I don't think the argument can be expressed much clearer and more obviously than that.
If it still isn't clear then so be it.
On Sunday, December 29, 2013 9:39:30 AM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
A lot of meat in your post. Thanks! I'll answer most of your questions....
Yes, observers observe they are in the same present moment by the
events. Exactly, but the important point is that is the simultaneity of
events, not of clock time readings. Observers can simultaneously shake
hands even if
their clocks have different clock times (their clocks are not
versus clock time simultaneity. Two completely different things!
That's the absolutely critical point to understanding my thesis.
ACTUAL simultaneity (2 observers shaking hands) IS self-evident. Do you
that? You can't...
The experiment that proves my thesis is the hand shaking. Absolute
proof of actual simultaneity.
That is how to operationalize P-time. By actual simultaneity. It CANNOT be
by clock time as proven above.
The P-time now of Caesar is long gone. Unfortunately for you, you can only
same NOW as Edgar, not Caesar! :-)
Yes, P-seconds should be calculable from Omega. Differences from the clock
of the universe can account for things like inflation, Hubble expansion etc.
However please note that the whole notion of 'the ~14.7 billion year age of
universe', of an age of the universe, that is the same for all observers
cosmology DOES accept the notion of a single common universal present
cosmology assumes that age of he universe is going to be the same anywhere
universe for every observer.
That's very important confirmation of the notion of a single common
present moment. Cosmology accepts my thesis of a common universal present
On Sunday, December 29, 2013 12:35:01 AM UTC-5, Pierz wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2013 2:19:57 PM UTC+11, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
The common universal present moment is defined and measured simply
observers observing they are in the same moment at the same time.
How do they observe that they are in the same moment except by the
of events in their perceived time-space environment?
It is self-evident
really? It is anything but self-evident that different moments in
are "the same moment". I don't even know what what means. Sure it's
'self-evident' that the now I experience is present everywhere. But that
self-evident truth was qualified by relativity, which was the actual
forward in our understanding of time.
and experimentally proved
again - really? You can't even tell me how to measure "P-time" so I
fail to see
how any experiment has or can prove such a thing. If this is physical,
scientific theory as opposed to a metaphysical speculation about "the
Now" a la Eckhart Tolle, then you *must* be able to provide some means
measuring your proposed physical quantity or entity. Again I ask: how
prove this sharing of a moment other than by blustering that it is
that they can be in the same present moment even if their clock
values are not simultaneous. And it's not just an event, as some
maintained, its the standard mode of existence of everyone
lives to share the same present moment with others.
Clocks? We don't need no stinkin clocks! Clocks don't measure
measure clock time.....
P-time doesn't fail.
The *concept* of P-time fails as far as physics goes, as far as I can
because you can't operationalize it. You can only make exasperated
no-one else "gets it" except you despite it's being so obvious.
It can't. It is simply impossible for anyone or anything to escape
present moment. That's the basic fact of our existence for goodness
The present moment is the locus, and only locus of reality. Without
present moment there could be no reality. The presence of reality
as the present moment....
Fine so far as it goes. The Now is ever-present and unchanging while
including clocks, move through it as it were. In some sense, all things
Now and nothing will ever occur anywhere except Now and we all share
the Now of Eckart Tolle's "The Power of Now". The problem is when you
insist that this is a concept relevant to physics. Let me ask: do I
"Now" with you as you were an hour ago? Do I share the same "now" as
the moment of his death? In the metaphysical sense, maybe. But not in
that is relevant to physics and measured time. *Which" moment are we
not a moment we can measure with a clock? If you just say "the current
moment, for goodness sake!" you are merely demonstrating that your
concept is a
Your last paragraph fails because it is all about measuring CLOCK
P-time. It's irrelevant to the discussion of P-time.
