skipped ten days. Threw them out. Officially, in 1582, no one was born in France, Italy, Spain or Portugal during the period of October 5 through October 14. Weird, huh?
But even weirder, Britain didn't adopt the Gregorian calendar till 1752, where they dropped 11 days out of September. Since this also applied to the American colonies, officially, no one was born here from September 3 through September 13, 1752. Except Indians. By the way, during that same year New Year's Day was moved from March 25 to January 1. That was it had been handled before, for example that was March 24, 1750, would be followed by March 25, 1751. Pretty f***ed up, huh? And you thought that big millennium party you went to was being held right on time.
An intersesting bit of information, but I don't know that it truely applys to the existance of time.

Warpt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:09 PM
  #58
hockeyfish
Registered User
 
hockeyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Back in the FoCo
Country: United States
Posts: 7,848
vCash: 500
All motion is dependent on time. Thus, if there were no time, there would be no movement. So, the fact that I will be going to work in a few minutes proves the existence of time.

This is all elementary blown way out of the scope of people by a bunch of pot heads.

hockeyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:11 PM
  #59
McOkMcgoMcoil
Registered User
 
McOkMcgoMcoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 13,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carcillo View Post
Time exists. Consider the half life of an isotope. Naturally occurring example of time.
Things change over time whether we are here of not.

Really it is the whold if a tree falls in the forest doe it make a sound. It is just a definintion of the word.

Is time our perception of it, or is time the fact that things change, materials, rocks, whatever, certian things change in them, they move they become differnt.

It is really what you define time as.

McOkMcgoMcoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:17 PM
  #60
McOkMcgoMcoil
Registered User
 
McOkMcgoMcoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 13,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marknuck311 View Post
Interesting thread/topic - I've thought about this too.
I mean, who decided 'wait, wait, ok, that's 1 minute!'??
I know time is measured by the sun, or rotation of the earth around the sun, but Still, why not 20 hours in a day? with 80 minutes to each hour? Something like that....just curious as to how it all came about.

Here's another thought to ponder: for those that believe there is a heaven, what form does one assume in heaven?
I was having a disucssion with a co-worker about heaven, and she said she was worried when she got there, she might not be able to identify her grandparents, or they wouldn't be able to recognize her - I asked her what form she thought she would assume, and she couldn't really answer that.
Is it the form/body that you died with?
Or do you get to choose? 'Cause if you get go to choose, then heaven will be nothing but teens and people in there early '20's - and that will make for a hell of an orgy......
Well time in that sense, became real when we could measure it. having a clock was a huge invention, something with the ability to duplicate it self at the exact same rate over and over, the common watch really is an amazing thing. Once we had that it was really just a matter of math, How should we measure time, each time the earth spins a clock should tick how many times? It is arbitrary, I day could have 2 hours, or 10 whatever, what makes me wonder is why does in all revolve around 6, when the rest of our society revolves around 10. I think it should be changed to 10, 20 hour days, 10 Am hours, 10 pm and 100 minute hours. Then 10 months a year with 36 days in each month. of course then you get back to 6, there must be a reason for 6, I just can't figure it out.

As for what form you take in heaven, well who knows, really heaven has nothing to do with science, if you believe it, well go ask a preist I guess.

McOkMcgoMcoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:19 PM
  #61
CaptBrannigan
Registered User
 
CaptBrannigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 2,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
According to the Late George Carlin it doesn't. here is a short excerpt.

The major calendars disagree by thousands of years. To the Chinese, this is 4699; the Hebrews think it's 5762; the Muslims swear it's 1422. No telling what the Mayans and Aztecs would say if they were still around. I guess their time ran out.
Remember, folks, these are calendars we're talking about, instruments specifically designed to keep track of time. And they'll all different. And they're not off by a couple of weeks, this is thousands of ******* years we're talking about. How did this happen?
Our current (Georgian) calendar is such an amuature show that every four years we have to cram in an extra day just to make the whole things work. We call it February 29. Personally, I don't believe it. Deep down, I know it's really March 1. I mean it just feels like March 1, doesn't it?
But even that simple quadrennial adjustment doesn't fix things, so every 100 years we suspend that rule and dispense with the extra day. Unless, of course, the year is divisible by 400, in which case we suspend the suspension and add the extra day. But that's still not quite enough, so every 4000 years we suspend that rule to, and back comes February 29!
Here's how we got into this sorry state: The Julian calendar was introduced in 46B.C., the Roman year 709, but it was off by eleven minutes a year, so by 1582 there was an accumulated error of ten days. Accordingly, that year Pope Gregory XIII decreed that the day following October 4 would be called October 15. They just skipped ten days. Threw them out. Officially, in 1582, no one was born in France, Italy, Spain or Portugal during the period of October 5 through October 14. Weird, huh?
But even weirder, Britain didn't adopt the Gregorian calendar till 1752, where they dropped 11 days out of September. Since this also applied to the American colonies, officially, no one was born here from September 3 through September 13, 1752. Except Indians. By the way, during that same year New Year's Day was moved from March 25 to January 1. That was it had been handled before, for example that was March 24, 1750, would be followed by March 25, 1751. Pretty f***ed up, huh? And you thought that big millennium party you went to was being held right on time.
Got any sources on this? Not that I doubt it I just want to read some more, it's fascinating.

