Why Time Does NOT Exist!

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
You have not read the entire thread and/or you did not comprehend my previous posts in the 9 pages of useless garbage that you now seem interested in

I have in fact read all the preceding pages that you so diligently filled with garbage and worse.

There was no beginning of the "universe" and it is not a bubble.

And while there are scientist that do support that point of view i do not believe, based on what i have read, we are in a position to make up our minds one way or another. What you have introduced so far certainly aids no one in their attempts to reach a conclusion.

We are the consciousness of Existence and this consciousness has purposely placed the expression and definition of "Nothing" in our minds so that we may know the limitations of this illusional reality, that which are unlimited and including the limited.

I am rarely left speechless and without words so i will responsible act on it and say nothing in response to the above.

I believe trees fall, no I know trees fall, I've seen it, I all so believe in forests, and the former Exists because of the Eternal consciousness.

Define the 'eternal consciousness' and how it can be proven that he cares or knows about trees.

Firstly: The scientists who believe a "God entity" created us and the "universe" will go to the grave claiming that they have found the "beginning" of "time" so that it fits their personal agendas and belief systems (be it religious or not).

As far as i know there is no established evidence that suggest that any significant proportion of cosmologist are raving fundamentalist that are attempting to prove god's existence by means of the big-bang. To suggest a big bang is to throw the bible out the window as the universe is then a evolving force that can not and does not logically have to lead to any observers.

Secondly: The "accelerated expansion" of the "universe" is all hypothetical theoretics, never has been proven.

Then lets get into detail as while i do not believe that it's in fact accelerated expansion we are observing you have offered NOTHING to suggest why anyone else should disregard the observations involved.

You know, every 5 years they "expand" the length of the "universe" because they simply can't seem to find the beginning or end of it!

No i have not in fact observed them doing that but i am sure you have a source for the claim somewhere beside your thumb?

Quite hard to postulate an expansion if you've never seen the end or beginning moving away, eh?

Cosmic microwave background radiation anyone? There is a laypersons view of reality( mine) and then there is ignorance and or shear stupidity....

Thirdly: What is outside of this "bubble" universe? Nothing? Nothing that doesn't Exist? How can this be?

Only someone like you would use the absence of evidence about what might or might not be outside this universe as defense, or means of attack, for what you think goes on inside it.

A non-Existent force, that which does not Exist, is non-existently acting as a barrier around physical Existence to conform it to a bubble?

Once again i wonder why someone so ignorant bothers to speculate about the 'nature' of what is outside this universe. Why no contend yourself to attempting to understand the basics relating to this universe; i can assure you that you could easily spend a lifetime on nothing other...

But this physical Existence is persistent on Expanding in to this non-Existent factor that some how Exists as long as the scientists can trick you and themselves in to believing such idiocy?

Talk about contradictions. What suggest to you that this universe requires 'space' ( or anything) to expand into? Explain what factual grounds we ( the grand type) have for speculating what is happening outside this universe.

Nothing does not Exist, and Nothing does Exist. One more time: Explanation: Nothing can and can not be known; only half way understood.

Nothing is understood as the absence of the things we can observe or understand and as far as i know we have no evidence that there are parts of the universe where 'nothing' exists or transpires; we don't know much anything about 'nothing' due to the absence of it.

Nothing is dichotomous: Existing as an expression so that we may know never ending Existence, and not Existing so that we may know its expression.

I suppose that may contain some hidden 'truth' i might one day understand( and probably under the same influence of the same drug your imbibing) but i for one like to create a basis in evidence before indulging in flights of fancy and fantasy. Believing what you want based on nothing at all is fine but this is not the forum for it and i am still wondering why this thread is allowed to continue on the so called 'science' forum.

It Exists because it is nothing, and Existing as Nothing it doesn't Exist. It doesn't Exist because it is not some thing, rather it is no thing.

That is in my opinion a quite open contradiction so just tell me who's opinion or work you are referencing that has the type of credentials that should go along with these claims. Ignorant people such as ourselves should not bother with inventing novel views( and especially not when they make no sense) as there are plenty of great minds that left us with perfectly good material to work with.

