No problem. I got it, anyway! :smile:
I don't know if you realized ... We have completely destroyed this topic! :grin:

You are not your body!" — Alkis Piskas

Now thats real nonsense...

The philosophy forum:

"A vibrant community of people who rarely agree with each other but who all love philosophy, this is the place for philosophical discussions about knowledge"

... It was with a small "g" ... — Alkis Piskas

Happy to read that.....wink...
as they don't seem to have a wink emoticon or at least, I couldn't spot one in the group offered.

Don't worry about spoiling Agent Smith's (not Banno's) topic — Alkis Piskas

Yeah I know it was Agent Smith's thread, I was more responding to Banno's comment regarding 'poor responses.' i was 'kinda' referring him/her back to the philosophy of Dirty Harry, I have often used with tongue in cheek intention.

Oh, I forgot to say I will have a look at the thread link provided.....

Ahoy Scotsman! Why do you think that non-linear time is associated with multiple time dimensions? Time can be circular in one dimension. On the microscale virtual particles states in the vacuum are represented by a circle, a vacuum bubble. Virtual photons or virtual particle/antiparticle pairs, are represented by closed one particle propagators in Feynman diagrams. In a sense such a particle rotates in spacetime and it can be released from it's closed periodic prison by real particles, like an electron and a positron can excite the closed photon loop, giving two real photons (which is called the annihilation of an electron by a positron), and two photons can excite the virtual electron loop to create an electron and a positron (or another pair). It were these loops that were the only material presence at the singularity. Time went back and forth. Then... bang! Freedom!

Ahoy Earther!

Because the meaning of the word linear, in the mathematical sense, is one dimensional, lineland,
just like 2D space is notionally called flatland
You cannot get a 1D circle, a circle is 2D.
If space and time are not separable then it follows that in a 1D spacetime you cannot have 2D time.
— Raymond

Closed time loops are a possibility in general relativity. — Raymond

On the microscale virtual particles states in the vacuum are represented by a circle, a vacuum bubble. — Raymond

Virtual photons or virtual particle/antiparticle pairs, are represented by closed one particle propagators in Feynman diagrams. — Raymond

These are all states found in 3 dimensions, not 1.

By the way, there are two books Brian Greene wrote. I think the story about the rotating bucket is written in The Fabric. — Raymond

Ok, I haven't read 'The Fabric', too many books, not enough lifetime!

as they don't seem to have a wink emoticon — universeness

:wink: (Just add colons to your "wink")

Agent Smith's thread — universeness

Nothing is mine. :sad:

Aw didums....:grin:

again, thanks for these wee computing lessons, it seems I need them :wink:
I used to teach hypertext! I think I need a refresher

The solution:

Entropic time can be proven non-existent in the light of the perfect clock time. The perfect clock time, on the other hand, is proven an unreal, non-existent, in the light of it's entropic counterpart.

In mathematical terms:

The periodic function sin(at), t being the clock time, or coordinate time, used as the basis for the clock time itself. The clock is defined as a periodic process with constant. Every periodic function functioning as the base of a clock can be expressed as a superposition of pure sine functions with constant periods. It's a fact of nature that processes with a constant period do not exist. It follows logically, undubitably, self- as well as logically consistently, while complying to the strict imperatives of scientific rationality, that t is ill defined and no real existing parameter in our universe.
Only in the virtual reality of the quantum vacuum, t is present intrinsically as a true parameter. All quantum field fluctuations can be expressed as a superposition of independent fixed energy and fixed momentum oscillations, both forward and backwards in time (anti-particles). These oscillations are a clock but they can't be used as a reference clock.

:broken:

:kiss:

I think I missed some of your sentences, sorry, have quoted and responded below:

Good. Thanks. :smile: Thanks god, I have been justified, at least partly! :smile: (Really, now. I'm not a theist. Note the small "g" again ... — Alkis Piskas

ha ha.... :grin:

I don't know if you realized ... We have completely destroyed this topic! — Alkis Piskas

we have become death! the destroyers of topic threads... :naughty:
Oppenheimer would not be happy!

Yeah, but at which hour?, which minute?, which second?, which nanosecond......planck time...ad nauseam, did Banno write this? — universeness

I think that basic lesson in physics, the one on working with errors, should be compulsory.

universeness, to the day will do.

I think that basic lesson in physics, the one on working with errors, should be compulsory.
universeness, to the day will do. — Banno

Logic is temporal, as logic is an aspect of thought and thought is temporal, because it takes time to think! Go ahead, have an atemporal thought, how long does it take for one of your neurons to fire? Probably faster than a day, but certainly a 'small time packet' will be involved.....so temporal.
I think that basic lesson on thinking, the one on working with errors, should be compulsory

Logic is temporal — universeness

Then you will have no trouble identifying for us the temporal elements in propositional calculus.

@Agent Smith, you have some familiarity with language games, and the errors that arise when they are mixed willy-nilly. What do you think of ?

Agent Smith, you have some familiarity with language games, and the errors that arise when they are mixed willy-nilly. What do you think of ↪universeness ? — Banno

Truth is Wittgenstein, nec caput nec pedes.

Universeness? The only discussion I had with him/her I can remember was on antinatalism. S/he's a natalist not because but despite (the illusion of) happiness!

Truth is Wittgenstein, nec caput nec pedes. — Agent Smith

A shame.

I was referring to:

Logic is temporal, as logic is an aspect of thought and thought is temporal, because it takes time to think! Go ahead, have an atemporal thought, how long does it take for one of your neurons to fire? Probably faster than a day, but certainly a 'small time packet' will be involved.....so temporal. — universeness

This is the sort of muddle that results.

To be sure, there are some rather neat temporal logics

A shame. — Banno

Indeed!

This is the sort of muddle that results. — Banno

Oh! Sorry, didn't read universeness's post. S/he seems busy...

Then you will have no trouble identifying for us the temporal elements in propositional calculus — Banno

My choice of methodology is for me to offer not for you to insist.

enjoy your bromance boys/girls/mixers!

Then you will have no trouble identifying for us the temporal elements in propositional calculus — Banno

In fact, I will do that for you as soon as you present your arguments to me in the form of Klingon and in the form of the programming language C++

Good one! :lol:

Sometimes we live no particular way but our own
And sometimes we visit your country and live in your home
Sometimes we ride on your horses, sometimes we walk alone
Sometimes the songs that we hear are just songs of our own — Hunter/Garcia

Therefore, there are some times.