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

Liz, Of course there is no reason that can't meet up to compare clocks. No one said there was. The point is that they can meet up to compare clocks and they always do it in the shared present moment. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:29:29 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: On 6 January 2014 10:16,

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

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. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 7:08:02 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: On 6

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

Jason, I'll stick with my definitions, which are quite clear and obvious. The present moment is the most basic experience (and therefore the most basic verifiable and repeatable empirical observation) of our existence. 99.999% of all humans on earth understand this clearly and unambiguously,

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

Brent, No it's not an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates because the spacetime t coordinates are different. Since the spacetime t coordinates are different WHEN are they together? Certainly not in a simultaneous clock time as proved by their

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

On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:50 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, I'll stick with my definitions, which are quite clear and obvious. Okay then please define for us: Event Present Simultaneous Clock time P-time Proper time Coordinate time Space time If we don't have common

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

On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:55 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Brent, No it's not an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates because the spacetime t coordinates are different. Their proper times are different, but not their coordinate times.

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

Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. What's the difference? Edgar On Monday, January 6, 2014 9:47:36 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:55 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net javascript:

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

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. Hmmm... A Casio? Does your theory feature some primitive God clock for present time?

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

On 1/6/2014 7:03 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. What's the difference? The difference is that you imagine that Present time is a unique global coordinate time (just

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

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. Any clock in my rest frame measures my coordinate time. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. What's the difference? In

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

On 7 January 2014 01:55, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Brent, No it's not an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates because the spacetime t coordinates are different. Since the spacetime t coordinates are different WHEN are they together?

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

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,

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

On 7 January 2014 01:55, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Brent, No it's not an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates because the spacetime t coordinates are different. They are only very slightly different. I think you're talking about the

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

Edgar, The structure of Minkowski spacetime is explained here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space Once one decides on a coordinate system, every point can be assigned a unique x,y,z,t position. Hence the meeting of two observers to compare clocks can be assigned a unique x,y,z,t

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

On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? Before I read Jason answer, let me tell you in three words: the

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

On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:42, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of

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

On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:20, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:36, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. However, a theory

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

On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:39, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:16, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own

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

Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same present place when their clocks don't agree. Now a question for you. What is this present place they are in? Edgar On Saturday, January 4, 2014 10:01:02 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: On 1/4/2014 5:44 PM, Jason

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

Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:07:10 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my

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

Bruno, This is wrong on all points. I've already shown why SR requires a present moment and falsifies block time. Because the fact that everything continually travels through spacetime at the speed of light requires everything to be at one and only one point in time and that time is the

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

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 10:34 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 17:10, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014,

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

Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image depends upon. As I said before, Lighten up guys, these

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

Edgar, FWIW, from my lurker's perspective, the people on this list are giving you what you need - criticism. They are actively engaging you on your theory, which is so much better than being ignored. Better still, the quality of the criticism on this list is likely to be of the same caliber as

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

Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first person is associated as a sort of hero in

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

On 05 Jan 2014, at 16:18, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image

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

On 1/5/2014 4:33 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same present place when their clocks don't agree. Yes. So why don't you recognize that present place is just a label, exactly like a latitude and longitude - and then that

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

On 1/5/2014 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment Yes, it's not a clock time. I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first

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

Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment. There is simply no way around that Edgar

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

On 6 January 2014 09:00, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared

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

Liz, What is explained quite well by relativity is the differing clock times. The fact they differ in the same present moment is not even recognized nor explained by relativity It's a basic but totally unexplained assumption Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:00:57 PM UTC-5, Liz R

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

On 6 January 2014 10:16, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Liz, What is explained quite well by relativity is the differing clock times. The fact they differ in the same present moment is not even recognized nor explained by relativity It's a basic but totally unexplained

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

Liz, Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock times which are different. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014

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

On 6 January 2014 12:45, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Liz, Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock

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

Edgar, It might help if we all used consistent language for present, event, simultaneous, etc. I recommend we use the definitions which Einstein works out (starting on page 2 of his paper): http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf It would avoid a lot of confusion I think,

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

On 1/5/2014 12:00 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a label. It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment.

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

On 03 Jan 2014, at 23:06, LizR wrote: On 4 January 2014 04:31, Gabriel Bodeen gabebod...@gmail.com wrote: (I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) The P-time notion, if it means anything at all timelike, says that there exists some uniquely correct ordering of events across space.

