Does time exist?

Originally posted by dottewell
Perhaps you'll see your mistake if you try to answer these questions.

(a) What colour is your Christian god? What colour is God's love? How hot would it have to get before it melts? What colour was Jesus' sacrifice on the cross? How much did it weigh?

If you can't answer these "scientific" questions, does it follow that those things only exist "in yo ...[text shortened]... es that mean if we extracted all of your god, we would find the omnipotence left behind?

(a) What colour is your Christian god? What colour is God's love? How hot would it have to get before it melts? What colour was Jesus' sacrifice on the cross? How much did it weigh?

If you can't answer these "scientific" questions, does it follow that those things only exist "in your mind"?

(b) You say that omnipotence is a property of your god. Does that mean if we extracted all of your god, we would find the omnipotence left behind? DOTTEWELL

Great! you are on the right lines now.

You have made my point for me very well. The exception in your list would be Jesus's sacrifice on the cross , because there is some historical evidence for that. However , the simple fact is that you are right about all of the above things. It does not prove that these things must exist only in my mind at all , but since they cannot be shown to exist outside of my mind either(apart from Jesus on the cross) then they become a matter of faith and belief until any such proof can be found.

Now....I am fine with this and have never said on any thread that God can be proved scientifically. It's just what I believe because I cannot answer any of the questions above in a meaningful way. Atheists say that because there is no proof the default position should be that God doesn't exist. Ok.....that's Ok....until.....drum roll .....some theist decides that the default position on time could be that it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. Roars of indignation seem to erupt at the suggestion! I am ridiculed for even questioning time in the same way others are Atheists ridiculed for questioning God. This is why I ask what colour is time? Because Atheists are saying it exists - I want to see how they justify believing in something that is invisible and can't be proved. If they can't take what they dish out it's a poor show.


Starrman believes in time I do not . That's why he can "see" time through the eyes of faith and I cannot. The problem is getting him to admit he believes in something he can't prove or see. Is consistency too much to ask?

Originally posted by knightmeister
(a) What colour is your Christian god? What colour is God's love? How hot would it have to get before it melts? What colour was Jesus' sacrifice on the cross? How much did it weigh?

If you can't answer these "scientific" questions, does it follow that those things only exist "in your mind"?

(b) You say that omnipotence is a property of your god believes in something he can't prove or see. Is consistency too much to ask?

hmm...exactly what is it that you think *we think* time is KM?

the phenomenon associated with the word time does not exist only inside our heads...some of this phenomenon can be proved via contradiction...others have been justified by experiment.

what experiments do we perform for any of the Gods defined by theists?

Originally posted by dottewell
Do you mean "category mistake"? It isn't, anyway.

Look, it may well be that there is some "association" between the colour blue and certain wavelengths (in fact I'm sure there is). But in almost all contexts, when we use the word "blue", we are not talking about wavelengths. Imagine you work in a factory and your sole job is to sort pieces of clo ...[text shortened]... so counter-intuitive it barely warrants a response. And I'm tired.

I liked this response , at least you are thinking it through which is more than I can say for some. I 've got a lot of time for the way you are approaching this. Here's where I think it's gone wrong though..

"Look, it may well be that there is some "association" between the colour blue and certain wavelengths (in fact I'm sure there is)."DOTTY

I think you will find there is much more than an "association" . The colour blue IS the blue wavelength of light and as such it is associated with light and photons etc in a very different way than a mile is associated with a piece of land. A mile CAN be separated from that which it is measuring so that you can have a mile of land or water or a mile up a mountain , maybe even a mile in the sky?

The colour blue CANNOT be separated from the blue wavelength of light . If you are seeing the colour blue you know that the blue wavelength of light is hitting your eye. That's the scientific reality. If you are seeing a mile you can be looking at virtually anything.

I'm sure you can see now that this means that blue light is a property of the sky in a very different way than a mile is a property of a piece of land. One is scientific reality the other is conceptual.

Now what's very interesting about this is that no-one seems to be able to tie time down to being a property of anything . Time can be used conceptually to describe all sorts of things just like a mile can. A blue wavelength of light does something , what does time (or a mile) do?

Context and catagory error.

Originally posted by Agerg
hmm...exactly what is it that you think *we think* time is KM?

the phenomenon associated with the word time does not exist only inside our heads...some of this phenomenon can be proved via contradiction...others have been justified by experiment.

what experiments do we perform for any of the Gods defined by theists?

the phenomenon associated with the word time does not exist only inside our heads...some of this phenomenon can be proved via contradiction...others have been justified by experiment. AGERG


TELL ME MORE!!!