Anyone ever hear the theory that the Middle Ages never happened and that we are actually a couple thousand years 'behind' where we think we are?

CaptBrannigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:26 PM
  #62
jumptheshark
McDavid Headquarters
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EVIL EMPIRE
Country: United Nations
Posts: 60,082
vCash: 0
Time is just the creation to judge points between two spots

once time travel happens--it is all moot

__________________
"If the Detroit Red Wings are defying gravity" by consistently contending without the benefit of high draft picks, "the Edmonton Oilers are defying lift.

Welcome to Edmonton Connor McDavid--the rest of you HA HA HA HA HA HA
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 04:28 PM
  #63
Benny Lava
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anaheim
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 8,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfish View Post
All motion is dependent on time.
Care to prove this?

Benny Lava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 05:05 PM
  #64
mayoradamwest*
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Guelph
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfish View Post
All motion is dependent on time. Thus, if there were no time, there would be no movement. So, the fact that I will be going to work in a few minutes proves the existence of time.

This is all elementary blown way out of the scope of people by a bunch of pot heads.
All motion is dependent on time? Motion cannot happen in the abscence of "time"? If you're talking big bang, there had to be some sort of "motion" there, prior to time?

Ahh philosophy. You're either brilliant, or a stoner.

mayoradamwest* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2008, 05:06 PM
  #65
Little Nilan
Registered User
 
Little Nilan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Praha
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 8,209
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Little Nilan
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
Time is just the creation to judge points between two spots

once time travel happens--it is all moot
Once time travel happens, first thing I'm doing is saddling up a tyrannosaurus rex. Now that's time well spent.

Little Nilan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2008, 08:50 AM
  #66
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by twi View Post
Got any sources on this? Not that I doubt it I just want to read some more, it's fascinating.

Anyone ever hear the theory that the Middle Ages never happened and that we are actually a couple thousand years 'behind' where we think we are?
Man its from George Carlin, so I'm not actually sure if it was true. I always wondered if it was but, never had the time to research.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2008, 07:33 PM
  #67
znk
Registered User
 
znk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,186
vCash: 500
Time exists otherwise radioactive decay woudlnt exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

Speed depends on time so the e=mc2 wouldnt exist.

znk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2008, 11:10 PM
  #68
hockeyfish
Registered User
 
hockeyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Back in the FoCo
Country: United States
Posts: 7,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Lava View Post
Care to prove this?
Sure. Lets say I'm walking behind another person who is also walking. Our bodies at some point occupy the same space, as he walks over a certain position and than I walk over that position. Two bodies of matter can not occupy the same space, yet it is possible for my body to occupy space that his body did. Thus, to make this possible, there must be another variable added. That variable is time.

hockeyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2008, 12:26 AM
  #69
Classic Devil
Moderator Emeritus
 
Classic Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 34,029
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by EGA View Post
You can't just through people into Kant. I'm not knocking anyone's intelligence, but it takes a special kind of dedication to get through his work.

Critique of Pure Reason... my own personal war. It's not that I don't get the material, it's just that the man has NO concept of puncuation, and one sentence could take up two paragraphs...

... that's right... I said it.

On the other hand, if you are trying to prove that time exists, then sure... go for it. You'll know in the marrow of your bones exactly how much time it took to read that.

To the OP... NICE THREAD!
I really enjoyed the Critique of Pure Reason - it's on a shelf along with a couple other books that I'll take with me wherever I go in life.

It was a bear, though. But if you're having real issues, you can just read the Prolegomena for a quick overview.

Everyone says Heidegger is a pain to get through, but I read Being and Time for fun and thought it was easier than the Critique.

Classic Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.