Time is the 4th dimension

[there4eyeM]

Since genuine observation can only occur "now", in the instant the observation is happening, observation itself is a rapid as the present moment.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

We’re so used to the world being in 3 dimensions that we forget that the 4th exist and it’s called time

Postclassical Quacks With Their Weird Delusions


Time can't be a dimension; it has no extension. It's here, and then it's gone. For example, if distance were like time, on going from Manhattan to Brooklyn, the roadway wouldn't exist until you reached it and then would disappear forever.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Hubble was able to convince Einstein that time was indeed a dimension, and what was lacking in Einstein's theories.
Because time is a dimension, and Christ and God are inter-dimensional, (as will we be in glorified bodies) they can move forward and backward in the dimension, which is how God can tell us the future accurately. He can visit the future at will...

Nature Is Not Supernatural

That's how this nonsense started. God cannot create a contradiction, such as a square circle. So he also cannot see the future, which is not out there for anyone to see.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

toobfreak
If you are interested on some deeper math for the space-time dimensions, Google "relativity quaternions".

Quaternions already give a basis that encapsulates the relativistic difference between time and 3-D space quit neatly.

Mathematical Mumbo-Jumbo

Equations also predict movements of stocks, until they don't. Ask Long-Term Capital Management, where theories blew up like the bubbles they were patterned after.

 

[james bond]

Wuwei
I think you need isotope dating for billions
. Carbon is for tens of thousands

That's right. The problem is that creationists have dated diamonds using C14. For very old rocks or diamonds the presence of C14 should be immeasurably small. But with any instrument there will always be noise at the limit of measurement called the noise floor. However creationists (including james bond) think that the noise actually indicates C14 which gives between 60 to 100 thousand years if it were real. Even so, james bond does not recognize that the noise measurements of C14 is much greater than the 6 thousand years creations believe the earth and universe. This contradiction is ignored by young earth creationists.

As for longer lived isotope dating see my next post to J Bond.

.

That's not even true. Wuwei lies in order to back up his arguments.

Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth was accepted in order to show long time that evolution needed. It was made up in order to show long time, but the process is flawed. I already pointed out no one knows the amount of original decaying element was present. The whole long time findings are based on how old the layers where the items were found. An erroneous process in itself. How can one find fossils, rocks, and diamonds that are dated millions or billions of years old in the same layer when the items ages are millions and even billions of years off from each other based on radiometric dating.

Creationists know C14 dating is equally flawed. Why do they still find C14 in fossils and diamonds that are supposedly millions or billions of years old? The creationists know that the upper limits of C14 dating is around 50,000 years. Thus, something is very, very, very wrong. Do you know what it is is? Of course not.

What do creationists use C14 dating for? It's not for inorganic items such as rocks and diamonds. All you want to do is show the creationists are wrong when you are wrong. C14 dating is for once living, organic materials. What the creationists point out is that C14 still remains in fossils thought to be millions or billions of years old. They also found it in the inorganic rocks and diamonds that were dated to millions and billions of years old using radiometric dating. It shows that the atheist scientists are wrong with their dating. There should be no C14 remaining, but yet there it is. Thus, it shows that radiometric dating that the evolutionists use is not trustworthy. Wuwei is not trustworthy.

 

[james bond]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist. Physics states time is a property of matter. Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

 

[Wuwei]

Wuwei
I think you need isotope dating for billions
. Carbon is for tens of thousands

That's right. The problem is that creationists have dated diamonds using C14. For very old rocks or diamonds the presence of C14 should be immeasurably small. But with any instrument there will always be noise at the limit of measurement called the noise floor. However creationists (including james bond) think that the noise actually indicates C14 which gives between 60 to 100 thousand years if it were real. Even so, james bond does not recognize that the noise measurements of C14 is much greater than the 6 thousand years creations believe the earth and universe. This contradiction is ignored by young earth creationists.

As for longer lived isotope dating see my next post to J Bond.

.

That's not even true. Wuwei lies in order to back up his arguments.

Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth was accepted in order to show long time that evolution needed. It was made up in order to show long time, but the process is flawed. I already pointed out no one knows the amount of original decaying element was present. The whole long time findings are based on how old the layers where the items were found. An erroneous process in itself. How can one find fossils, rocks, and diamonds that are dated millions or billions of years old in the same layer when the items ages are millions and even billions of years off from each other based on radiometric dating.