Originally posted by knightmeister
the phenomenon associated with the word time does not exist only inside our heads...some of this phenomenon can be proved via contradiction...others have been justified by experiment. AGERG


TELL ME MORE!!!

meh...phenomenon such as all events don't happen at once, this can be proven by looking at the consequences of this assertion being false, ie: all events do happen at once.

Originally posted by Agerg
hmm...exactly what is it that you think *we think* time is KM?

the phenomenon associated with the word time does not exist only inside our heads...some of this phenomenon can be proved via contradiction...others have been justified by experiment.

what experiments do we perform for any of the Gods defined by theists?

hmm...exactly what is it that you think *we think* time is KM? AGERG

To be honest I don't know whether this belief is exclusive to atheists , it will be interesting to find out. However , some atheists I have argued with seem to give time amazing powers. Scotty said that the whole universe was dependent on time , as if time was fundamental to all existence . Others talk about space/time being a dimensional reality of some sort like a "fabric" in which the universe lives. This conjures up images of a great force of some kind or at least something substantial. Even you seemed to think that the universe would start happening all at once if you took away time. How strange? If time was just a human concept it would make no difference to anything nor would anything "depend" on it.

However , I don't really know . All I know it that it comes up in relation to arguments about the origins of the universe. Have a peak at the Void of Nothing thread and you will see. It's not up to me to say what they think it is . If they/you think it is anything more than just a human concept then it is up to them to define it's existence.

Originally posted by knightmeister
...It does not prove that these things must exist only in my mind at all, but since they cannot be shown to exist outside of my mind either(apart from Jesus on the cross) then they become a matter of faith and belief until any such proof can be found...

Wrong conclusion. All it shows is that not all things and properties that exist in our world can be conceptually reduced to protons and electrons.

Every intelligent atheist knows this. The existence of smiles, the colour blue, love, and so on, are not matters of faith; their existence is built into the bedrock of our language and the way we experience the world. Pretty much everyone experiences and recognises these things every day of their life.

That is not the case with your god.

Look, this "argument" is an obsession of yours, but it's playground logic. I can't believe you've ever seriously studied philosophy in any broad sense. That's a shame; most intelligent Christians I know see our ability to pursue philosophy with an open and enquiring mind as a gift rather than a threat. I fear you have a lot of reading - and thinking - to do.

Originally posted by knightmeister
hmm...exactly what is it that you think *we think* time is KM? AGERG

To be honest I don't know whether this belief is exclusive to atheists , it will be interesting to find out. However , some atheists I have argued with seem to give time amazing powers. Scotty said that the whole universe was dependent on time , as if time was fundamental to all ex anything more than just a human concept then it is up to them to define it's existence.

To be honest I don't know whether this belief is exclusive to atheists , it will be interesting to find out. However , some atheists I have argued with seem to give time amazing powers.As do you (or if not you certainly others), one of such being that there exists an entity that exists outside of and can manipulate it Scotty said that the whole universe was dependent on time , as if time was fundamental to all existence Seems like a fairly logical inference...for the sake of efficiency, consider and communicate to us the meaning of: sometimes the universe operates without time, or there exist some parts of the universe that operate without time...tell us what actually happens in these circumstances please Others talk about space/time being a dimensional reality of some sort like a "fabric" in which the universe lives. This conjures up images of a great force of some kind or at least something substantial. though I'm not pretentious enough to try and pursuade anyone that I have any real insight into quantum mechanics or relativity theory yet I can say with confidence that some of the properties assigned to time are required to account for the observational discrepencies found without them...further more these properties have been justified by experiments. Even you seemed to think that the universe would start happening all at once if you took away time. No I didn't How strange? If time was just a human concept it would make no difference to anything nor would anything "depend" on it. The only thing human about it is the label

Originally posted by Starrman
What's ridiculous is not that you question time; that's fine and dandy, but that the epistemic basis for your argument is so confused. I'm not going to go over what everyone else seems to agree are the clear and justified observation, definition and measurements of time, since it has been done already in this thread. Your analysis of what others have posted is skewed so as to fail to grasp their points, so it seems a futile venture.

I'm not going to go over what everyone else seems to agree are the clear and justified observation, definition and measurements of time, STARRMAN

And STILL no-one has been able to show me how what is being observed is anything other than matter and energy moving relative to each other. No-one has shown the necessity of time existing.

You treat as a given what no real scientist can afford to assume as given.......that what you are observing can be explained in no other way than what you already believe to be there.

It's basic science . Observe what's really there with an open mind. Look at your watch and tell me what you see. Can you see it moving? Can you see yourself mentally comparing that movement to other movements? Why is the watch moving? Is it time doing it or energy? What other explanations are there for this consecutive movement? Is time proven by this? Observe the raw data before you add the theory prematurely.