The illusion is Nothing and Nothing is everything connected for ever.

More , in my opinion , pure nonsense.

When it all comes together it ceases to be a measurable thing, rather it is a formless eternal abyss made up of forms.

Yet more pure nonsense...

The "universe" is immeasurable, beginningless and endless.

Please state this as your opinion as it's certainly not a fact that anyone can , or have, validated.

That is the reality of illusion and illusion of reality, yet still it Exists.

Nonsense...

Local, time is local. Based on revolutions, rotations, etc. Accidentally it has found its way in to "theoretical" physics where it does not belong.

Why does it not belong there? Why should we not be honest and say we can make local time measurements to relatively great accuracy and thus predict celestial events and general mechanics? Do you not even understand the fundamental nature of the difference between speculation and observation about possible future observations?

In fact, time is what created the field of theoretical physics, without time we'd have no theories, all would simply become known instead of a rabbit chase down the endless hole of "time".

More complete and utter nonsense. Did you hear these things somewhere else or does it all flow from your fantastical imagination( deluded mind in my opinion but since i'm trying to be 'nice') that just keeps throwing words together hoping to strike sense?

If you could close your eyes and see every thing simultaneously in motion and accept that it is eternally Existing (that is, not inside of a bubble), could you realize that there really is no motion? (every thing means the planets, the stars, galaxy's upon galaxy's spinning) I don't expect you or any one to be able to do this, perhaps I am gifted, but I never cease believing that you or any one can because we are of the same consciousness.

Well my mind most certainly do not do allow such things at the current time and while i will never dismiss such possibilities i am not sure how a vivid imagination 'proves' the truth of what is imagined or experienced. What happens in your mind is certainly not proof of anything when observed reality does not substantiate it. The closest you may approach to the 'truth' with your views is when you propose that what we experience as reality is simply a elaborate matrix style computer program and that we then have no ability to consider what happens outside of it. To suggest that the universe do not act as we can in many ways show it to be , based on what you see in your mind, is in more ways than one very disturbing. To be so self involved as to believe that one 'understands' the universe based on 'faculties' that others lack , at least presently, should stretch and break the credulity of any intelligent audience. Opinions are great things but only when they inspected against observation and what we understand about reality. Einstein may have have had a dream in which general relatively were 'revealed' to him ( probably after listening to his wife who laid it all out to him) but no one much cared until it could be validated and properly inspected against observation.

GR trashed its self. If you want to deal with time, then go ahead and be a standard minded physicist,

I believe GR contains flaws that may invalidate most of it but unlike you i can refer you to the scientist ( with proper credentials and published material) that makes these claims and also tell you why i consider their opinions and or 'proof' more valid than the main stream views. I am no physicist and frankly i can imagine many fields of science were one could better waste one's time researching the nonsense the grant-givers wishes you to.

if you want to jump in to the next era of timeless technologies,

Timeless technologies? Explain to me how a universe without time would function and how consciousness and living forms would exists in it.

well then, we must alter the consciousness to not believe in time nor imperfections,

Your attempting to do too much 'consciousness' alterations instead of sitting down and reading some books that could you provide you with the knowledge that could in fact alter your perspective and consciousness. As things stand you don't seem to like the water , the bath, or the baby itself and apparently want to do away with it all.

only then will we truly over come and control "time".

I doubt we could ever prevent the universe from evolving and thus prevent time from flowing one way or another.

If time is to be controlled it must cease to be believed in

Maybe if i stopped believing in time i would not mind spending so much time responding to what i consider to be almost entirely nonsense. At least i know why you seem to find the time to type up so much rubbish.

Stellar

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
There is no metaphysical, all is physical, no need for the adjective/pre-fix "meta".

So now all is physical? Did you read some of your previous posts or do you just type with no reflection at all?

How can "nothing"(no thing) be proved through mathematics and physics when they think they need some thing?

Since all physics is based on our knowledge of 'somethings' i suppose our reflections nothing will have much to do with those things.

An immeasurableness is exactly what Existence is, how can mathematics prove that?