Creationists know C14 dating is equally flawed. Why do they still find C14 in fossils and diamonds that are supposedly millions or billions of years old? The creationists know that the upper limits of C14 dating is around 50,000 years. Thus, something is very, very, very wrong. Do you know what it is is? Of course not.

What do creationists use C14 dating for? It's not for inorganic items such as rocks and diamonds. All you want to do is show the creationists are wrong when you are wrong. C14 dating is for once living, organic materials. What the creationists point out is that C14 still remains in fossils thought to be millions or billions of years old. They also found it in the inorganic rocks and diamonds that were dated to millions and billions of years old using radiometric dating. It shows that the atheist scientists are wrong with their dating. There should be no C14 remaining, but yet there it is. Thus, it shows that radiometric dating that the evolutionists use is not trustworthy. Wuwei is not trustworthy.

no one knows the amount of original decaying element was present.
Yes they do, especially for long lived isotopes. I showed you how in post #74
Why do they still find C14 in fossils and diamonds that are supposedly millions or billions of years old?
They don't find any. What they find are instrument impurities or limitations of sample preparation.
What do creationists use C14 dating for? It's not for inorganic items such as rocks and diamonds.
They don't? Au contraire, creationists tried to date diamonds for C14. All that they found was instrument noise, but like you they mistook it for C14.
They also found it in the inorganic rocks and diamonds that were dated to millions and billions of years old using radiometric dating.
Now you say they do. They found instrument or sample preparations limitations.
There should be no C14 remaining, but yet there it is. Thus, it shows that radiometric dating that the evolutionists use is not trustworthy.
No it just shows dating diamonds using C14 is not trustworthy.

The abundance of C14 in a 100,000 year old sample is
one Carbon14 per 130,000,000,000,000,000 carbon12 atoms.

There are only 384 C14 atoms in 1 mg of a 100,000 year old sample. That is an astounding difference.
An hour in an AMS machine would count one C14 every 10 seconds. Cosmic rays, splatter off walls, etc could easily hit that limit.

Creationists should not glean any information from that noise.

.

 

[zaangalewa]

"Time" is the effect of observing change. Observation is human.

Try to catch a fly then you will see that a fly is a damned fast observer. I guess in a most simple way is an observation nothing else than a simple interaction. What not interacts is just simple not existing. You could stand in the middle of a sun - as long as this sun not interacts with you happens nothing.

"Time", "Space" or anything else existing without an observer is meaningless.

The moon moved a long time around the Earth before known human beings observed this.

Technically, that is an inference.

What else?

 

[zaangalewa]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist.

Why?

Physics states time is a property of matter.

Einstein said the flow of time depends relativelly on the geometrie of the space. And mass curves the space. That's why time flows relativelly faster and slower - but always is past past and future future, although natural laws give results in both directions (what was <-> what will be). But this not means matter creates time or time needs matter to exist. And in quantum mechanical experiments time is unbelievable precise in the measurements - while mass seems not to be measurable, if I understand such experiments correctly.

Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

 

[Quasar44]

Time is the 4th D and it comes from thermodynamics and entropy

 

[zaangalewa]

Hubble was able to convince Einstein that time was indeed a dimension, and what was lacking in Einstein's theories.
Because time is a dimension, and Christ and God are inter-dimensional, (as will we be in glorified bodies) they can move forward and backward in the dimension, which is how God can tell us the future accurately. He can visit the future at will...

Nature Is Not Supernatural

That's how this nonsense started. God cannot create a contradiction, such as a square circle. So he also cannot see the future, which is not out there for anyone to see.

I don't think it is a good idea to try to give god rules what he is able to do physically or not able to do. What if he is not using your form of logic? He could use the trivalent logic of the colors for example - and a square is by the way only a special dynamic form of a closed circle line. And not everything is physics. My wife and I drove once under a rainbow from one side to the other. Sure that's physically impossible. We know this. We are realists. Nevertheless we both remember the same and we are in this better world now since a very long moment, which hopefully never will end, although it will end one day ... or ... .

 

[zaangalewa]

Time is the 4th D and it comes from thermodynamics and entropy

So ... what exists a second ago in the past now? Nothing or the world as it was a second ago? Or something else? ...