P-time is the radial dimension of our hyperspherical universe back
point of the big bang. The surface is our 3-dimensional universe
4-dimensional - there's the whole problem!
in the present moment which is the locus of reality and all that
the P-time radial dimension
Wow, so time P-time is single dimension orthogonal to the 3 dimensions
that proceeds at a constant rate? It sounds *just like* good old clock
in Newton's day! In fact just like our natural, naive intuition of time
an immense amount of deep thought and hard work on Einstein's part
intuition to be mistaken.
extends happening occurs within the present moment and the current
the universe in continually computed. This is experienced as
which is always the same no matter at what rate clock time is
The only way P-time can be measured that I know of is from Omega,
curvature of the universe, from which we can compute the radius =
dimension. Anyone know what that equation would be?
So a measurement requires units. If P-time can be calculated from the
of the universe" (itself problematic, since space-time is warped and
gravity and is not a simple sphere), then what units will result?
there any way to convert P-seconds to normal, good-ole clock seconds?
no use the P-time measurement in any other equation with other physical
quantities such as time, distance, mass etc, then one has to wonder
earth good it is.
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 8:33:23 PM UTC-5, Pierz wrote:
Everyone else has made excellent, well laid-out arguments
position Edgar, but I will throw in another perspective. You
two observers 'share the same common present moment'. However
define what that means exactly. If I imagine your scenario of
observers who aren't me then of course they seem to share the
moment, regardless of how far apart they are. To say they
the same moment" would be like saying that one exists and the
doesn't at some point in time, right? But this is really
question about what a "point in time" is. You seem to be
relying on an
intuitive sense of time that is not bound to anything
hidden point of my tongue-in-cheek 'U-time'). How need to
you mean by "sharing the same moment" and you need to show how
it is to
be measured. I submit that the only method of making such a
determination is by means of something that measures clock
example, a clock! And you already agree that clocks will show
observers don't precisely agree about the simultaneity of
In fact, to make the whole situation clearer, it is better not
observers or people as the objects said to share the same
because observers persist in time and this makes things less
Instead, you should ask the same question about a momentary
event like a
pulse of light from a diode. Do the diodes themselves share the
present moment"? Yes, whatever that means! Do the flashes occur
simultaneously? Well you know the answer depends on the
of reference. Substituting a mental event (the thought "I am here
for the light flash, we can see that two thinkers cannot have
thought at an objectively identical moment. All events can be
using clocks, which after all cold be anything that has a
There is nothing in space-time, including mental events, that
is not an
event that can be timed in this manner. What is confusing you
the persistence of the observer and the impossibility of
both observers don't exist at any point in time you can
*what* observer? The observer is constantly changing, and the
to see if they share the same moment is to time the changes in
using clock time. P-time is an ad hoc postulate to save your
of an all-embracing moment. It fails when you try to
Please, rather than reiterate your intuition, refute this point.
On Saturday, December 28, 2013 10:57:18 AM UTC+11, Edgar L.
I haven't made any progress getting the idea of a common
present moment across so here's another approach with a
To start consider two observers standing next to each
other. Do they
share the same common present moment? Yes, of course. Any
Now consider those two observers, one in New York, one in
Francisco. Do they share the same common present moment? In
words is the one in San Fran doing something (doesn't
at the exact same time the one in New is doing something?
course they do share the same present moment. Any
Now consider an observer on earth and an observer in some
galaxy. But with the condition that they share the exact
relativistic frame in the sense that there is zero relative
and the gravities of their planets are exactly the same so
clock time is passing at the exact same rate on both their
Now are these two observers sharing the exact same present
well? Note that we just extended the exact same relativistic
circumstances of the previous two examples so there can be
relativistic considerations. Do these two observers also
exact same present moment as well? Yes, of course they do.
do they share the exact same present moment but they also
exact same clock time t value. Any disagreement?
OK, if you agree then you have to take a partial step
accepting my thesis of a common universal present moment.
must agree that there is at least a common universal
across the universe for all observers in the same
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.