close
  PhilosophyDiscussion

Is time relative to the perceiver?


917850Jan 24, 2007 4:49pm
10: there is no time. Ergo it cannot be more infinite than the Now in which you find yourself constantly.

Believing in time is like believing in God.


SwaplerJan 24, 2007 4:53pm
Depends on your def of time... Im reffering to how much information I can process which equates to how much motion is going on in my mind, which equates to what kind of illusionary time I experience.


Sponsor
rumisongJan 24, 2007 4:57pm
8: Time is additive incompleteness due to the incompleteness of the perceiver...

Time is the perceiver .... I'm not so sure I would take that leap, but in a way...


Im not sure Im seeing a leap ... who/what is doing the adding? only the incomplete adds, so the "due" is extraneous perhaps?


SwaplerJan 24, 2007 5:02pm
I'm gonna be honest with you rumi, I didn't take my protein pills today - I can't really make what I would like to say effable, I do howver think that there is what you would call a mutual similar "feeling"

Descarte: Any extension is infinite

... me: infinity can have infinite sets of measurement

infinite sets can be understood by infinite beings appropriate to said sets

time is incalculable but exists relative to the processing of informaiton and change attributed to its level by its appropraitely lesser infinite being

I wouldn't expect for anyone to get my mubly jibber jabber - I'm not a logician in my knowledge of logical terms.

Ground control to major Tom....


Is time relative to the perceiver?


You need to Sign-up for StumbleUpon to post to this forum