By slowly measuring what we can hoping that we may eventually measure the rest? Mathematics seems to have done quite well in helping us tame the world around us and whatever problems you have with you will have to resolve in your own time.

How can "physics" or "science" prove that?

There is in fact no hard evidence that 'existence' can not be measured as so many other observations have been.

One thing is for sure, they can never diss prove Eternity because "Nothing" is of the consciousness.

And you should know that falsifiability plays quite a large role in the viability , if not the usefulness, of any given theory.

Science is based on theories and hypothesis, just because it is called "science" makes it viable proof? Credibility and evidential guesses?

Science is in fact based on observation and our attempts to explain it by means of other observations and prior knowledge. You can call almost anything 'science' if you don't know what science is about and while the process are frequently hijacked , or even on the whole, that simply does not prove that there is anything wrong with the process itself.

Sorry. Science has merely become another religious system.

One that occasionally reveals some truths about this world and can quite frequently be employed for the betterment of humanity; of the religious systems this would by no means be the worse.

This thread/post has not a thing to do with AlienAgenda, nor is any one here claiming that they are connected to alien data-stream.

I have great sympathy with the accusations as you are not introducing anything remotely novel that is consistent or makes much sense and do seem to think you have reached some kind of superior awareness. I try never to waste time on stupid threads like this one but since it's in the 'science' forum i'm too disgusted with this idiocy to just let it pass.

Stop trying to corrupt the thread and/or derail it, please. Discussion about why time does not Exist would be appreciated.

If you stop typing all that nonsense we could easily leave this thread alone but i suppose i will do my best to introduce some sanity by pointing out the illogical and fallacious nature of your ideas and accusations.

Proof of Existence is the expression of Nothing.

More nonsensical nonsense.

YES, and it is accepted, too. Imagine if the health field treated people like we live for a very very long time, they wouldn't just keep people here as long as possible for monetary gains made off of medical dependence.

Unless western health care were doing it's best not to really cure anyone of anything for very long if at all and then only because killing us too fast would be even more obvious than the current slow genocide.

The mind is the consciousness and the consciousness is connected to every thing. The chosen reality of humanity creates the reality of this planet.

More claims that has to be considered to be nonsense in the absence of any remote attempt at validation. I have made fantastical claims in my time but god knows i do try to source the claim from main stream news or at least from a authoritative source.

There is no "proof", only hypothetical theoretics. There is no beginning and there is no end to the "universe". Think for your self.

There is far more proof for the big bang than there is for your absolute vast majority ( lets say 95%)of your claims on this thread and to suggest that we should consider your opinion while you have such a hard time typing more than a line without contradiction yourself is quite arrogant. WE are thinking for yourselves and there are at least two of us who wish you would too before typing any more.

Look up the definition of science. Why all the division? Science is philosophy is philosophy is science.

Ideas are great but at least under science we understand that evidence should be presented when they are made. You clearly do not know much about science or it's general aims.

And that's where we go wrong, there is no need to control any thing. Existence simply is, it cannot be controlled nor can it be measured.

What does that even mean? There are plenty of reasons to control things if only one's own bowel movements( excuse me but what he says reminds me of such things). Please do your best to make illogical arguments that attempts a pretense at internal consistency

There aren't many "universes", there is only Existence, it is eternal. We know this because of the knowledge of Nothing.

We don't in fact know that and you most certainly do not so stop pretending that you do. Please stop typing up all this rubbish.

There are no multiple "bubble universes" or any other shaped, enclosed by nothingness (that doesn't Exist) universes, because of what Nothing is and is not.
(Please refer to previous posts in this thread before replying again, thank you, it would be greatly appreciated and make for easier understanding)

I am once again at a loss for words. Can anyone point me to the sense in that sentence?

When the knowledge of "Nothing" is forgotten, the consciousness of the forgetting becomes sick.

Sick indeed.

When "Nothing" is forgotten we become diss membered from the Eternal connectedness of consciousness, when we re-member "No-thing" we once again become the eternal connectedness. We have forgotten our membership to Nothingness

Can anyone explain any of this to me as i desperately want to believe that this type of insanity is in fact impossible or rarer than this.

