Does time exist?

Eons of movement , indeed

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And yet, in the last hour I have been watching it, it has neither moved nor stopped existing.
Thus it follows that duration cannot be movement.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thus it follows , watch longer .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not the point. In the mere hour I've been watching it, it has already contradicted your assertion.
Watching longer won't change that.

 

Are you sure ?

 

Think it through. You have all the time you need.

"Duration is movement."
"I watched this rock for an hour. It has not moved. Clearly it has endured for an hour without movement. This falsifies the above assertion."
"Wait longer."
"And waiting longer will ... defalsify what has already been falsified? Not without traveling back in time time it won't."

 

You don't have all the time you need to understand , duration .

 

You're playing Mister Deep and Mysterious again.
I take it that means you have no serious response.

 

Yes what I'm trying to do is to have people think deeper . And ask questions .

Some long drawn out explaination is never my thing . I give curt short answers to encourage thinking upon .

I don't think of my attitude as a problem , rather I think my attitude is an encouragement to think and to explore knowledge .

 

Yes, the duration of the event. In context of the above , a rock which exists according to a limited chronology of nows (existence in reality) which add up to the duration of the event of being a rock. This duration may be measured and translated into arbitrary numerical time values of seconds, hours, years, centuries or by the probabilistic term "half-life", which measures the duration for a rock to lose half its mass.

 

Explain more clearly .

 

IMO, duration is a measurement of a limited existence in reality.
However, the term "enduring" implies an abstract concept, i.e. a universal constant which remains unchanged over time.

 

In what way is duration a measurement ? Explain further

 

Because the definition of duration is dependent on time, and not the other way around.

 

Duration is a result, which can only be defined after something which had existence in reality ceases to exist.

 

I don't follow; what are you trying to say?

Please define what you mean by "variable input".

Are you trolling?

 

So .... your point ?

 

No the definition of duration , is based on movement .

And movement is based on the Nature of any object , and the dynamics of the interaction between objects .

 

Please point me to a (scientific) definition of duration that is based on movement, not (the passing of) time.

I don't disagree there.

 

You probably won't find it .

Point to me , the scientific definition of time .