I don't buy this "I'm walking away , it's futile" game. If you can't do the science just be man enough to admit it.

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]To be honest I don't know whether this belief is exclusive to atheists , it will be interesting to find out. However , some atheists I have argued with seem to give time amazing powers.As do you (or if not you certainly others), one of such being that there exists an entity that exists outside of and can manipulate it Scotty said that the whol ...[text shortened]... nor would anything "depend" on it. The only thing human about it is the label [/b]

sometimes the universe operates without time, or there exist some parts of the universe that operate without time...AGERG

To me the whole of the universe operates quite well without time. Matter , energy , get them moving and hey presto a moving , changing universe. That was easy . Show me where I missed something . Was time needed?

Originally posted by knightmeister
sometimes the universe operates without time, or there exist some parts of the universe that operate without time...AGERG

To me the whole of the universe operates quite well without time. Matter , energy , get them moving and hey presto a moving , changing universe. That was easy . Show me where I missed something . Was time needed?

define change, define move

Originally posted by knightmeister
I liked this response , at least you are thinking it through which is more than I can say for some. I 've got a lot of time for the way you are approaching this. Here's where I think it's gone wrong though..

"Look, it may well be that there is some "association" between the colour blue and certain wavelengths (in fact I'm sure there is)."DOTTY

I ...[text shortened]... ht does something , what does time (or a mile) do?

Context and catagory error.

"Association" was your word.

You've missed my point entirely, as I thought you would. I'll try just once more.

Our concept "blue" has nothing to do with wavelengths. It may well be that our current scientific explanation of why things appear blue (in terms of wavelengths etc.) is correct; I have no reason to doubt it. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that being blue cannot be a property of a thing.

As I said, if we had to scrap the science - if the wavelength readings started coming out all wrong - the word "blue" would continue to be used as before. So when we say something is blue we are not talking about wavelengths.

You can repeat the science till you are blue in the face; it won't change the concept and won't therefore change what "blue" actually means.

You seem confused about the "mile" issue; my point is merely that the property of being a mile long is not in the mind; it is a property of just those things that are a mile long. Of course these can be stretches of land, or sea, or whatever; and a mountain might be a mile high. So what?

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]To be honest I don't know whether this belief is exclusive to atheists , it will be interesting to find out. However , some atheists I have argued with seem to give time amazing powers.As do you (or if not you certainly others), one of such being that there exists an entity that exists outside of and can manipulate it Scotty said that the whol ...[text shortened]... nor would anything "depend" on it. The only thing human about it is the label [/b]

The only thing human about it is the label AGERG

I agree . You label it time and you say time exists. I label it a universe of matter and energy in motion and say time doesn't exist.

Don't you get it yet-?? The universe IS time . They are not separate entities in my mind. The two are are embedded and emmeshed.

You may talk about the universe needing time to exist "in" - but to me time needs the universe to exist , because they are one and the same.

If anything needs time it's humans. We need it to theorise about the universe.

Originally posted by dottewell
"Association" was your word.

You've missed my point entirely, as I thought you would. I'll try just once more.

Our concept "blue" has nothing to do with wavelengths. It may well be that our current scientific explanation of why things appear blue (in terms of wavelengths etc.) is correct; I have no reason to doubt it. Nevertheless, that doesn ...[text shortened]... tches of land, or sea, or whatever; and a mountain might be a mile high. So what?

As I said, if we had to scrap the science - if the wavelength readings started coming out all wrong - the word "blue" would continue to be used as before. So when we say something is blue we are not talking about wavelengths.DOTTY

Firstly , how would we know the readings were wrong?

The basics of this is that we have measured wavelengths of light reflected from certain objects that we call blue. This is how we know that the light we see with our eyes is of a certain wavelength. If the wavelengths changed then we would change the machine for a new one . However , it is incredibly unlikely to happen. You might as well say that the speed of light will change or the sun won't come up tomorrow.

You can say that the wavelength might change but in reality it ain't going to happen and since I thought we were trying to ascertain whether blue is more of a property of a specific wavelength of light than a mile is a property of land it is a matter of science.

I see what you are trying to say but you have to "scrap the science" in order to bring the concept of blue closer to the concept of a mile. Even this doesn't work though because blue is not really a concept , it is a physical experience. There is a different mental process involved.

Originally posted by Agerg
define change, define move

I'm not the world's greatest physicist but I think I can have a fair stab at it.

Change is when matter changes into other forms of matter or energy changes into matter and vice versa. Move is when energy is applied to matter and there is a reaction of motion of matter.

Do you not believe in energy and matter and change and movement?

Define how time changes matter/ energy. Show how time moves anything.