 

[james bond]

Wuwei
I think you need isotope dating for billions
. Carbon is for tens of thousands

That's right. The problem is that creationists have dated diamonds using C14. For very old rocks or diamonds the presence of C14 should be immeasurably small. But with any instrument there will always be noise at the limit of measurement called the noise floor. However creationists (including james bond) think that the noise actually indicates C14 which gives between 60 to 100 thousand years if it were real. Even so, james bond does not recognize that the noise measurements of C14 is much greater than the 6 thousand years creations believe the earth and universe. This contradiction is ignored by young earth creationists.

As for longer lived isotope dating see my next post to J Bond.

.

That's not even true. Wuwei lies in order to back up his arguments.

Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth was accepted in order to show long time that evolution needed. It was made up in order to show long time, but the process is flawed. I already pointed out no one knows the amount of original decaying element was present. The whole long time findings are based on how old the layers where the items were found. An erroneous process in itself. How can one find fossils, rocks, and diamonds that are dated millions or billions of years old in the same layer when the items ages are millions and even billions of years off from each other based on radiometric dating.

Creationists know C14 dating is equally flawed. Why do they still find C14 in fossils and diamonds that are supposedly millions or billions of years old? The creationists know that the upper limits of C14 dating is around 50,000 years. Thus, something is very, very, very wrong. Do you know what it is is? Of course not.

What do creationists use C14 dating for? It's not for inorganic items such as rocks and diamonds. All you want to do is show the creationists are wrong when you are wrong. C14 dating is for once living, organic materials. What the creationists point out is that C14 still remains in fossils thought to be millions or billions of years old. They also found it in the inorganic rocks and diamonds that were dated to millions and billions of years old using radiometric dating. It shows that the atheist scientists are wrong with their dating. There should be no C14 remaining, but yet there it is. Thus, it shows that radiometric dating that the evolutionists use is not trustworthy. Wuwei is not trustworthy.

no one knows the amount of original decaying element was present.
Yes they do, especially for long lived isotopes. I showed you how in post #74
Why do they still find C14 in fossils and diamonds that are supposedly millions or billions of years old?
They don't find any. What they find are instrument impurities or limitations of sample preparation.
What do creationists use C14 dating for? It's not for inorganic items such as rocks and diamonds.
They don't? Au contraire, creationists tried to date diamonds for C14. All that they found was instrument noise, but like you they mistook it for C14.
They also found it in the inorganic rocks and diamonds that were dated to millions and billions of years old using radiometric dating.
Now you say they do. They found instrument or sample preparations limitations.
There should be no C14 remaining, but yet there it is. Thus, it shows that radiometric dating that the evolutionists use is not trustworthy.
No it just shows dating diamonds using C14 is not trustworthy.

The abundance of C14 in a 100,000 year old sample is
one Carbon14 per 130,000,000,000,000,000 carbon12 atoms.

There are only 384 C14 atoms in 1 mg of a 100,000 year old sample. That is an astounding difference.
An hour in an AMS machine would count one C14 every 10 seconds. Cosmic rays, splatter off walls, etc could easily hit that limit.

Creationists should not glean any information from that noise.

.

LOL, you don't know either and are not trustworthy. I just said the Christians use C14 on organic, living materials such as fossils. Not rocks or diamonds unless it was to embarrass the atheist scientists and catch them in their lies. How can diamonds and rocks still have C14 remaining when they're found in millions and billions of years old layers as claimed by the atheist scientists? They can't. It means the atheist scientists were wrong and were trying to support their theories of long time.

You are a hater. No one thinks much of your posts. You think your posts are smart, but they're ones that float in the tb. You don't answer my questions and are usually wrong or post out and out lies. You love noise and that's what you are. Another lolser.

 

[james bond]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist.

Why?

Physics states time is a property of matter.

Einstein said the flow of time depends relativelly on the geometrie of the space. And mass curves the space. That's why time flows relativelly faster and slower - but always is past past and future future, although natural laws give results in both directions (what was <-> what will be). But this not means matter creates time or time needs matter to exist. And in quantum mechanical experiments time is unbelievable precise in the measurements - while mass seems not to be measurable, if I understand such experiments correctly.

Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

You never heard of spacetime? It's just common sense physics. Your example with Einstein just backs up what I stated. Time has to have matter to exist. Time needs mass and space. While I agree time is relatively faster and slower, it depends on altitude or gravitational time dilation.

