Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id WAA18908 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:00:55 GMT X-Originating-IP: [22.214.171.124] User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.0.3 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:52:50 +0000 Subject: Re: Cultural traits and vulnerability to memes From: Steve Drew <email@example.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Message-ID: <B8BAC0B1.email@example.com> In-Reply-To: <200203171959.TAA18210@alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk> Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Mar 2002 21:54:55.0917 (UTC) FILETIME=[60014DD0:01C1CDFE] Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
> Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 11:38:06 -0800
> From: "Dace" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: Re: Cultural traits and vulnerability to memes
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C1CDA8.34A4CD20
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>> Time is not a mystery, it's a measurement of motion.
>>> And where do we find this motion? Is it a property of space? All =
>>> space in the universe can't make motion. Take away time, and=20
>>> everything freezes. Time isn't just the measurement of motion. It's =
>>> motion is made of.
>> Relatively speaking, everything in the universe is moving. What we =
>> time is a comparison of the motion of one thing with the relative =
> motion of=20
>> another. Most things are compared to the rotation of the earth. =
>> minutes, days are all ways of comparing our own passage through life =
>> the turning of the earth. Years compare the same thing with the =
>> of the earth around the sun. Give me an example of time that does not =
>> compare the motion of two objects and we may be able to come to some
> As the universe cannot be compared to any other objects, its duration is =
That is an assumption. Prove there are no other universes. Secondly, i
wasn't aware that the fate of the universe was decided. Is it destined for
collapse into the big crunch? If it is, does this universe end at that
point, or does the possibility of recycling in another big bang make it
continuos? Or are we in for the ever expanding universe and the heat death?
How could the energy ever dissipate to zero in this case and hence the
universe come to an end?
> The same could be said of any organism, including ourselves. =
> The time we experience does not depend on its measurement or anyone =
> else's experience. A mechanism for measuring time, be it natural or =
> artificial, cannot tell us what time itself is. This is why the =
> reduction of reality to mechanism eliminates time. =20
> You're confusing the menu with the meal. That we describe time =
> according to the earth's rotation on its axis or its revolution around =
> the sun doesn't mean days and years are identical to the motion of the =
> earth. =20
>>>> Time is relative because all measurements are taken from the point =
>>>> view of the measurer and no two measurers can occupy the same
>>>> point in the universe at the same time.
>>> You're assuming the existence of time here. If it were an illusion, =
>>> would be no such thing as "at the same time." Past, present, and =
>>> would collapse into a fourth dimension of space. The "present" would
>>> then be arbitrary, and "past" and "future" would be symmetrical.
>> No. I'm assuming a paucity of other words with which to describe the =
>> that a moving point can't be seen by two observers from another same=20
>> exact point. There is only room in a point for one observer. I used =
>> word "time" because I couldn't think of another word at the moment, =
>> because it more accurately described what I was talking about. Time =
>> the fourth dimension of space and a dimension is a way of describing
>> what we see, not the thing we see. When I see the moon moving through
>> space, I describe it in terms of size (length, width, height) and =
>> (time). These features of description exist only in my mind, not in =
> Time can certainly be treated like any physical object whose existence =
> is purely relative to other objects. However, unlike all the other =
> objects of the external world, time is also found within our =
> consciousness. Each of us has a direct line to time. To deny this =
> absolute time is to deny ourselves, and it's no surprise that =
> mechanistic philosophy does exactly that. Mechanism also denies the =
> totality of the universe, treating it as nothing more than a collection =
> of parts in relation to each other. In other words, there's no final =
> reality, either outside or inside. It's the ultimate form of nihilism. =
Can't see this myself. My perception of time varies enormously from good
times passing quickly to bad times passing slowly. but measured against the
(relative) time frame of the earth's orbit about the sun my body ages at a
>>>> Without someone to do the measuring, there is no spacetime.
>>> Agreed. And without time, there would be no act of measurement and
>>> therefore no spacetime.
>> Right. Things would continue to float around in the universe but the =
>> would not be called spacetime.
> How could anything "continue" without time? Again you're covertly =
> assuming its existence while overtly denying it.
I don't understand the problem. Space and time are co-dependent. Neither
exists in the absence of the other. How can you have existence without
duration, or duration without existence?
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 17 2002 - 23:39:12 GMT