Stellar


[edit on 1-5-2007 by StellarX]

StellarX,

I will not engage you in an insult match nor a comparison of credentials, paper work, or "mainstream" and popularized names. What should be adressed here is the content, if you can not do so, then you will not receive a direct response.

You are being and I am being, we are all being and that is all that matters. We both have brains and we both have eyes, look and think about what was presented.

If you would like to delicately pick apart what has been revealed and find flaws in it without referencing the likes of GR, 3D and Einstein, then please do so. I would be glad to converse in a mature tone and about the actual subject its self.

I am letting you know that any further responses that are not dealing with the actual content put forth in the previous pages in accordance with the actual habiliment of the essence of time, no time, measurements, and the expression of nothing, will receive no further antiphons.

Thank you.

Best regards,
L.O.V.E.

p.s.

Re-member that the definition of nonsense, a word that you are fond of, is in and of its self, self-sensical. You can't really call some thing nonsense and expect it to be only that, because to do so means that you have made sense of its nonsensicality, and you are yet to sensically explain that non-sense. Instead we have 3 posts of flaming, insults, and comparative character degradations; endorsed names of the past are irrelevent now. Non is contingent of Nothing, and nothing of non. Know the language, more importantly know thyself, for words are yet to find their true purpose in this illusional reality

[edit on 1-5-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
I will not engage you in an insult match nor a comparison of credentials, paper work, or "mainstream" and popularized names.

As per your record so far i did not expect you to suddenly resort to substance anyways..

What should be adressed here is the content, if you can not do so, then you will not receive a direct response.

And while you so arrogantly assume that you provided anyone with 'content' people with scientific backgrounds would have noticed the absence by the end of your first post.

You are being and I am being, we are all being and that is all that matters.

That may be so in your version of reality but in mine observation tends to matter more than simply 'being'. If you just want to 'be' i suggest you sell your computer, house and whatever else you have and explore a simpler/alternative type of 'being' in some third world slum or forest. Don't patronize me by lecturing me on just 'being' when your 'being' so ignorant and so deliberately so.

We both have brains and we both have eyes, look and think about what was presented.

I have doubts as to how well you are using your own as i don't see how such average organs ( most humans seem to have them without having arrived at your opinions) can lead their user to such fantastical delusions.

If you would like to delicately pick apart what has been revealed and find flaws in it without referencing the likes of GR, 3D and Einstein, then please do so.

So you can endlessly wax lyrically about what has been 'revealed' to you and wont soon be to me? Sorry but if i descended to your level of discussion nothing could possible be resolved or learnt by anyone who cares to make observation the basis of their understanding of this universe. However flawed our current understanding of physics is at least there is a paper trail and in many cases substantive contradictory views. Your approach offer us nothing of this and while there may be many, if extremely well hidden, truths to be discovered there would be no way to prove to the 'unenlightened' masses who have already shown that they have almost unlimited capacity to believe exactly what suits them in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I would be glad to converse in a mature tone and about the actual subject its self.

I am trying but your not making it easy as should be evident. I thrive on being able to source all i say but it's hard when your responding to allegations and 'facts' that are so far off the beaten track as to defy logic and any attempts at sourced responses.

I am letting you know that any further responses that are not dealing with the actual content put forth in the previous pages in accordance with the actual habiliment of the essence of time, no time, measurements, and the expression of nothing, will receive no further antiphons.

Glad it's over then and hopefully this embarrassing thread can disappear from the view so that no more readers of the SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY forum will be distracted by it.

[quoteThank you.

Best regards,
L.O.V.E.

I'll send you a personal thank you, by u2u, when you have been suitable silent for a few days or weeks.

p.s.

