Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
|
 Lord_McLovin
government issue
Registered: 04/09/11
Posts: 1,135
Loc: DEA Headquarter
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
|
Quote:
That's pretty much...exactly what I said. Maybe I wasn't clear, but I do have a firm grasp on what you're saying. That's what I meant when I said it was "purely relativistic."
I'm sorry, it just seemed a little confusing. Noone should be led to believe that gravity makes one move in slow motion. 
|
tokinman21
Stranger
Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 2,021
Last seen: 1 month, 16 days
|
|
Quote:
Lord_McLovin said:
Quote:
That's pretty much...exactly what I said. Maybe I wasn't clear, but I do have a firm grasp on what you're saying. That's what I meant when I said it was "purely relativistic."
I'm sorry, it just seemed a little confusing. Noone should be led to believe that gravity makes one move in slow motion.
Yeah, my bad...I just meant to say that if you could observe it externally (like, say you were God and had a full comprehension of time) you would see certain things moving slower than others if you were to set a "standard" level of gravity. Things on jupiter would seem to be going slower than on mars, for example.
The simplest way to say that is just with the clock reference. If you put a clock on a mountain it will tick more times in a hundred years than if it were in a valley.
Edited by tokinman21 (02/14/12 11:09 AM)
|
Lord_McLovin
government issue
Registered: 04/09/11
Posts: 1,135
Loc: DEA Headquarter
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
 Re: Past/Future aren't real [Re: tokinman21]
#15808061 - 02/14/12 11:37 AM (3 months, 13 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tokinman21 said:
Yeah, my bad...I just meant to say that if you could observe it externally (like, say you were God and had a full comprehension of time) you would see certain things moving slower than others if you were to set a "standard" level of gravity.
Let me reformulate this. You don't need to be god, it's enough to be in a spaceship sufficiently far awar from the dude on the (incredibly massive) planet you're watching (and of course not to close to, say, a star) and, to keep things nice, not moving relative to him.
What you mean with "'standard' level of gravity" is called flat space(time) (i.e. not being curved by gravity, negligible effect of gravity).
The point is there cannot be an absolute comprehension of time, only a comprehension of causality. This also means that "god", if you refer to it as some higher omniscient form of consciousness, cannot have such as absolute time simply doesn't exist - it's something we made up. Actually this all follows from the constancy of the speed of light.
|
tokinman21
Stranger
Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 2,021
Last seen: 1 month, 16 days
|
|
Quote:
Lord_McLovin said:
Quote:
tokinman21 said:
Yeah, my bad...I just meant to say that if you could observe it externally (like, say you were God and had a full comprehension of time) you would see certain things moving slower than others if you were to set a "standard" level of gravity.
Let me reformulate this. You don't need to be god, it's enough to be in a spaceship sufficiently far awar from the dude on the (incredibly massive) planet you're watching (and of course not to close to, say, a star) and, to keep things nice, not moving relative to him.
What you mean with "'standard' level of gravity" is called flat space(time) (i.e. not being curved by gravity, negligible effect of gravity).
The point is there cannot be an absolute comprehension of time, only a comprehension of causality. This also means that "god", if you refer to it as some higher omniscient form of consciousness, cannot have such as absolute time simply doesn't exist - it's something we made up. Actually this all follows from the constancy of the speed of light.
But a true "God" wouldn't be outside of the time, it would BE the time, so of course God can understand it whether it has a pattern or not. Now I'm just arguing the semantics of God though, which is not only irrelevant to this thread but probably to everything else as well.
|
Lord_McLovin
government issue
Registered: 04/09/11
Posts: 1,135
Loc: DEA Headquarter
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: Past/Future aren't real [Re: tokinman21]
#15808110 - 02/14/12 12:02 PM (3 months, 13 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tokinman21 said:
Quote:
Lord_McLovin said:
The point is there cannot be an absolute comprehension of time, only a comprehension of causality. This also means that "god", if you refer to it as some higher omniscient form of consciousness, cannot have such as absolute time simply doesn't exist - it's something we made up. Actually this all follows from the constancy of the speed of light.
But a true "God" wouldn't be outside of the time, it would BE the time, so of course God can understand it whether it has a pattern or not. Now I'm just arguing the semantics of God though, which is not only irrelevant to this thread but probably to everything else as well.
I'm glad that fell for my offer to change the topic a bit as I feel we're boring some people who else would be interested in this thread.
Your criticism is very justified. The idea of some invisible being in the skies overseeing everything seems very childish considering the very structure of our universe (i.e. spacetime).
It appears that our concept of god is just so childish and man-made. I'm very much convinced that, no matter how you call it, that the fundamental structure of the world we live in is so ineffably beautiful that no book could ever manage to describe it appropriately - that the only thing that is able to fully pay respect to it is the experience of life itself.
|
tokinman21
Stranger
Registered: 07/28/10
Posts: 2,021
Last seen: 1 month, 16 days
|
|
Quote:
Lord_McLovin said:
Quote:
tokinman21 said:
Quote:
Lord_McLovin said:
The point is there cannot be an absolute comprehension of time, only a comprehension of causality. This also means that "god", if you refer to it as some higher omniscient form of consciousness, cannot have such as absolute time simply doesn't exist - it's something we made up. Actually this all follows from the constancy of the speed of light.
But a true "God" wouldn't be outside of the time, it would BE the time, so of course God can understand it whether it has a pattern or not. Now I'm just arguing the semantics of God though, which is not only irrelevant to this thread but probably to everything else as well.
I'm glad that fell for my offer to change the topic a bit as I feel we're boring some people who else would be interested in this thread.
Your criticism is very justified. The idea of some invisible being in the skies overseeing everything seems very childish considering the very structure of our universe (i.e. spacetime).
It appears that our concept of god is just so childish and man-made. I'm very much convinced that, no matter how you call it, that the fundamental structure of the world we live in is so ineffably beautiful that no book could ever manage to describe it appropriately - that the only thing that is able to fully pay respect to it is the experience of life itself.
Well said, brother. 
| |
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
