NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 12:19 pm
it depends on the process. In the case of an atomic clock one of them is the electron's transition frequency which we happen to measure in a specific electromagnetic region.
So, human beings put their relative perspective onto this, and take measurements of some frequency?
In the case of an atomic clock yes
But what is the actual 'process', itself, which you say is "time"?
We are doing this again?
Yes 'we' are. I once again ask you questions, and you once again show if you are able to or unable to answer them.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
We label time the observable phenomenon of things happening not all at once,
Once again you are immediately using the 'we' word as though it is true and correct. Unfortunately though it is not true and not correct at all. Are you capable of comprehending that 'we' are NOT doing what you say 'we' are here?
What you say here is obviously wrong, as 'we' do not do this at all.
The Truth is 'you' and maybe some others do that, but I certainly do not.
By the way, "things happening not all at once" is just described and labeled by the word 'change', by me. See, using this description fits in with and helps in explaining the big and whole true picture of things.
Are you able to fit your description with ALL things to form one crystal clear explanation and true picture of things? If so, then great. I hope you reveal it soon.
Also, the definition is usually labeled by a word, and not the other way around. But each to their own.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
on their pace and according to their natural pacekeeping "mechanisms" .
And what are things "natural pacekeeping "mechanisms" " exactly?
You did not or could not answer this last time I asked you the question.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
We also label time the measurements we do on those natural clocks.i.e An natural clock is the" motion" of the sun around the sky.
So, 'you' have two different definitions for the word 'time'. This helps in explaining why there is such a confusion in your community.
Also, does the sun actually have "motion" "around the sky"? Or, is that just one of those wrong and incorrect interpretations of what is observed by some people?
That interpretation appears to be like the one about how the sun revolves around the earth. Obviously, a totally wrong and incorrect interpretation, although it is one that was believed to be true and so was very strongly held onto as being true.
By the way, what is the actual "ticking" processes of the sun, which you are measuring here? What 'processes' in the sun are you actually measuring?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
A 'frequency' is a 'frequency' or are you saying that 'frequency' is 'time', itself?
-A frequency of an electron's transition is a measurable function in a process we understand as "atom".
You are making less sense the further we delve into this.
Since when has a 'process' been understood as "atom"?
Also, what do you measure the frequency of an electron's transition with exactly?
Again, what is the actual process, itself, which you understand to be 'time', and, what do you measure this function with?
See, ALL-OF-THIS can be explained in very simple and very easy terms. That is once you know how to look at and see what is actually true, right, and correct here, which obviously you are still a long way of learning.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
We can use it to see how gravity can affect this function(changes its frequency)..
So, you measure the frequency with some thing, which you have yet to say what that thing is, and then you use, probably that same thing, to measure the frequency when it is at different heights.
And where is time actually involved in this again?
Let us remove your third definition of 'time', the measuring definition, and stick to the first two;
1. the observable phenomenon of things happening not all at once, on their pace and according to their natural pacekeeping "mechanisms".
2. the ticking of a process.
1. Using 'time' as a label for this, will not work in with other things.
2. If you need to measure the "ticking" of this "process" (whatever that "process" actually is) with a clock, then obviously that process is not 'time' itself.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 12:19 pmIf it is our ticking, we are talking about the ticking of our atoms ,our molecules,our biological clocks etc.
'We' are not talking about anything. I asked you a question. 'You' are trying your hardest to answer it.
But where and what is the actual ticking 'process', itself, of atoms and molecules, which is what you call "time"?
its a hyperfine transition frequency in the optical or ultraviolet region of the electromagnetic spectrum of atoms
But it does not matter if it is hyperfine or hyperthick "transition frequency" nor does it matter where it is, nor does it matter of what it is.
How exactly do understand a "transition frequency" to be 'time', itself?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
Obviously the phrase "biological clock" is just some made up term to describe some thing, unless of course you can pinpoint where is and what this "biological clock" is exactly?
Try googling circadia , diurnal, ultrdian, infradian rhythms.
A typical response from a person who obviously does NOT know what they are talking about.
This is because what they are saying, when we get down to it, with and from the right questions, does not make sense, itself.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
And no...they are not "made up term". they are thousands of biological clocks in our body.
Are they?
And what are ALL of these "thousands" of clocks measuring exactly?
I also think you will find that ALL terms are made up terms.
Okay, thank you.
Obviously you are completely incapable of answering the question. But this does not surprise me at all. I KNEW you could not before. This is because of what 'time' actually IS.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
The heart pumps blood and this is a process, so is the "ticking" process of the human heart "time" also?
The heart's cells are controlled by an internal biological clock.
And where precisely is, and what exactly is, this "internal biological clock"?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
If you know your heart rate at rest then you can count the exact numbers of beats to measure a minute....cool fact!
But how do you know if your heart is exactly at rest for the whole minute? ... interesting question!
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
So you can time this biological clock in relation to our made up clocks.
But you said you can use your heart to measure the made up minute.
How does one time a "biological clock"?
You said you understand 'time' to be the "ticking" of a "process", which 'process' exactly is what I am trying to gather from you is 'time' exactly?
Also, of course it is possible to measure heart, or not a biological clock's, beats in relation to the human devised up and made clocks, but what are these actually in relation to exactly?
What exactly do human beings set the rate of their created contraptions called clocks, which are said to measure 'time', which you say you understand is the "ticking" of a "process"?
I just asked you ANOTHER question. That is all I did. This is obviously ANOTHER question you are incapable of answering.
The sun revolved around the earth was a consensus for decades also. But that obviously did and does not prove anything as well.
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 12:19 pmThis is how we found out natural clocks are not fixed but relative to the effects of gravity and motion.
What are "natural clocks"?
Atoms's frequencies, Radioactivity, pulsating Cepheid stars, planets circling their stars...if you have an internet connection you can find more about these things.
So more or less absolutely any thing that moves or changes is a natural clock, to you, correct?
If yes, then great.
But if no, then what is correct?
NickGaspar wrote: ↑January 13th, 2020, 1:59 pm
And, how does motion supposedly affect these"natural clocks"?
I am sure that online you can find something on this topic .
Considering you are, once again, completely incapable of answering this also yourself. I found something. I also found where and why this is false, wrong, and incorrect.
So, thank you for your help here. You have revealed a lot, for me.