I think you need a thread as well to see if you can back any of your claims up, because you're blatantly lying. I'll see if I can get a moderator to see through your bullshit. You have to back your contradictory claims with evidence, not calling something out on bullshit because you don't like the poster.
BlackHoley I could not care less about the poster, to me the BS you post is the problem. I challenge you to a formal debate on the matter of the existence of time in Relativity. You have stated flatly that time does not exist in GR(before you started wobbling, that is), so the question will be... "Is time included in the Theory of Relativity, as put forward by one A. Einstein?" ...and I intend to pound you flat(just a heads up). I await your response. Grumpy:mufc:
I take your challenge ,... ....so start it in the appropriate forum which Kitt subscribed in the other thread. Good for you, hope you can hold to your convictions! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Good luck with that: see the thread he addressed to me for a sample of how it might go. A quick bit of advice: keep him focused. Don't let him dodge his own claim by changing the subject.
Actually, I am more worried about that coming from his side. I know for a fact that dozens of scientific mainstream papers will put him place... You have already had a good dose of ''keep your tongue quiet when you know nothing.''
Moderator note: Enough's enough. Undefined, you've been warned about this kind of conduct before and it has demonstrably served to aggravate the situation. Knock it off. Blackholey, same goes for you.
Sorry what? I think you need to get clear, who is trying to aggravate things. I was attacked with baseless claims against my assertions concerning time. I understand if you are not qualified to understand the issue, but don't ignore the actual facts of what is happening here. I have been absolutely fine. I have commented to every post as detailed as I can. I haven't created this post, to start ''arguments.'' So get off your high horse please. Get a better understanding of what is happening here.
Wrong. What you really mean is that the philosophical hypotheisis that time is not real has been discussed. The evidence of reality though, our experiences, the 13.8 billion years we have progressed since the BB, evolution etc, have shown the hypothesis to be completely lacking in any sense of logic and sensibility. It has been shown that time does exist. Now I did offer a challenge to undefined, which has been ignored and plastered over with repetitious crap. I offer you the same challenge. Please show me a realm where time doesn't exist, or alternatively show me a realm where space does not exist.....show me a realm where space/time does not exist. But just as you have ignored the references I have supplied, and just as you have derided scientists of great esteem and reputability, I predict a similar reaction to my challenge.
Dang!!! I was so wrapped up in my first post composition and I came back just now to post a proposal thread. I was going to restrict all cites to the 1920 version of Relativity by A. Einstein(the question "Does time exist in Relativity as published by A. Einstein?" pretty well makes other cites moot, and we've had enough quote-mining and crank opinions). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! "I am very disappointed!" Probably better for my blood pressure this way.:geek: GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I guess that means no formal debate. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 'sigh' GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Stand in line old fella! I have a challenge to be undertaken that predates your debate. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please show me a realm where time doesn't exist, or alternatively show me a realm where space does not exist.....show me a realm where space/time does not exist.
AlexG Isn't that the place where the crocodiles ate all the clocks? GrumpyPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Mod Hat — Splinter note Mod Hat — Splinter note Fifteen posts from this thread have been moved to a splinter thread; those wishing to continue that discussion are welcome to do so in that thread. Thank you.
I'm absolutely sick of all the lengthy sanctimonious unsupported, and misinterpreted unreviewed crap that people expect to pass as science. Those that support this stuff, I just have one question to be answered.... No convoluted bullshit, no extended rants, just answer the question. Should not take anymore than one or two sentences...If you have an answer!
Since the troll has again taken it upon himself to repeat absurd beliefs and philosophical notions, the onus is upon him to first prove that 'time' and 'space-time' constructs are real and 'exist in themselves and not just as analytical maths/geometry construct tool/convenience derived abstracted from real things/events. So, will the troll please stop making 'cheap shot' posts to BlackHoley who cannot reply or defend while he is on suspension? And when Blackholey returns, it might be a good thing if you the troll could acquaint yourself with the posts already made quoting mainstream Einstein, Penrose and Sean Carroll (even Grumpy's own link!) where 'time' and 'space-time' are clearly explained as being unreal and abstractions from real things and events which require said real things/events (processing energy-space features) in order to make any sense out of 'time' and 'space-time' descriptions, coordinates in equally abstract and unreal math/geometry analytical constructs. Which makes YOUR claims that 'time exists' the claim for YOU to support by anything other than your 'beliefs' and philosophical notions. BlackHoley et al have no further need to do anything, because your challenge is made moot by mainstream already. And no-one has claimed that REAL OBSERVABLE of 'space' OR REAL OBSERVABLE of 'energy' OR REAL OBSERVABLE of 'processing energy-space features' (ie, Motion/change as per Maxila's definitions already posted) are anything but real. You are the ones connecting real space with unreal 'time' in a maths/geometry abstraction construct for analytical purposes. The space and the motion is real, the 'time' is a derived abstraction from the events/things in real space that are dynamical motions which make sense of the unreal 'time' and 'space-time' descriptions/coordinates etc. As Einstein et al have explained in mainstream literature which you still haven't addressed directly. So get to it and actually read what has already proven you wrong. That way you would realize your errors and so have the sense to refrain from again coming across so 'trolly' and 'in denial' etc etc as usual because you don't acknowledge or address directly the posted mainstream info that has already proven your stance as unreal and philosophical only, not meaningfully physically in that 'time' and 'space-time' constructs do NOT 'exist' in themselves as such, but only by abstraction from real things (space and motion etc) which DO exist in themselves in real physically observable terms. Other than that, admin advises not to feed the troll, so....
I'm really sorry undefined, that you could just not answer the question I first posed yesterday. My opinion on the reality of time, space, space/time is just as sincere as the others here that also think that way. I have been an avid reader and listener to Sean Carroll, and have read the extract that you supplied. I do not believe for one instance [and I have not seen anyone else agree either] that he was inferring time did not exist and was not real. I have also found a list of lectures by Sean Carroll, and although I have not read them all, in fact less then half, he has made a few inferences re space and time and there relations and existence in GR. http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll3/Carroll01.html I have supplied other links that you have just ignored. In fact all links I have given re space, time and GR, you have found the need to promptly deride and then accuse me of trolling. Then you put forward your own, which in my opinion you have misinterpreted, and claim some form of superiority. You deride the scientific method, you deride peer review, yet you claim you have a validated ToE. Why wouldn't people find those actions and beliefs hard to accept? Again, I'm sorry you feel the way you do about me, and I hope that things can get back to some normality in the course of time. But that relationship will not improve by trying to brow beat me into accepting something I don't see as valid, nor any evidence for anyway. Seriously, take it easy.
