Thread for Kenny and Fairy to hijack for their foreplay

[Age]

I know it's correct. How it demonstrates in any way that the future of infinity is all present and correct, isn't even wrong to the point of being on the cusp of hysterically amusing.

Oh I see.

Do you think it at least supports the notion that there's not an objective "now"?

Of course it does. Absolute reality is meaningless, even for each dimensionless point of existence. I know this with absolute certainty.

So, 'absolute reality's is, personally, meaningless to 'this one', therefore 'absolute reality' an 'objective Truth', which applies to absolutely every one. As absolutely every one could agree to, correct?

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Oh I see.

Do you think it at least supports the notion that there's not an objective "now"?

Of course it does. Absolute reality is meaningless, even for each dimensionless point of existence. I know this with absolute certainty.

Don't you think that already implies that future moments are as real as the present?

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

[Age]

Oh I see.

Do you think it at least supports the notion that there's not an objective "now"?

Why are you asking that old fool? Just watch the video.

Because this is a discussion forum and I think I actually have a pretty good argument for why we can go from relativity of simultaneity to no objective now to all moments exist at once.

Are you willing and able to describe to the readers, here, the very and exact difference between some so-called 'objective now' from what you call 'all moments exist at one'?

If no, then why not?

It is like these posters sometimes did not even think about the words that they express and write, here

[Flannel Jesus]

Of course it does. Absolute reality is meaningless, even for each dimensionless point of existence. I know this with absolute certainty.

Don't you think that already implies that future moments are as real as the present?

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Don't you think that already implies that future moments are as real as the present?

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable? Any more reasonable than God or free will or absolute morality?

[Flannel Jesus]

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable?

That's the consequence of relativity. If you accept that two reference frames have as much of a claim on reality as each other, then my future is necessarily the "now" in some other reference frame.

I can show it with Lorentz transforms and a real example if you want.

[Age]

Don't you think that already implies that future moments are as real as the present?

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

I'm in a frame of reference right now.

When are you not?

I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

But there is no actual 'distance away', in the way that you are portraying, here.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now,

'When' is 'right now', exactly?

And, what is 'seen', subjectively, by one is never what is actually, and objectively, True, Right, Accurate, nor Correct, in Life, obviously

but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

Are you 'absolutely sure'? Or, is this just what you 'subjectively and personally presume'?

So since there's no objective now

Why do you, personally, believe this subjective view of yours, here, to be absolutely and objectively true and correct?

and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

Your own personal and subjective conclusion, here, clearly does not logically, soundly, nor validly follow from your own personal subjective premises, above.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable?

That's the consequence of relativity. If you accept that two reference frames have as much of a claim on reality as each other, then my future is necessarily the "now" in some other reference frame.

I can show it with Lorentz transforms and a real example if you want.

No. You can't show it in reality. It's meaningless. It's just a Dunning Kruger Jungian belief that only the majority of high Mensa can have. I'm wee-wee end of the pool and therefore its intellectually impossible for me to believe it. I'm too dumb to have that delusion. That pareidolia.

[Age]

How could I? By what coherent warranted justification? It's as imparsimoniously at least as bad as introducing God in to the mix.

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable? Any more reasonable than God or free will or absolute morality?

Are you even aware that it is your own very specific and individual personal and subjective views and definitions of God, free will, and absolute morality that does not exist?

What those words are actually relating to do actually and irrefutably exist.

Again, if absolutely any one would like to discuss 'this', or absolutely anything else, here, in a Truly open and honest way, then let 'just' begin.

[Age]

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable?

That's the consequence of relativity. If you accept that two reference frames have as much of a claim on reality as each other, then my future is necessarily the "now" in some other reference frame.

I can show it with Lorentz transforms and a real example if you want.

Having 'a claim' on, or about, 'reality' never ever means that 'that one's' 'claim on reality' is True and Right, nor even necessarily close to being what is actually irrefutably True and Right, obviously.

[Flannel Jesus]

'Now' is an illusion. Past, present and future coexist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsw99SSwKc

For the religious nuts on here this is not a 'subjective opinion'. GPS has to be constantly adjusted to compensate for relativity.

My explanation was pretty close to what the video is saying, I think. Anyway, relativity isn't for everyone.

I'm on board though.

[Age]

I'm in a frame of reference right now. I see two events as simultaneous - one happening here where I am, and another happening some distance away, event B.

There's some other reference frame that also sees that event B as happening right now, but because this reference frame is moving rapidly compared to my reference frame, it also sees an event happening to me in my future as happening right now.

So since there's no objective now and both reference frames are as valid as each other, that means it's as reasonable to say "my right now is now" as it is to say "my future is now".

How can anything that has yet to happen to you now, be seen now, anywhere. How is that nonsense - forward time travel - reasonable?

That's the consequence of relativity. If you accept that two reference frames have as much of a claim on reality as each other, then my future is necessarily the "now" in some other reference frame.

I can show it with Lorentz transforms and a real example if you want.

Why can you only show that your future is necessarily the so-called "now", within double quote marks, in some other reference frame, only if 'the other' first accepts that two reference frames have a much of a claim on 'reality' as each other?

[Age]

'Now' is an illusion. Past, present and future coexist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsw99SSwKc

For the religious nuts on here this is not a 'subjective opinion'. GPS has to be constantly adjusted to compensate for relativity.

My explanation was pretty close to what the video is saying,

Yes, I agree.

you also contradict "yourself" when "trying to' explain the 'same thing', which the others also do not yet fully understand and know.

Once you people do fully, or even just better, understand and know the 'very things', which you are all just 'trying to' explain, here, then you too will also see, exactly, the confusion and misunderstandings that you all previously had, and thus also see and understand why you people all just kept on contradicting "yourselves".

I think. Anyway, relativity isn't for everyone.

'This one' speaks and writes 'like this' because it 'wants you' to, also, believe that it actually understands 'relativity', better than others, here, do.

Just like it believes 'this' "itself".

Yet It has obviously not yet learned the 'wrongness' in so-called 'relativity'.

I'm on board though.

you would be, as 'you' are only a 'follower' and 'believer' and not a 'seeker' and 'finder'.

you, like all the other "followers and believers", do not question and ponder, instead you just agree, and wander, meaninglessly.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

'Now' is an illusion. Past, present and future coexist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsw99SSwKc

For the religious nuts on here this is not a 'subjective opinion'. GPS has to be constantly adjusted to compensate for relativity.

My explanation was pretty close to what the video is saying, I think. Anyway, relativity isn't for everyone.

I'm on board though.

I'm as fine as I can be with relativity, there are no dots to follow anywhere in it to the next minute. To the next key stroke after this. Concurrently. Nobody can see my next minute before I do.

[Flannel Jesus]

'Now' is an illusion. Past, present and future coexist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsw99SSwKc

For the religious nuts on here this is not a 'subjective opinion'. GPS has to be constantly adjusted to compensate for relativity.

My explanation was pretty close to what the video is saying, I think. Anyway, relativity isn't for everyone.

I'm on board though.

I'm as fine as I can be with relativity, there are no dots to follow anywhere in it to the next minute. To the next key stroke after this. Concurrently. Nobody can see my next minute before I do.

I did offer to go through a specific example. It might take some time and be a bit tedious, but it would be a very visual example that anybody can follow.