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

It's hard to stop arguing with an irrational person, isn't it? I've already offered Edgar \$100 to tell me any experiment that could be carried out to falsify or validate his theory (that two separated events occur in only one absolute order), but he immediately stopped talking to me. An

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

Jason, Apparently we are not talking about the same scenario here somehow. Only acceleration/gravitation effects produce permanent clock time differences that both observers agree to when they meet up again. The same amount of acceleration, no matter where or when (or an equivalent

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

Jason, No, in your example when James (why do you keep confusing things by changing the names?) whizzes by us at 80%c that is not a 'meeting'. A meeting is when there is NO relative motion. In your example for that to happen James would have to experience a massive decelleration which would

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

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, Apparently we are not talking about the same scenario here somehow. Only acceleration/gravitation effects produce permanent clock time differences that both observers agree to when they meet up again. This

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

Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own experience. All these events always occur in their Present moment. The rate at which these events occur is

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

Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. Reality subsumes physics, if you want to define physics as just what is mathematically describable. Not all of reality is

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

On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. Reality subsumes physics, if you want to define physics as just what

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

Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? It clearly is not a clock time simultaneity since Pam and Sam shake hands and compare watches in the same present moment

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

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality.

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

2014/1/4 Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? It clearly is not a clock time simultaneity since Pam and Sam shake hands

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

On 5 January 2014 07:32, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? My theory is that there isn't one. Mind you, it isn't

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

On 5 January 2014 04:36, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Pierz, It may not be physics by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. However, a theory does have to be consistent with

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

Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light! -- 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

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

On 5 January 2014 04:16, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own experience. All these events always occur

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

CAT theory by Liz R! That has a ring to it. I can feel a book coming on, a follow up to It's all done by invisible pink unicorns. -- 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

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

Edgar, If I explain something according to my understanding, and you reply that I am wrong, without explaining how or why, then we are doomed to go in circles without making any progress. I am left with no way to further my understanding, and you, believing me to be wrong, also will not advance

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

I'm afraid we're reached the point where I throw my hands up and resort to parody. Not that Edgar doesn't deserve it for his deeply patronising tone, often verging on downright insults... Of course he could easily recover the situation at any moment simply by making a post that actually explains

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

Jason, Assume block time for a moment. You still haven't answered my question about how your theory of the present moment works. What determines which moment of Caesar's life he thinks is the present moment? What determines which moment of your life you experience as the present moment?

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

Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is an event as if that explained something. Of course it's an event. Everything that happens in the entire universe is an event. But what is the nature of that event from your perspective?

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

On 5 January 2014 12:33, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, Assume block time for a moment. You still haven't answered my question about how your theory of the present moment works. There is no present moment in block time. Block time explains how someone *feels* that there is a

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

Jason, PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? With block time all quantum events from big bang to end of the universe have already occurred, haven't they? If so then what happened to quantum randomness?

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

On 5 January 2014 13:48, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? With block time all quantum events from big bang to end of the universe have already

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

On Jan 4, 2014, at 5:36 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is an event as if that explained something. I use that word in the usual relatavistic (and traditional) sense. As

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

On Jan 4, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? See wheeler-dewitt equation or Feynman diagrams. With block time all quantum events

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

On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I think the above one could be misleading. I know what you mean (it's

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

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:37 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I

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

On 1/4/2014 5:44 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 5:36 PM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net mailto:edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is an event as if that explained something. I use

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

On 5 January 2014 15:46, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Edgar's assertion that we wouldn't feel like we are moving through time unless time really moves, contradicts computationalism, which his theory supposedly assumes. I believe about 400 years ago similar arguments were being

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

On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a single block time structure that encompasses all events when clock times progress faster or slower for different observers? This corresponds to different objects having different

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

On 5 January 2014 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a single block time structure that encompasses all events when clock times progress faster or slower for different

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

On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar,

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

On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all

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

On 5 January 2014 16:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Not really as a Feynman diagram. Those are always drawn in momentum space (because energy/momentum is what's conserved) and are assumed to occupy only a negligible space. I always assumed they were similar to worldlines for

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

Edgar, I asked three simple true/false questions about what your theory says. You didn't even fucking anwer false, because the concept isn't quite right, but you'd do better by asking XYZ. If you simply won't answer basic questions about whether your theory entails something, then you

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

On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the world and the fact that you put different t-labels on events at the same (x y z) doesn't

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

And once you've answered Gabe's questions, you can show us the maths!!! I'm not saying I will understand it myself, but there are people around here who will. I've already asked this (god knows how many times) from Mr Of course I respect women scientists who yet again seems to be refusing to

