You have a technical mind, don't you? - page 19
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Aha-ha, that's why the scientist can't understand the new android update. And the mathematician's on a diet.
Don't confuse intelligence and scope. Give a nun time to learn and patience, she'll build you a nuclear reactor.
About the correctness of the data: it's not about what is true, what is false. It's about the description of the thought product. The particle as though exists in space, but they describe it through a backwards place, in particular the concept of "negativity".
In this post, you state that Time is not a physical Object. No dispute, you are separating Time and Space as Things that do not need to be merged into one entity. Also, not in dispute.
But in another post, you argue that Space is a physical Object. It turns out that Time is not material and Space is material. But why?
No, no. I didn't argue that Space is material, I argued that it is physical. Physical means existing in reality (communism also exists in reality, but it cannot be touched and has no temperature, so you know what I mean).
Time is a comparative characteristic only. Time cannot be touched, time does not give the volume of matter, time does not contain information about an object (colour, strength). Man by virtue of consciousness has invented a special category of time, although in the material plane time does not exist.
Ahh, that wasn't my quote in bold))) I was quoting an interlocutor
No, no. I did not claim that space is material, I claimed that it is physical. Physical - existing in reality means (communism also exists in reality, but it cannot be touched and has no temperature, so you know what I mean).
Time is a comparative characteristic only. Time cannot be touched, time does not give a volume to space, time does not contain information about an object (colour, strength). Man by virtue of consciousness has invented a special category of time, although on the material plane time does not exist.
Here you have overstated that time does not exist.
In every atom, according to the scientific community, there is a certain number of turns of electrons per unit time. It turns out that there are no revolutions either. Re-examine it.
No, no. I did not argue that space is material, I argued that it is physical. Physical - existing in reality means (communism also exists in reality, but it can't be touched and has no temperature, so you know what I mean).
Time is a comparative characteristic only. Time cannot be touched, time does not give a volume to space, time does not contain information about an object (colour, strength). Man by virtue of consciousness has invented a special category of time, although on the material plane time does not exist.
Well, 'physical' and 'material' are almost synonymous (in my mind). Physical space, which is intangible at the same time... That's something to think about... What is its'physicality' without'materiality'?
Time, it is easiest to compare it to a scale. The view of the scale may be different, but the units of the scale are invariant to our view of them.
We can assess the scale through the prism of subjective experiences, but the scale for Matter must still exist independently of us.
According to your reasoning, it turns out that the scale of Time, is only derived from the subjective experiences of the individual, and for Matter, Time does not exist. In this I do not agree.
PS/ If the quote was not yours, I apologise for my inattention.
Aha-ha, the scientist can't figure out the new android update. And a mathematician on a diet.
Don't confuse intelligence and scope. Give a nun time to learn and patience, she'll build you a nuclear reactor.
About the correctness of the data: it's not about what is true, what is false. It's about the description of the thought product. The particle as though exists in space, but they describe it through a backwards place, in particular the concept of "negativity".
No, no. I didn't argue that space is material, I argued that it is physical. Physical - existing in reality means (communism also exists in reality, but it cannot be touched and has no temperature, so you know what I mean).
Time is a comparative characteristic only. Time cannot be touched, time does not give the volume of matter, time does not contain information about an object (colour, strength). Man by virtue of consciousness has invented a special category of time, although in the material plane time does not exist.
As I wrote before, you have problems with logic. Apparently that's why you don't realise that after time you have to recognise its derivatives as intangible - speed, momentum, kinetic energy, etc. Well, if you accept them as tangible, then you can derive the notion of tangible time from them.
Even though what I am claiming is impossible to disprove or prove, but:
2. space, - Intangible. Space is also the dimension of Being. A sphere of phenomena of the material world, in which physicalobjects reflect another form of relation between themselves. It is . Measurement, as a side of relation of Objects..
Beyond Physics, we will inevitably find pure Philosophy. )
Here you have overstated that time does not exist.
In every atom, according to the scientific community, there is a certain number of turns of electrons per unit time. It turns out that there are no revolutions either. Reconsider.
It is possible to exist in two states - physical and non-physical.
You know from physics class that physical means existing in real reality. In reality, in short. Irrespective of the subject.
In the physical, there are objects that affect the reality around us. Space gives us volume, through volume there is matter, through matter there is field and matter.
And there are non-physical entities. They sort of exist, but they don't exist in material terms: communism, bravery, nastiness, politics, Cheburashka. Communism cannot be built with bricks, courage does not affect temperature, nastiness does not cause magnetic storms, and the Cheburashka cannot be touched with hands (children touch the down rag toy, not the character).
And there are two more entities that do not exist in material embodiment: information and time. I had a separate article about information on another resource, I will not talk about it now. But as far as time is concerned, answer yourself a question:
1. Can you touch time?
2. Does time have a temperature?
3. Does time have analog nature or discrete nature?
4. To which form of matter does time belong: field or material?
You will answer the first two questions negatively, the second two questions cannot be answered because time has no material properties, time has no physical properties. Time has no real properties at all. And if an object has no real properties can it have a real embodiment? No.
Time is just a comparative characteristic of processes. It has nothing to do with the real physical world. The human subject invented time; it is necessary for comparing of course of two processes: first process: the hand of clock goes one circle. The second process is any process of choice. Then these two processes are compared how many times the second process has taken place during the period of the first process (for passing of the circle by the hand). That's it. This is a subjective entity, and more often than not, a philosophical one. In material terms time is nothing, it is simply a derivative of the human thought process, or, more conveniently, a projection.
This is why I draw attention to the clarification of the question "does time exist?", because misunderstandings can arise from ignorance.