Re-member that the definition of nonsense, a word that you are fond of, is in and of its self, self-sensical. You can't really call some thing nonsense and expect it to be only that, because to do so means that you have made sense of its nonsensicality, and you are yet to sensically explain that non-sense. Instead we have 3 posts of flaming, insults, and comparative character degradations; endorsed names of the past are irrelevent now. Non is contingent of Nothing, and nothing of non. Know the language, more importantly know thyself, for words are yet to find their true purpose in this illusional reality

Contrary to you claims i am in fact attempting to make sense of your ramblings as i sincerely believe that there is something to learn from every person on the planet. Having said that i have not done so thus far and i suspect it will take me some time to learn anything from what you have presented here.

Stellar

Time doesn't exist the same way inches and meters don't exist.

Time is a unit of measurement. It is a construct of thought used to help up determine location within a frame of reference.

Ever use a chronograph?

Originally posted by newtron25
Time doesn't exist the same way inches and meters don't exist.

'Seconds', 'minutes' and 'hours' do not but then the absence of 'inches' and 'meters' has not made the world disappear either. I think you are confusing the physical existence ( as measured to the best of our abilities) of a thing with the means by which we measure it.

Time is a unit of measurement. It is a construct of thought used to help up determine location within a frame of reference.

Minutes and seconds are units of measurement and units of measurement should not be confused with what they are employed to measure. Would the Earth stop revolving without us creating a largely arbitrary system of measurement?

Ever use a chronograph?

No i have not and i hope it's more relevant than what you have said so far.

Stellar

Originally posted by newtron25
Time doesn't exist the same way inches and meters don't exist.

Time is a unit of measurement. It is a construct of thought used to help us determine location within a frame of reference.

Ever use a chronograph?

Nicely said, newtron25. Thank you for your pleasant advice

Measurement is also a unit of time and no time, and thought a construct of both the former.

A reference of frame within location also determines the thought of time. Ours happens to be based approximately around 365 days, 24 hours, 60 minutes, 60 seconds, etc. because of our determined location and frame of reference that is currently thought of to be the Earth. With mental gymnastics we can move beyond such a limited conscious perception without implementing the exact art of astro sciences.

Of course we could easily switch these measurements at any time and only have 12 "hours" in a day, thus having only 24 "half hours", or 48 "hours" in a "day", thus having 24 "half hours"... all this by simply changing the way we measure "time".

No, I have never used an actual chronograph, but I have used variations there of. I think we all have: the stop watch.

Every thing does and does not Exist. Time does not Exist Existentially because there was no beginning and no end to a so called "uni-verse", but it does Exist because we experience it in our limited conscious reality, that in which we seemingly live and die. We must find a way to not for get to divide these two, while still keeping them intelligibly and logically binded together for our comprehension

[edit on 4-5-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

What about entropy increase? This is time.

Because entropy increases and never decreases, nothing can be put back as it was. This is the one way arrow of time.

Originally posted by bodebliss
What about entropy increase? This is time.

Because entropy increases and never decreases, nothing can be put back as it was. This is the one way arrow of time.

How does one explain precognition, when one sees a clear image of a scence yet to happen?
The arrow does not seem to allow for that, which is fine if you don't believe in it. But some people have no choice.
'God exists in eternity. The only place that time and eternity meet is the present, so the present is the only time there is.' Marianne Williamson

Read Carl Jung's Synchronicity. Fantastic book.

He says that on another level of awareness, filtered in a similar way to our vision, to provide only details that are relevant to us, we have access to a dimension outside 3D spacetime, where there is no time, or distance. This explains awareness of coincidence, remote viewing, clairvoyance, etc.

Chronogragh, or any other manmade time teller has nothing to do with the physics description of time.

That is entropy! The slow unraveling of the complex, the accurate, and the efficient.

since there is no way of determining point zero to within a specific margin of error for the beginning of time, the best we can do is approximate time as a measured unit within a relativistic framework.

Wear a watch. That's a chronograph. It tells you when you are early or late.

Time does exist, but we can not absolutely prove it.

Originally posted by bodebliss
What about entropy increase? This is time.

Because entropy increases and never decreases, nothing can be put back as it was. This is the one way arrow of time.

Entropy can only be measured in a measurable and therefore closed and limited system.

Existence has no beginning/ending of time and no beginning/ending of space, ergo it is not closed nor is it limited, thus entropy is all ready and all ways perfected and/or ceases to be a defining factor in an unlimited system, that which would not really be "systematized".

