On 7 January 2014 01:46, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:

> Liz,
>
> Yes, of course it is "quite hard to understand" what NOT meeting in the
> same present moment would be like. That's because it's impossible and
> self-contradictory. That is why they must meet in the same present moment.
>
> Well, it's your idea, so I expect you to have *some* visualisation of it.
Everyone else is happy to just assign the meeting a position in space-time,
and not tack on extra stuff about some as yet ill-defined "present moment".
If you aren't capable of explaining what the sigificance of the present
moment is - for example, what you think the universe would look like if it
didn't exist - then I can't see that it has any value as a concept.

There are only two ways I can see to show that your idea of present time
has some use.

1. Show us the maths. It might make more sense if we can see how to
transform the present moment into a space-time t coordinate, for example,
or just to see how the idea makes sense logically from various axioms.

2. Describe an experiment that would, even if only in theory, let someone
distinguish some consequence of your theory from SR.

-- 
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 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to