"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:c6oge.74185$c24.45909@attbi_s72...
riedt1@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as
the
human brain) to have relevance.

The universe was hotter, denser and smallar in the past independent
of
humans and what they think.

But what you fail to understand is that the past is nothing but an
intellectual concept.
What was is other a memory (intellect required) or an estimate
(calculation required).
Neither of those exist in nature except as a complete construct of the
intellect. Nature
only knows what is. What is physical is only what is.

A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory
I have heard of: single ported, SRAM, dual ported, dynamic, flash, core,

A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as the
human brain) to have relevance.

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7b2dncdYvIBiuR_fRVn-pw@rcn.net...
In article <hIydnbUfIJ7MvB_fRVn-jg@conversent.net>,
"AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:c6oge.74185$c24.45909@attbi_s72...
riedt1@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as
the
human brain) to have relevance.

The universe was hotter, denser and smallar in the past
independent
of
humans and what they think.

But what you fail to understand is that the past is nothing but an
intellectual concept.
What was is other a memory (intellect required) or an estimate
(calculation required).
Neither of those exist in nature except as a complete construct of the
intellect. Nature
only knows what is. What is physical is only what is.

Now explain animal migrations. Include an absence of memory
of where the food was found in the past.

Why should I do that? I didn't limit my remarks to simply the human
intellect, or the
human memory. I may have inadvertently done so in other posts in other
threads, but
limiting memory to humans is an error. The fact that humans and animals
both use memory
doesn't make time any more physical.

riedt1@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as the
human brain) to have relevance.

The universe was hotter, denser and smallar in the past independent of
humans and what they think.

...the past is nothing but an intellectual concept.

AllYou! wrote:

...the past is nothing but an intellectual concept.

...and extremely useful for understanding the universe about us. It is
a testament to human imagination that we have developed such fruitful
tools to help us understand nature.

There has NEVER been a prediction of SR or GTR that was contradicted
by an observation. NEVER!

All true, but again, you miss the point. Nothing is what I've claimed is contrary to what
you've stated. Of course the concept of the past and future is useful. That has nothing
to do with whether or not it's anything more than an intellectual construct. Where are
these mutually exclusive for you?

AllYou! wrote:
All true, but again, you miss the point. Nothing is what I've claimed is contrary to
what
you've stated. Of course the concept of the past and future is useful. That has
nothing
to do with whether or not it's anything more than an intellectual construct. Where
are
these mutually exclusive for you?



Oh, I don't think I am missing anything! One can argue that "everything" is a
construct of the human mind. "Time" is no less significant than anything else.
Perhaps you should bugger off to a philosophy newsgroup. This is physics, and
time is a integral part.

In article <hIydnbUfIJ7MvB_fRVn-jg@conversent.net>,
"AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:c6oge.74185$c24.45909@attbi_s72...
riedt1@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as
the
human brain) to have relevance.

The universe was hotter, denser and smallar in the past independent
of
humans and what they think.

But what you fail to understand is that the past is nothing but an
intellectual concept.
What was is other a memory (intellect required) or an estimate
(calculation required).
Neither of those exist in nature except as a complete construct of the
intellect. Nature
only knows what is. What is physical is only what is.

Now explain animal migrations. Include an absence of memory
of where the food was found in the past.

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message

Oh, I don't think I am missing anything! One can argue that "everything" is a
construct of the human mind. "Time" is no less significant than anything else.
Perhaps you should bugger off to a philosophy newsgroup. This is physics, and
time is a integral part.


But you've never given any argument to support that position. All you do is grandstand
about how wonderful the human intellect is and how useful to humans, the concepts of the
past might be. You've yet to show how anything you've claimed is exclusive to the notion
that time is just an intellectual concept.

As to your claim that everything is a construct of the human mind, it seems that it's you
who must go to a philosophical NG. Sensory stimulation is not a construct of the human
mind. anything which is capable of stimulating the senses is physical, and not simply a
construct of the human mind. How is time physical?

In article <xv6dnbawRf7DtB_fRVn-gQ@conversent.net>,
"AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7b2dncdYvIBiuR_fRVn-pw@rcn.net...
In article <hIydnbUfIJ7MvB_fRVn-jg@conversent.net>,
"AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote:

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:c6oge.74185$c24.45909@attbi_s72...
riedt1@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
A GRAND ILLUSION OF TIME
Time is a human concept. It requires an intelligent memory (such as
the
human brain) to have relevance.

The universe was hotter, denser and smallar in the past
independent
of
humans and what they think.

But what you fail to understand is that the past is nothing but an
intellectual concept.
What was is other a memory (intellect required) or an estimate
(calculation required).
Neither of those exist in nature except as a complete construct of the
intellect. Nature
only knows what is. What is physical is only what is.

Now explain animal migrations. Include an absence of memory
of where the food was found in the past.

Why should I do that? I didn't limit my remarks to simply the human
intellect, or the
human memory. I may have inadvertently done so in other posts in other
threads, but
limiting memory to humans is an error. The fact that humans and animals
both use memory
doesn't make time any more physical.


You said that "Nature only knows what it is." This is not true.
Nature propogates itself by recalling certain experiences
that made survival successful. You may think satisfying hunger
and thirst is illusion. I don't.

AllYou! wrote:
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message

Oh, I don't think I am missing anything! One can argue that "everything" is a
construct of the human mind. "Time" is no less significant than anything else.
Perhaps you should bugger off to a philosophy newsgroup. This is physics, and
time is a integral part.


But you've never given any argument to support that position. All you do is
grandstand
about how wonderful the human intellect is and how useful to humans, the concepts of
the
past might be. You've yet to show how anything you've claimed is exclusive to the
notion
that time is just an intellectual concept.

As to your claim that everything is a construct of the human mind, it seems that it's
you
who must go to a philosophical NG. Sensory stimulation is not a construct of the
human
mind. anything which is capable of stimulating the senses is physical, and not simply
a
construct of the human mind. How is time physical?


Hurts doesn't it!

AllYou! wrote:

...the past is nothing but an intellectual concept.

...and extremely useful for understanding the universe about us. It is
a testament to human imagination that we have developed such fruitful
tools to help us understand nature.

There has NEVER been a prediction of SR or GTR that was contradicted
by an observation. NEVER!
eh, WHERE ARE THE GRAVITY WAVES?

eh, WHERE ARE THE GRAVITY WAVES?
See: http://panteltje.com/rotfl.gif