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

On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the world and the fact that you

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

On 5 January 2014 17:10, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net meeke...@verizon.net

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

On 1/4/2014 7:10 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:03, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a single block time structure that

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

On 1/4/2014 7:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: What is moving if it's

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

On 1/4/2014 7:53 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:16, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: Not really as a Feynman diagram. Those are always drawn in momentum space (because energy/momentum is what's conserved) and are assumed to occupy only a

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

On 1/4/2014 7:56 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a

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

On 5 January 2014 20:21, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/4/2014 7:56 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a

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

On 5 January 2014 20:19, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: I don't think he needs an excuse. I've given up on him. Yes, well, thereby showing more wisdom than most of us ... but in the end I hope I too will let go of the tar baby and get back to sensible discussions. -- You received

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

On 03 Jan 2014, at 04:22, Richard Ruquist wrote: Liz, Edgar has a problem with your gender as is well known on other lists. Edgar did not answer any of my questions too. I guess he has enough work answering Jason. I don't know what he means by computational space, nor if anything related

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

Liz, The common present moment is not something I need. It's the way nature works... Edgar On Thursday, January 2, 2014 9:34:46 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: Another thing I've been intending to ask Edgar, but it seems i can't now, because he's refusing to reply to any of my posts... Why does

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

Liz, This is of course complete nonsense I have immense respect for many female scientists, thinkers and artists. Emmy Noether is one who comes to mind. Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 1:24:29 AM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: On 3 January 2014 16:22, Richard Ruquist yan...@gmail.com

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

Lliz, Brent and Jason, Actually Liz is correct here, by GR it is the acceleration. That is the physical cause of the clock time differences of the twins. It is true the effects can also be analyzed just by spacetime paths as others have suggested, but it is actually the acceleration (or

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

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Lliz, Brent and Jason, Actually Liz is correct here, by GR it is the acceleration. That is the physical cause of the clock time differences of the twins. In my experiment, lets say the acceleration lats for a total of 4

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

Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the principle of equivalence) it could be standing 'still' in a strong gravitational field. Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:06:08 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote:

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

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the principle of equivalence) it could be standing 'still' in a strong gravitational

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

(I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) The P-time notion, if it means anything at all timelike, says that there exists some uniquely correct ordering of events across space. Consider these events: Pam's 3rd birthday party and Sam's 4th birthday party The P-time notion says that either (A)

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

Jason, Come on Jason. Of course not. You have to have EQUAL amounts of acceleration to produce the same effect. But doesn't matter where in space it is. Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:24:26 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen

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

On 03 Jan 2014, at 15:14, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, This is of course complete nonsense I have immense respect for many female scientists, thinkers and artists. Emmy Noether is one who comes to mind. Gauss said the same on Noether, and then add: --but that one is probably not

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

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, Come on Jason. Of course not. You have to have EQUAL amounts of acceleration to produce the same effect. But doesn't matter where in space it is. There are equal amounts of acceleration in both cases: 4 minutes

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

Gabriel, See my long most recent response to Jason for an analysis of how this works and why this contradiction doesn't falsify Present moment P-time. Best, Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:31:59 AM UTC-5, Gabriel Bodeen wrote: (I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) The P-time

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

Hi Edgar, That response does not at all address the contradiction I asked out. However, if you'd like to make your meaning crystal clear, you could give direct answers to the following logical questions. A direct (non-evasive) answer includes, at a minimum, picking one of true or false for

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

On 1/3/2014 7:24 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net mailto:edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the

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

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:11 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 1/3/2014 7:24 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter

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

On 1/3/2014 8:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Thanks for your several posts and charts. You really made me think and I like that! I'm combining my responses to your multiple recent posts here. First though there are two ways to analyze it, GR acceleration, as opposed to SR world lines,

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

But it does matter how long you coast between accelerating away from Earth and the braking maneuver in which you accelerate back toward Earth. If you don't coast at all there is only a small effect. If you wait a long time, 10yrs, there is a big effect - which is easily seen in terms of the

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

On 4 January 2014 03:06, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Liz, The common present moment is not something I need. It's the way nature works... We don't know how nature works, we only have theories. You have a theory about how nature works. Why does your theory need a common present

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

On 4 January 2014 03:14, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: Liz, This is of course complete nonsense I have immense respect for many female scientists, thinkers and artists. Emmy Noether is one who comes to mind. Yes she's one of my heroes, along with Lisa Randall and Alice in