There is no conceptualization of consistencies without expectation. Expectations come from viewing a closed system, thus results are limited and inescapably subject to expectation because of these limited outcomes

[edit on 5-5-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by Karilla
This explains awareness of coincidence, remote viewing, clairvoyance, etc.

There are only such things as coincidences from a limited awareness and perception. Coincidences are merely wish full thinking, some thing related to those of the "super"natural... that which is really the natural that is yet to be explained and comprehended, but doesn't mean there is any thing "super" about it. Existence simply is, all is natural.

Existence is simultaneously, eternally omnidirectionally, synchronized perfection

Originally posted by Mysteri

Lets say that one day an astronaut in the year 2000 dropped a small red ball into deep space (interplanetary to avoid all those gravity dilemnas) this ball floats about in spcae for millions of years perhaps hit by the occasional dust particle or small rock but it will survive, now our little astronaut buddy has been in cryo-storage all this time and hasn't aged a tad, imagine his surprise when upon his next venture into space he finds the same ball totally unchanged.

yeah, i know im good. so lets see what yall have to say now eh?

No, you are actually pretty bad. You are confusing philosophy with Science.

You example means nothing as time still passes in the universe and the ball and the man both have witnessed the passage of time. Just because time passes doesnt mean there has to be some physical "time damage". If somebody carbon dated the ball or the astronaut they would be able to show that time has indeed passed.

You are right when you say that time is just a measure because it is, just like distance and velocity( or so that is our understanding so far). But there might be some truth to your saying that "time doesnt exist" in a meta-physical sense. But then again it could be that time is an effect of some other elements that are present in our universe or so forth. But all this is again speculation.

Existence has no beginning/ending of time and no beginning/ending of space, ergo it is not closed nor is it limited, thus entropy is all ready and all ways perfected and/or ceases to be a defining factor in an unlimited system, that which would not really be "systematized".

There is no proof of an ulimited universe. All evdence points to a closed system. Even multiverse enthusiasts believe there are only one-time interactions between 'branes'.

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
Nicely said, newtron25. Thank you for your pleasant advice

Measurement is also a unit of time and no time, and thought a construct of both the former.

The simple act of measuring gets quite close , and especially in terms of practicality, to proving the presence of what is being measured.

A reference of frame within location also determines the thought of time.

We generally use the sun as reference if nothing else serves.

Ours happens to be based approximately around 365 days, 24 hours, 60 minutes, 60 seconds, etc. because of our determined location and frame of reference that is currently thought of to be the Earth.

The Earth would exist without us giving it a name...

With mental gymnastics we can move beyond such a limited conscious perception without implementing the exact art of astro sciences.

'Mental gymnastics' is not even required as what we know have been gained by perception and memory NOT elaborate thumb-sucking.

Of course we could easily switch these measurements at any time and only have 12 "hours" in a day, thus having only 24 "half hours", or 48 "hours" in a "day", thus having 24 "half hours"... all this by simply changing the way we measure "time".

Sure could and it may or may not be more practical but it certainly wont change time going by anyways and humans aging.

Every thing does and does not Exist. Time does not Exist Existentially because there was no beginning and no end to a so called "uni-verse",

How does one go about proving that beyond the type of doubt every sane person should have?

but it does Exist because we experience it in our limited conscious reality,

How does one experience what does not exist in a limited or any other fashion?

that in which we seemingly live and die. We must find a way to not for get to divide these two, while still keeping them intelligibly and logically binded together for our comprehension

Elaborate as that makes absolutely no sense to me.

Stellar

Originally posted by bodebliss
There is no proof of an ulimited universe. All evdence points to a closed system. Even multiverse enthusiasts believe there are only one-time interactions between 'branes'.

When someone, any one, can explain how Nothing that is not a something wish fully becomes a something so that we may experience the "uni-verse" as an enclosed "bubble" or any other geometric calculation... will be the day that I throw my hands in the air and bow at the feet of creationism.

Until then we have an issue to address: Nothing