Welcome to the Philosophy Forums! If you are not a member, please join the forums now. It's completely free! If you are a member, please log in.
Search found 26 matches
June 7th, 2011, 6:58 pm
(quote not shown) thanks for your concern; i'm not really worried about proving the theory so much as i am getting someone to examine the data, and attempt the experiment themselves. just need to find someone who wants to know answers instead of believing their own opinions because you can't show th...
June 6th, 2011, 4:19 pm
Cronos988 wrote:But is not time only a measurement of movement? We define time by looking at the movement of atoms, defining time as the difference between state A and state B of the atom.
i accept the gist of what you're saying, but i suspect it's actually the inverse. movement is only a measurement of time. space, mass, etc are downstream effects, existing after Time has finished it's quantum-side duties
June 6th, 2011, 4:15 pm
(quote not shown) i like the general metaphor of what you're saying, but i personally work with a variation of that. not particles at all that you're replicating. a place in the pseudo-future of the the zeitgeist seems to be what my research points to. instead of directly connecting to someone else'...
June 1st, 2011, 5:53 pm
(quote not shown) sorry for the slow response Gen66; got hung-up by the inability to post until someone else does. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Cognitive_science_heptagram.svg/400px-Cognitive_science_heptagram.svg.png the reason i'm sitting on a philosophy board talking a...
June 1st, 2011, 5:23 pm
(quote not shown) for what it's worth, hearing about Time from me is going to expose you to some of the strangest notions that one could come across. we count Time and measure it on clocks. but that is a social convention more than anything else. we agree that time passes, and have set up a system w...
May 26th, 2011, 6:15 pm
(quote not shown) yes, that's definitely the question i'm asking. but i also deal in the wild end of the pool when it comes to what the multi-dimensionality of Time is like. the general reason i'm asking about this direction of ideas even, is because of one of the possible interpretations of Time is...
May 26th, 2011, 4:05 pm
Gen66 wrote:Not at all, don't get me wrong
cheers then. i am trying to admit that i'm at a point where i can't argue something as true. clumsy social misfit i may be, but i am here trying to hear other ideas so i can narrow down my own mistakes, so i do appreciate the criticism.
May 26th, 2011, 3:53 pm
thank you for the advice Gen66, but i'm not trying to impress someone. i don't know anyone here. and even if i did so and wanted to impress them, i probably wouldn't use that fact to impress them. being a theoretician doesn't really 'impress' people, even in the same field. i don't understand the ac...
May 25th, 2011, 5:40 pm
(quote not shown) if i might say, it's not metaphoric in the least. the problem as i see it, is that the leap to understand it is of necessity metaphoric. i'm a theoretical physicist, just trying to fill in details about how we react with what the future of laws of physics look like. "our reali...
May 24th, 2011, 3:31 am
(quote not shown) sure thing. for the moment, i'm going to narrow my scope to just focus on perception of the future. partly just for expedience, but primarily because you mention procedural memory which encompasses a majority of past experience. any more exacting focus is less likely to be affected...
May 22nd, 2011, 7:47 pm
(quote not shown) it's an interesting analogy you make. but i cannot really work with that idea as truth. society wasn't 'designed' specifically to fulfill the needs of emotional growth in individual citizens. it was designed (by Classical Greeks) as a method to fulfill their collective needs as whi...
May 22nd, 2011, 5:01 pm
(quote not shown) yes absolutely. there are two meanings and both apply to what i said. you are obviously correct about the fallibility of memory. and i might add that the same thing is also true for prediction, and it's equally fallible for the exact same reasons that memory is fallible. but let me...
May 21st, 2011, 4:15 am
(quote not shown) that's a great start. i agree with all that; basic cognitive science. i will deny almost none of that understanding then. but it does mean, i'm switching to theoretical physics (since it's what i do). you see, i'm happy enough with where memory is stored. but, there is an important...
May 21st, 2011, 1:43 am
(quote not shown) happily enough then. i'm keen to explain. first off, thought actually overlaps quantum space. which is not to deny any of the proof that science has shown us about the wetware version of the brain. i do not mean that it is multidimensional in any traditional sense. the key issue is...
- Search found 26 matches • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2