Hi Andre, i agree on your abstraction. Allow me to respond to some conciderations.
I will take a leap to show that time is conceptual. suppose we arrive at the exact formulation of the time event. We are there , finally, we see the mechanism, it is there , the equasion--finally, now next question derived from this eureka moment,.....What is the duration of time.? and here we go again. we simply don't know , because we cannot know , it will give birth to the next question if we do,....DQ? pattern of value? yep, the dynamical caracter of everything of the Giant, every last bit of it. Adrie 2010/9/18 Andre Broersen <[email protected]> > > > Craig: > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 2:25 PM,<[email protected]> wrote: > > > [Steve] >> >> >> It would seem that either at some point something came from nothing >>> or >>> >> that something was always around. Which do you think it is? >>> >> > >> > Time is a sequence of changes& time began with the first change. >> > It is a moot point whether the first change was from nothing to >> something or >> > from something to something else. ?Either way there was a beginning& >> > it was a finite time ago. >> > I think that is a good way to dissolve the issue. > > Andre: > The Buddha (wisely) was silent when asked about 'beginnings'. I imagine > acres of forests have been > chopped to fill books with speculations. We simply do not know. > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > -- parser Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
