The nature of time

Of course but from the posts of some of our participants I had assumed they imagine the Universe to disappear if we’re all killed somehow

Fil that’s very well put indeed. Of course you mean at the instant the Universe has shrunk to nothing when we get the next Big Bang

Indidentlly pursuant to that thought however, the idea of nothingness entails a large number of paradoxes or contradictions though I have a means of skirting them: That is, the instant persists for a duration of zero when they all disappear as purely semantic issue

If that’s a typo you might correct it but otherwise elaborate for the benefit of particiant who is an Average Clod (me)

I’d disagree for what it’s worth which might actually not be much but I do sense all the apparent disagreement as simply presently unfathomable semantic issues. Like the paradoxical difficulty between determination and free will, eventually the semantics will be recognized

That’s for sure. For instance the fella who thinks time stops if all motion stops—this is surely semantic. It’s like saying “If the impossible happens, time stops” which of course is just another way of saying that time can’t stop

I’m sure that’s quite profound but beyond the Average Clod (me anyway)

What’s “n” by the way

Again if feasible, some elaboration tho it’s becoming apparent that “n” means “and” and thus I will have to reread a para or two

Thank you Fil for your interest in my OP and also for having a short username thereby saving keystrokes

Gee Fil forgive me if I had given you the slightest hint of impropriety, I meant no offense whatever, only that the average Clod (me) might not fully comprehend without further exposition

Geo, where are you, can you help us out here

I can’t answer that, partly because I don’t know

You seem to be asking, “If Time moving Time is not a circular argument how can we conceive of an infinity." And I suppose that’s a perfectly good question which we might explore some time with a new OP. I’ve thought about it a great deal and concluded that from an intuitional standpoint infinity and forever are both impossible, per

http://www.ghanavillage.com/showthread.php/13602-The-mathematics-of-infinity

Imagine all the potential rearrangement of atoms, information or whatever you fill like it, in the Universe...given an infinite amount of time is provided you will always have a more then zero chance of rearranging those atoms in the exact same faction they where at any given previous time you chose to peak...So in that sense I guess we all are immortal after all...we all in fact will end up repeating somehow somewhere...
(my "n" is a diminution for "and")

...if that was the impression I gave you that was not what I meant to ask, simply because circular arguments are not acceptable...when I pointed "if not" I meant if time cannot carry time, and not the opposite...given that is a logical conclusion Time cannot be on its on right other then a Loop which onto itself refers to the Eternal and True...that WHICH IS THE CASE !
(and I don´t certainly mean GOD or the likes, don´t get me wrong there either...)

Yes that’s so and so if we have an infinity forever, then there are as I pointed out in the linked post (see 953) an infinite number of galaxies at this very moment that are different from this one only by the length of one hair on your leg

Mind something about infinity´s as Cantor said they have size...Time is something "within the machine"..."externally" the Machine stands still...all fields of potential are fully occupied is the way I put it...another way of putting it and that it may be more clear, or not, is that the Set of Sets stands still while all the other sub-sets seam to move, perspective like...of course none of it moves...

The PRIME MOVER IS ILLUSION and GOD IS DEAD !

It's amazing how we humans seem to think that the universe has to conform with our logic--or better said that the limits of the universe (or of God?) must be the same as the limits of human logic.
I call that shrinking the cosmos to the size of one's head.

And I thinking you were the one defending precisely that idea...that the Cosmos is reduced to what is inside of ones head...not that I believe you in there...

Seriously Fil it’s all a grammatical problem, there are several different ways in which your assertion can be construed and some awkwardness that might confuse the Average Clod (me)

For instance "when I pointed "if not” seems grammatically incorrect or at least vague

And given "I meant if time cannot carry time,” I wonder for instance whether by “carry” you mean “move” as we hadn’t discussed carrying

So from your last clarification, I presume you’re saying, “If time can carry (move?) time along, then infinities are inconceivable.” I suppose that’s true but only if the argument isn’t really circular

Another point I was stopped by n"how can infinity´s be conceivable”. My immediate reaction was, “infinity’s what? Infinity’s time? Infinity’s circular argument?” until I speculated that you meant instead “infinities” In which case

Forgive me Fin but there’s another glitch in the software which has temporarily put this post out of business, for some reason I’ve been deprived of your post, which is supposed to be at the bottom of this window, and so I cannot further respond as time is drawing nigh and the day just isn’t long enough to bring it up using another tab

Has been very interesting chat tho and thanks once again
Sorry I can’t correct several typos above, but a?k won’t let me scroll, while I’m running out of energy to do it through keyboard shenanigan

Edited to add, suddenly the blue scroll bar has appeared so now I can

I meant as an argument against, if time could...but it cant because its illogical...
I apologise for my miss usage of the correct terms like infinity´s instead of infinities...I am Portuguese and a lousy English speaker...therefore less then an average cloud...

….can edit. Again I was cut off in the middle of a sentence. However when I did go to edit, I was refused, probably because 10 min had elapsed and I’m such a bad person I’m not entitled to longer edit time

Really fellas, I’m not your typical troll, I won’t embarrass you if you give me a little more time, say at very very least 3 hrs

Thanks all

Oh Fil not at all, it’s I who am the Average Clod

Very interesting you should so assert. Clearly the Christians are totally wrong about Her abilities; She cannot perform miracles because She cannot do the impossible. If you will start an OP about this I’d be glad to expound further

I think he meant it as if it was the opposite way, clearly he is wrong...Certainly the limits of the Universe are limits upon what humans can do prevented humans "live" or "have" anything like a Universe wherever it may rest, just as the limits of human logic apply to the universe we can speak off, think and feel about...whatever is the case it is certainly true that the limits are for both party´s...

Both indeed and forgive me most sincerely for my apparent criticism of your punctuation. It’s as if I were to be called for not handling your language as well as you handle ours

dalehileman, I assure you, you are not a troll, typical or otherwise.

Your comparison is unfair once English and rightfully so is the main language in use (lets set Mandarin aside) and Portuguese only the fifth...
(no more then 400M use it) I must indeed make a more tangible effort to improve my English skills specially in a philosophy forum...that and an embedded tendency for opacity in correctly conveying and portraying my beliefs...

Why thank you JL, a fresh whiff of encouragement in this otherwise quotidian diriment of procrustean redoubt

..but in actuality I’ve been so accused in perhaps other less tolerant forums where I ‘ve been summarily banned for life

The nature of time...

Time is a very important concept in music. In music, it is possible to operate with multiple time signatures simultaneously.
But what happens if you play two rhythms with different time signatures simultaneously? They merge and create a new time signature that describes both as one single rhythm. Perception is relevant when we speak of time.