The Philosophy Discussion Forum

.



All things exist; ALL possibilities, exist at the same time.



We are approaching infinity when we try to understand another dimension, which is time.



We cannot conceive it.





...I meant to say that before.




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:All things exist; ALL possibilities, exist at the same time.
We are approaching infinity when we try to understand another dimension, which is time.
We cannot conceive it.

...I meant to say that before.

Understanding time is a piece of cake: something happens, for example, the Earth completes a rotation about its axis, and while it is doing so, lots of other things happen: pendulums swing, atoms vibrate and so on. You divide the big events by little ones, or multiply the little ones to make big ones. Insisting that time is something inconceivable just highlights a limited power of conceptualizing, or in some cases, a poor grasp of ontology.

.


.............................. If you are philosophically thirsty.




In addition to the above link - This is pretty philosophical, in a scientific way, so I don't think this would appeal to you:



Special Relativity





...............................


...and:



The Philosophy of Space & Time










...*ProTip: you are actually on a philosophy site. It's OK to think here. It's alright to listen to other viewpoints.

.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:If you are philosophically thirsty.

Poor Bill, is there anything in that article that you believe contradicts how I have described time?

Bill Wiltrack wrote:In addition to the above link - This is pretty philosophical, in a scientific way, so I don't think this would appeal to you:

I suspect this is another example of you ignoring what people say and inventing personae that you have the cerebral capacity to navigate. There is nothing I have ever posted that gives substance to the intellectual phantasm you are blindly striking out at. Of course, you may think otherwise, and if you have any evidence, I shall be happy to stand corrected.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Special Relativity[/size]

As it happens, this is linked to the same wiki page as above, easily done. I took the liberty of assuming that you meant to link to the Wikipedia page on Special Relativity; if so and, having read that, I wonder what point you are trying to make. Do you think I have not heard of Special Relativity?

Bill Wiltrack wrote:...and:The Philosophy of Space & Time

Same thing really, what point are you making, other than that there's a lot of stuff on Wikipedia?

Bill Wiltrack wrote:*ProTip: you are actually on a philosophy site. It's OK to think here. It's alright to listen to other viewpoints.[/size]

I do. I have said several times that I will entertain any hypothesis that is consistent with the empirical data. Anything that is not demonstrably false could be true, but there is no point giving much time to self indulgent waffle that doesn't actually say anything.

.





............................................





That's fine. I hear & accept your position. I'm not here to change you or anyone else on this earth.






.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:That's fine. I hear & accept your position. I'm not here to change you or anyone else on this earth.

If you believe your contributions will meet complete indifference, you are wasting your time posting anything. You compound that fatuity every time you respond to challenges, Poor Bill. No doubt you find that acceptable.

.




This may sound selfish but I really enjoy crafting threads and related posts.


As you can see, for me it's a multimedia artform that I joyfully adhere my name to.


So, just posting is the thing in itself. Sort-of Zen like .






.......................................








Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express this.







.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:This may sound selfish but I really enjoy crafting threads and related posts.
As you can see, for me it's a multimedia artform that I joyfully adhere my name to.
So, just posting is the thing in itself. Sort-of Zen like .
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express this.

A recent example of this 'multimedia artform' is the thread 'What was your motivation for having children?' viewtopic.php?f=9&t=13414 The artwork consisted of asking a question, ignoring the answers and berating the respondents for not thinking about the answers you weren't qualified to comment on, because you had ignored them.
In this thread, you have made vacuous claims that you offer no empirical or logical support for, and posted links to wiki pages that contradict those claims. Your 'artform' achieves self contradiction, despite being meaningless.
You are not the only person to contribute gibberish, but you have the distinction of being the only person so bold to call it art.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express this, Poor Bill.

uwot wrote:...
In this thread, you have made vacuous claims that you offer no empirical or logical support for, and posted links to wiki pages that contradict those claims. Your 'artform' achieves self contradiction, despite being meaningless. ...

.



I cannot make someone understand.


If you were asleep and someone told you that there is another reality, a one where you are more alive than in the dream state you are in, an individual has no ability, no reference point to use, so that individual cannot understand.


This isn't wrong or bad. It just is.


I cannot make someone grasp the concept of time being another dimension. It just won't happen. No matter how many links I use.





....................................................................







.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:I cannot make someone understand.

You do seem to struggle, Poor Bill.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:If you were asleep and someone told you that there is another reality, a one where you are more alive than in the dream state you are in, an individual has no ability, no reference point to use, so that individual cannot understand.
This isn't wrong or bad. It just is.

Poor Bill, you are asleep; there is another reality. When you wake up you will realise what being alive is, and that in your current state you have no ability, no reference point and you understand nothing.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:I cannot make someone grasp the concept of time being another dimension. It just won't happen. No matter how many links I use.[/size]

Wake up, Poor Bill.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:I cannot make someone grasp the concept of time being another dimension. It just won't happen. No matter how many links I use.[/size]

I meant to ask, Poor Bill: what do you mean by 'dimension'? What wisdom have you gleaned from all the links that you expect us to similarly discover?

.






........................................


It is widely understood that time is the next dimension; the fourth dimension.



Wisdom cannot be linked to. It doesn't matter how many links I share with you - you are limited as far as your capacity for understanding. Each of us are. That is what is known as living in a multidimensional continuum.


Welcome aboard !




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:It is widely understood that time is the next dimension; the fourth dimension.

What is widely understood, at least amongst people who know what they are talking about, is that in order to locate an event you need four co-ordinates. To describe where something is, you need an agreed starting point. From that you can locate any other point in space by describing its distance 1: left or right, 2: back or forward, 3: up or down. Those three variables correspond to 'spatial dimensions'. To locate an event, you need also to specify when it happens, that too is measured from an agreed point/date. That is what the forth dimension means.
What is also well understood, is that people who learn their science from TV and Hollywood dramas sometimes believe that narrative devices refer to real objects.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Wisdom cannot be linked to. It doesn't matter how many links I share with you - you are limited as far as your capacity for understanding. Each of us are.

Indeed, but you haven't demonstrated any critical appreciation of the links you share to suggest that my understanding is more limited than yours.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:That is what is known as living in a multidimensional continuum.

I am confident that no it isn't, but if you can share a link that corroborates your view, I will be happy to stand corrected.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Welcome aboard !

You're on your own, Poor Bill.

.


Here is a link for ya - Spacetime




..............................................



...you just relax. I got it from here.


.