# Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

```Jason,

That's very simple P-time allows us to explain how there is a present
moment in which we experience our mutual existence, are able to converse
together, shake hands, and compare our (different) clock times.```
```
If there weren't such a common present moment distinct from our different
clock times we could do none of those things because we would be in
different moments of existence. We wouldn't even inhabit the same reality.

Obviously that's not a function of being in the same clock time, because it
happens when we are in different clock times as well....

Edgar

On Thursday, January 2, 2014 6:05:36 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> Jason,
>>
>> I said I don't know because SR doesn't know. What's wrong with that? It's
>> consistent with SR.
>>
>
> Nothing is wrong with that position, I just thought P-time might offer an
> answer to this problem which exists in SR.
>
>
>>
>> I don't know WHAT Sam is doing at any particular moment in the shared
>> present moment, but I know he exists and is doing something. What's wrong
>> with that? If I had a mathematical way to determine that I'd certainly let
>> you know but as far as I know there isn't any. We just have to accept the
>> fact that everything isn't mathematical. Consciousness and the present
>> moment are examples. Clocks don't measure P-time. There is no P-time clock
>> that reads P-time. We know we are in the same present moment P-time not but
>> having synchronized clocks but by shaking hands and comparing clocks, and
>> by just living our lives and communicating like we always did whether our
>> clocks are the same or not.
>>
>> There is no clock that displays P-time. However everything is logical,
>> and I've given the logical reasoning...
>>
>
> What does P-time predict or allow us to explain that special relativity
> does not or cannot?
>
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>> On Thursday, January 2, 2014 4:30:37 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Liz,
>>>>
>>>> We'll let Jason judge whether I answered him or not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> what was whatever relativity predicts, but relativity also has no answer
>>> without a defined reference frame).
>>>
>>> However according to P-time, Sam must be doing *something *at the exact
>>> moment Pam arrives at her destination. Is that something celebrating his
>>> fifth birthday or not?
>>>
>>> If there is some certain thing he is doing at that instant (which I
>>> think follows from P-time), your P-time theory ought to have some
>>> mathematical way of providing an answer that question, should it not? If it
>>> does not, then what is the advantage of P-time over special relativity?
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, January 2, 2014 4:14:02 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3 January 2014 10:00, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Liz,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I answered Jason directly. See that post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no preferred CLOCK time frame. There is a shared common
>>>>>> present moment they both share which is 'preferred' in that sense. Again
>>>>>> you are confusing clock time and Present moment time. See my response to
>>>>>> Jason for one more approach that might make it understandable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is preferred in the sense that it defines an inertial frame. From
>>>>> what you have said so far that frame is the Earth's rest frame (or let's
>>>>> say the rest frame of the CMB, which seems more physically plausible -
>>>>> they
>>>>> are fairly close from the point of view of relativistic travel). Saying
>>>>> that a frame of reference is special - e.g. that it computes reality -
>>>>> should have observable consequences, probably for dispersion in high
>>>>> energy
>>>>> cosmic rays. Have you worked out what those are, so they can be tested
>>>>> experimentally? So far your theory appears to be just words, and from the
>>>>> response you've had so far, not very convincing ones. It needs a
>>>>> mathematical underpinning, as I requested way back but haven't yet seen,
>>>>> before it can really be called a theory.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or if you prefer to stick with just words, please try to show some
>>>>> reason, any reason, for anyone to think that P-time actually exists and
>>>>> does some useful work in explaining reality. Just saying it's "obvious",
>>>>> and "no one understands you" isn't enough (well, not unless you're a
>>>>> teenager, at least.)
>>>>>
>>>>> See everyone's responses to your posts, but especially Jason's, for
>>>>> any number of approaches that might make this understandable.
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>
>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email