Quentin, But it's NOT the case...
Edgar On Thursday, February 6, 2014 10:52:58 AM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-02-06 Jesse Mazer <laser...@gmail.com <javascript:>>: > >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net<javascript:> >> > wrote: >> >>> But recall that p-time is not a directly measurable quantity so >>> "arbitrary precision" does not apply. You still haven't grasped the concept >>> correctly. P-time has no direct measure, because the present moment is that >>> in which all measures, including those of clock time, are computed. >>> >> >> I don't recall you ever spelling that out in conversation with me, thanks >> for clarifying. In the past people had asked you about how to determine >> p-time and you had said things like "we should be able to compute p-time >> from Omega, the curvature of the universe" (in the post at >> http://www.mail-archive.com/everything-list@googlegroups.com/msg47450.html). >> So if you now say that determining which events are simultaneous in >> p-time is fundamentally impossible for any being within the universe, that >> answers what I was wondering about in question #1. >> > > If that's the case... what good is it to entertain such "p-time"... it's > useless. Predict nothing, cannot be measured. What is p-time supposed to > solve ? > > >> >> Jesse >> >> >> >>> >>> Nevertheless the fact of existence of all observers and thus of >>> everything in the present moment is a direct empirical observation. Just >>> like consciousness it is not subject to measure, but that doesn't mean it >>> doesn't exist. >>> >>> Edgar >>> >>> On Thursday, February 6, 2014 12:47:05 AM UTC-5, jessem wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:38 PM, meekerdb <meek...@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2/5/2014 9:31 AM, Jesse Mazer wrote: >>>>> >>>>> --question 1 dealt with the question of how YOU would define p-time >>>>> simultaneity in a cosmological model where there's no way to slice the 4D >>>>> spacetime into a series of 3D surfaces such that the density of matter is >>>>> perfectly uniform on each slice (and that uniform can be characterized by >>>>> the parameter Omega), unlike in the simple FLRW model where matter is >>>>> assumed to be distributed in this perfectly uniform way. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't see that perfect uniformity is necessary. We have calculated >>>>> our epoch relative to the CMB as 13.8By. I assume any other scientific >>>>> species in the universe could do the same and so say whether they were >>>>> 'at >>>>> the same time' as measured by expansion of the cosmos. I don't see how >>>>> the >>>>> existence of galaxies and galaxy clusters precludes this kind of >>>>> measurement. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Using the CMB may give an approximate answer, but would you argue it >>>> could distinguish between different simultaneity definitions that agree >>>> approximately when averaged over large scales, but disagree somewhat about >>>> the details of simultaneity in highly curved regions? For example, could >>>> the CMB be used to define a unique definition of simultaneity in the >>>> neighborhood of a black hole (where coordinate systems like Schwarzschild >>>> coordinates and Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates and Kruskal-Szekeres >>>> coordinates give very different definitions of simultaneity)? Edgar isn't >>>> just claiming some approximate pragmatic truth about simultaneity, he's >>>> claiming an absolute and exact truth about simultaneity in all >>>> circumstances, I was asking if he thinks this truth can be empirically >>>> determined to arbitrary precision even in principle, and if so what >>>> empirical observations would be used. >>>> >>>> Jesse >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Brent >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >>> To post to this group, send email to >>> everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >>> . >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > > > -- > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy > Batty/Rutger Hauer) > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
