Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

[Belz...]

Time is the change in the now. The past is a timeline, but the past does not 'contain' time.

You keep contradicting yourself. If it does not contain "time", then information is not increasing. You have no idea what you're talking about, and have no intention of correcting this inadequacy.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The building seems to be smaller in reality than on Google Maps.

So you have a photo from the internet and an aerial photo from Google Maps from the internet.

In what way is one photograph "reality" which the other is not?

 

[Belz...]

The building seems to be smaller in reality than on Google Maps:

Translation: "One of the two pictures seems to fit more with what I want."

 

[Roboramma]

When we measure time it is the rate of change in the now that is measured. The past can only be measured indirectly and the future only as predictions. So time is very simple.

I can measure the future very easily, here's I'll do it now: how long will it take me to finish this post? I've just looked at a clock. Once I click submit I'll look again. I will have measured my (current) future.

Measuring space works the same way, by the way.

. A similar change of view can be made for time. Today people think of the past as something that stretches away from the now. The new perspective is that the past exists in the now.

You're right that it's a new perspective. It's also wrong.

Edit: My measurement results: 1 minute, 30 seconds.

 

[Anders Lindman]

So you have a photo from the internet and an aerial photo from Google Maps from the internet.

In what way is one photograph "reality" which the other is not?

The VAB seems to have more or less the correct size when I checked again. However, the angles of the buildings in the Google Maps are different: http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/9193/vab2.jpg

So is the satellite image a composite so that one building, the VAB is taken from one direction, and the other building next to it taken from another direction?

 

[Anders Lindman]

I can measure the future very easily, here's I'll do it now: how long will it take me to finish this post? I've just looked at a clock. Once I click submit I'll look again. I will have measured my (current) future.

Measuring space works the same way, by the way.


You're right that it's a new perspective. It's also wrong.

Edit: My measurement results: 1 minute, 30 seconds.

You mean that a measurement is a process rather than a single snapshot? But if we by measurement mean when we get the result then that can only happen in the now. Even when a measurement is composed of separate sub-measurements each of those sub-measurements also only can be done in the now. The same with measurement of length. The same with any action of course. All actions happen in the now, never in the past, never in the future.

 

[Anders Lindman]

I just did. You can measure time just like you can measure space: with man-made units of measurement.

When you say 'did' then that is past tense. So what you have is a measurement from the past, not a measurement of the future.

 

[Belz...]

You mean that a measurement is a process rather than a single snapshot?

Yes. Everything is a process.

But if we by measurement mean when we get the result then that can only happen in the now. Even when a measurement is composed of separate sub-measurements each of those sub-measurements also only can be done in the now. The same with measurement of length. The same with any action of course. All actions happen in the now, never in the past, never in the future.

Which would, again, prove your hypothesis wrong about the past accumulating new information.

 

[Belz...]

When you say 'did' then that is past tense. So what you have is a measurement from the past, not a measurement of the future.

Now you're just trolling. I measured time. This is what you asked. It applies to both directions.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

...So is the satellite image a composite so that one building, the VAB is taken from one direction, and the other building next to it taken from another direction?

They're aerial photos, not satellite photos, and yes, the Google Maps "satellite" view is a composite and it's not unusual for neighbouring buildings to appear to have been photographed from different perspectives.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

When you say 'did' then that is past tense. So what you have is a measurement from the past, not a measurement of the future.

I have a calendar. Do you want me to measure how many days it'll be until New Year?

 

[Anders Lindman]

Now you're just trolling. I measured time. This is what you asked. It applies to both directions.

It was about measuring the future. You didn't measure the future and you never will. Nobody, not even Uri Geller, can measure the future.

 

[Anders Lindman]

I have a calendar. Do you want me to measure how many days it'll be until New Year?

What you measure is a prediction. An accurate prediction yet still a prediction. A map is not the territory.

 

[Anders Lindman]

They're aerial photos, not satellite photos, and yes, the Google Maps "satellite" view is a composite and it's not unusual for neighbouring buildings to appear to have been photographed from different perspectives.

Ok, but it looks suspicious to me.

 

[Border Reiver]

You mean that a measurement is a process rather than a single snapshot? But if we by measurement mean when we get the result then that can only happen in the now. Even when a measurement is composed of separate sub-measurements each of those sub-measurements also only can be done in the now. The same with measurement of length. The same with any action of course. All actions happen in the now, never in the past, never in the future.

You do realize that this is the "logic" by which Achilles can never outrun the turtle?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Ok, but it looks suspicious to me.

I've learned there is no need to be worried about things which look suspicious to you.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Yes. Everything is a process.



Which would, again, prove your hypothesis wrong about the past accumulating new information.

Measurements as actions can only happen in the now. Data about measurements can be accumulated of course. My hypothesis that the past is ever growing amount of information still stands.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

What you measure is a prediction. An accurate prediction yet still a prediction. A map is not the territory.

Ipse dixit. You "measured" the VAB using online pictures, not by going there. What you measured is a prediction. If you eventually go there then you will be able to confirm by actual measurement if your predicition was accurate.

 

[Border Reiver]

What you measure is a prediction. An accurate prediction yet still a prediction. A map is not the territory.

A map is a scale two dimensional rendering of a three dimensional object. The arbitrary reference lines used to locate objects on a map can change - and often does or can be used independently of the picture beneath the grid lines.

 

[Anders Lindman]

You do realize that this is the "logic" by which Achilles can never outrun the turtle?

I believe time is discrete, meaning that time steps frame by frame so to speak. I think it was the philosopher Whitehead who said that consciousness as the subject perceives objects in the moment, and then the subject of that moment becomes the object(s) of the next moment and so on.

If time is discrete, and space also is discrete, then that solves paradoxes like that.