Re: religion

"Oliver Wong" <owong@castortech.com> wrote in message
news:wXywf.80084$6K2.54082@edtnps90...
>
> "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:414p31F1coilcU3@individual.net... 
>
>    I think we won't find a section of our universe which is composed of
> space but not time. If such a thing were to exist, it would have to exist
> outside of our universe (where "outside" here means both outside of our
> space and outside of our time).
>
>    For example, "after" our universe ceases to exist, a new universe could
> "come into existence", which had no time. There would just be matter
> arranged in space, and the matter would "never" move. "After" that,
> another universe could come into existence, this one being composed of
> both time and space. Words like "after", "never", etc. are not appopriate
> here, because they talk about timelessness, but hopefully the meaning is
> clear.
>
>    Once Alistair brought it up, I realized that I am not aware of any
> scientific theory which supports the idea that space requires time, though
> I believe there are some which support the idea that time requires space.
> I vaguely recall a discussion that time is actually a "derived" concept,
> and the "base" concepts that make up the universe are space and velocity.
>
>    - Oliver
Space and time are related in very much the same way that energy and matter
are. However my basis for sayng this is philosophical, rather than physical.

If you consider matter to be energy that is moving "slower" than the speed
of light, and energy to be what matter converts to  when it approaches the
speed of light (both gross but "useful" oversimplified distortions of
physics), then you can imagine time arising out of space and space arising
out of time. Relativity certainly implies that time is derived from
movement, and movement certainly implies space.

It is all interesting speculation; for myself, I cannot conceive space and
time as being anything other than interrelated.

(Gotta stop now as I have no more space or time :-))

Pete.

In article <42hj02F1if80kU1@individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>"Oliver Wong" <owong@castortech.com> wrote in message
>news:wXywf.80084$6K2.54082@edtnps90... 

[snip]

>Space and time are related in very much the same way that energy and matter
>are. However my basis for sayng this is philosophical, rather than physical.[/color
]

Hmmmm... energy, matter and time all have units of measure but I don't
know of a measure of space which cannot be applied to matter
(absence-of-space)... but that's neither here nor there.

When you speak of the relation between energy and matter, however, there's
a little equation that was generated by a Swiss patent-clerk in 1905 that
says the two are the same, insofar as terms of a valid equation which are
on either side of the '=' sign are the same... 'The mass of a body is a
measure of its energy-content' and all that.

[snip]

>It is all interesting speculation; for myself, I cannot conceive space and
>time as being anything other than interrelated.

Back in the days before I had to work for a living I formulated 'Time is
the label applied to the purported sequentiality of events'.

DD
kk

<docdwarf@panix.com> wrote in message news:dq0cbq$460$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <42hj02F1if80kU1@individual.net>,
> Pete Dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote: 
>
> [snip]
> 
>
> Hmmmm... energy, matter and time all have units of measure but I don't
> know of a measure of space which cannot be applied to matter
> (absence-of-space)... but that's neither here nor there.
>
> When you speak of the relation between energy and matter, however, there's
> a little equation that was generated by a Swiss patent-clerk in 1905 that
> says the two are the same, insofar as terms of a valid equation which are
> on either side of the '=' sign are the same... 'The mass of a body is a
> measure of its energy-content' and all that.
>
> [snip]
> 
>
> Back in the days before I had to work for a living I formulated 'Time is
> the label applied to the purported sequentiality of events'.
>
A friend of mine who is a Scientologist quotes L Ron Hubbard as: "Time is a
postulate that space and particles will persist."
(I have some very interesting conversations with this guy and his wife;
usually we call it a draw :-))

That's interesting and kind of agrees with your definition regarding
'sequentiality'.

Of course we know that there is no theoretical reason why Time can't run
backwards (it is symettrical mathematically), and some particles are even
considered to move in negative time (pi mesons and tachyons, for example),
but the laws of thermodynamics and consequent entropy cause the 'arrow' to
move 'forward' (according to Hawking...)

Oops... out of time again... :-)

Pete.

On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:26:37 +1300, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:

>Of course we know that there is no theoretical reason why Time can't run
>backwards (it is symettrical mathematically), and some particles are even
>considered to move in negative time (pi mesons and tachyons, for example),
>but the laws of thermodynamics and consequent entropy cause the 'arrow' to
>move 'forward' (according to Hawking...)

If all time went backwards, how could we tell?

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:26:37 +1300, "Pete Dashwood"
> <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>
> 
>
>
> If all time went backwards, how could we tell?

I'd be getting younger instead of older?

Donald

In article <8a9as19cd4qg016ps33f1bjld09jhbvldg@4ax.com>,
Howard Brazee  <howard@brazee.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:26:37 +1300, "Pete Dashwood"
><dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>
>If all time went backwards, how could we tell?

There would be no random events; the universe would become rigidly
deterministic.

DD

"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net> wrote in message
 news:8a9as19cd4qg016ps33f1bjld09jhbvldg@
4ax.com...
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:26:37 +1300, "Pete Dashwood"
> <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>
> If all time went backwards, how could we tell?

The universe would move from chaos to a more ordered state. That is
observably not true. (See "Entropy")... If it was, my bed would make itself
and the eggs would jump out of the pan and back into their shells...:-)

Pete.

"Richard" <riplin@Azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1137008449.204828.229980@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... 
>
> Hmmm. A religion, started as a $10 bet at a SciFi conference according
> to Van Vogt, based on Elron's bad SciFi and a pagurised
> pseudo-psychology, the basis of which is 'it ain't my fault that I am a
> failure'.
>
> Still, it's probably no worse than the others.   ;-)
>
I'm not a convert, but it works for my friends and they are certainly
interesting to talk to.

In my opinion, it is definitely no worse than the others, (I'd rather talk
'religion' with them , than with some Roman Catholic friends I have... :-))
and far better than some I have encountered. (Like guys who nail their dicks
to a cheeseboard :-))

I don't recall them ever expressing your last statement; in fact, it seems
quite the opposite... "everything is my fault and I'm so responsible I now
need to spend loads of money so I can gain the power to do something about
it..." ;-)

Pete.

In article <42moi2F1j4jnrU1@individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net> wrote in message
> news:8a9as19cd4qg016ps33f1bjld09jhbvldg@
4ax.com... 
>
>The universe would move from chaos to a more ordered state. That is
>observably not true. (See "Entropy")... If it was, my bed would make itself
>and the eggs would jump out of the pan and back into their shells...:-)

I remember reading someplace about the phenomenon of watching a typical
war movie backwards... something about how men lay dying in their
comrades' arms and suddenly the injuring shrapnel was sucked out of them
by explosions that re-formed into bombs which rose into the bellies of
airplanes which were moving contrary to their aerodynamic design.  The
airplanes then returned to their home fields, where these bombs were then
unloaded from their bays, put into trucks that also moved contrary to
their aerodynamic design and brought to a factory where they were
dis-assembled so that they would never harm anyone else.

DD

<docdwarf@panix.com> wrote in message news:dq5ivl$ihh$1@reader2.panix.com...
> I remember reading someplace about the phenomenon of watching a typical
> war movie backwards...

Things a little slow in your neighborhood, are they?

MCM