How The Brain Stops time

The analogy still does not address the lack of material evidence for the existence of time.

To address mass nouns
Mass noun flour and mass noun time. If we are going linguistic with this lets take Navajo where container shape and size are built in grammatical features to nouns mass and count. This effectivly seperates all qualitative matter from that matter's quantitative container. In English we contain mass nouns simply because they are hard to handle physically without a container. Water (lake)(river)(cup) etc... we are not talking about the container although we contain them if we talk about the actual container we must refer to the lake or river bed or banks, or a measuring cup. Same goes for flour bag, cup, teaspoon. English as well as all languages and families cross culturally that I am aware of show lingusitically that mass nouns are mass because of their qualities make them impossible to be naturally quantified. no one is mistaking lingusitically quality for quantity, in fact the quantity is arbitrarily imposed on a quality, and these are things that can be seen, felt, tasted, touched, smelled. Add the inability to physically percieve and where have we?

What i think the end product of this is, is that time is ...impossible to accurately track. ..

Cesium clocks have demonstrated stability [of] one second in 1,400,000 years according to the Naval Observatory...Set your watch by it: (303) 499-7111 .

GoshisDead wrote:

What i think the end product of this is, is that time is ...impossible to accurately track. ..

Not so:

Quote:

Cesium clocks have demonstrated stability [of] one second in 1,400,000 years according to the Naval Observatory...Set your watch by it: (303) 499-7111 .

You seem top be missing the argument of Time and time. You can track time because it is simply the hash marks created by those wishing to measure something, and that something they are measuring may simply be the hashmarks which they created. The accuracy of those distances is not the issue. You cannot track Time the experiential duration by measurement other than experiential measurement. The brain tracks in recallable memory, moments although it experiences entire durations. Placing an arbitrary measuring system on something that is not tangible and cannot be experinced uniformly make that system of measurement suspect at best, as no one can experience Time itself unbiasedly and Instruments cannot detect it. There may be Time not created by man, but how would we know?

GoshisDead wrote:

You seem top be missing the argument of Time and time. You can track time because it is simply the hash marks created by those wishing to measure something, and that something they are measuring may simply be the hashmarks which they created. The accuracy of those distances is not the issue. You cannot track Time the experiential duration by measurement other than experiential measurement. The brain tracks in recallable memory, moments although it experiences entire durations. Placing an arbitrary measuring system on something that is not tangible and cannot be experinced uniformly make that system of measurement suspect at best, as no one can experience Time itself unbiasedly and Instruments cannot detect it. There may be Time not created by man, but how would we know?

I never knew there was a distinction between Time and time. And I don't think I know it now. Do you also think there is a difference between a person's height and the measurement of the person's height? So there is Height and height. How about Length and length.

You seem to be missing the argument of Time and time. You can track time because it is simply the hash marks created by those wishing to measure something, and that something they are measuring may simply be the hashmarks which they created. The accuracy of those distances is not the issue. You cannot track Time the experiential duration by measurement other than experiential measurement. The brain tracks in recallable memory, moments although it experiences entire durations. Thus we have expressions like a long time, time flies, time is dragging, not very long time, all explaining the same amount of time expressed on a cesium clock. Placing an arbitrary measuring system on something that is not tangible and cannot be experinced uniformly make that system of measurement suspect at best, as no one can experience Time itself unbiasedly and Instruments cannot detect it. No one would take someone as credible if they measured distance in miles but that distance were invisible. One may claim that time is a unit of distance. (how many clicks on this measuring device does it take to get from X to Y) As there are distance time correlations throughout history (A day's ride, 3 hours away etc...) However its a tough sell that the time reffered to is talking about time as we seem to experience it as those things now are normally converted mentally into a convention distance unit. There may be Time not created by man, but how would we know?

You seem top be missing the argument of Time and time. ... There may be Time not created by man, but how would we know?

GoshisDead wrote:

You seem top be missing the argument of Time and time. ... There may be Time not created by man, but how would we know?

That's nonsensical on the face of it - cesium atoms and their outer electrons aren't man-made. We're observing something that exists independently of our observation. As to the measurement of electrical processes in persons sitting in chairs vs persons close to achieving terminal velocity in free fall - might that measurement be less related to brain biochemistry and more to relativistic effects? Even at low velocities (planes flying east to west vs planes flying in the opposite direction) relativistic effects can be reliably measured - and have been in countless experiments. You don't have to travel at close to the speed of light to see that time dilation and contraction work exactly as predicted by the theory; and that the same applies to other dimensions, like length.

... cesium atoms aren't time their outer electrons aren't time we are observing something that exists independently of our observation using an unrelated measurement...

GoshisDead wrote:

... cesium atoms aren't time their outer electrons aren't time we are observing something that exists independently of our observation using an unrelated measurement...

That's right. It just so happens that counting radiation cycles (or something like that) of a cessium-133 atom is a much more stable means of measuring a second than is using the earth's orbit. And so the International System of Units found that 9,192,631,770 cycles of the atom nearly exactly predicts 1/86,400 of a 24 hour solar day. We obviously long before created the day and its subsequent hours and seconds for our own utility. Cessium (or any other element, for that matter) would not change its frequency if we changed our time keeping.