Mass curving the space is gravity, another fundamental force discovered by creation scientist Sir Isaac Newton. Moreover, time is past, present, and future; Not just past past and future future. There is no results in both directions. It's been demonstrated that we cannot go back in time. Why? One can't travel faster than light. You believe in science fiction.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist. Physics states time is a property of matter. Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

Mind Undermines Matter

Time exists in empty space; no matter is needed. Postmodern physics has to complicate theories that can't stand on their own; that's why it ties time to matter, energy, and the kitchen sink.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist.

Why?

Physics states time is a property of matter.

Einstein said the flow of time depends relativelly on the geometrie of the space. And mass curves the space. That's why time flows relativelly faster and slower - but always is past past and future future, although natural laws give results in both directions (what was <-> what will be). But this not means matter creates time or time needs matter to exist. And in quantum mechanical experiments time is unbelievable precise in the measurements - while mass seems not to be measurable, if I understand such experiments correctly.

Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

You never heard of spacetime? It's just common sense physics. Your example with Einstein just backs up what I stated. Time has to have matter to exist. Time needs mass and space. While I agree time is relatively faster and slower, it depends on altitude or gravitational time dilation.

Mass curving the space is gravity, another fundamental force discovered by creation scientist Sir Isaac Newton. Moreover, time is past, present, and future; Not just past past and future future. There is no results in both directions. It's been demonstrated that we cannot go back in time. Why? One can't travel faster than light. You believe in science fiction.

The Substance Entering During the Big Bang Created Everything But Time

The maximum velocity in the true fourth dimension is c²: one light-year every three minutes. It has no effect on time.

 

[zaangalewa]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist.

Why?

Physics states time is a property of matter.

Einstein said the flow of time depends relativelly on the geometrie of the space. And mass curves the space. That's why time flows relativelly faster and slower - but always is past past and future future, although natural laws give results in both directions (what was <-> what will be). But this not means matter creates time or time needs matter to exist. And in quantum mechanical experiments time is unbelievable precise in the measurements - while mass seems not to be measurable, if I understand such experiments correctly.

Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

You never heard of spacetime?

What about if you would start to read and try to understand what others said here?

It's just common sense physics. Your example with Einstein just backs up what I stated. Time has to have matter to exist.

Again: Why?

Time needs mass and space.

The relativity of time correlates with a curved space. Mass curves the so called spacetime (=Minkowski space). But over big distances - even about billions of lightyears - the space is flat, what's unbelievable astonshing. Why has a triangle exactly 180° in such gigantic dimensions?

While I agree time is relatively faster and slower, it depends on altitude or gravitational time dilation.

Mass curving the space is gravity,

Mass is gravity. Gravity curves the spacetime.

another fundamental force discovered by creation scientist Sir Isaac Newton.

?

Moreover, time is past, present, and future; Not just past past and future future. There is no results in both directions.

You are able to calculate where the Earth was and where it will be in the same way.

It's been demonstrated that we cannot go back in time.

How? Name of this experiment or name of the scientist who found this out?

Why? One can't travel faster than light.

Something what has mass is not able to travel faster than light. What about if something has a negative mass?

You believe in science fiction.

You say that mass produces time without to say how mass is doing this.

 

[james bond]

Time doesn't actually exist. It's simply a concept created to explain how we perceive the chronology of events.

It’s official: time doesn’t exist

So what time features should we feed our ML models?

towardsdatascience.com

Don't be stupid. Time exists because we exist. Matter can't exist without time. If there was no time, then we would not exist.

Weirdo Nerds Push Such Nonsense Because They Are Mentally Unbalanced Escapists

Time is merely an attribute, like color.

I was saying time has to have matter to exist.

Why?

Physics states time is a property of matter.

Einstein said the flow of time depends relativelly on the geometrie of the space. And mass curves the space. That's why time flows relativelly faster and slower - but always is past past and future future, although natural laws give results in both directions (what was <-> what will be). But this not means matter creates time or time needs matter to exist. And in quantum mechanical experiments time is unbelievable precise in the measurements - while mass seems not to be measurable, if I understand such experiments correctly.

Once that happens, then we get special relativity.

You never heard of spacetime?

What about if you would start to read and try to understand what others said here?

It's just common sense physics. Your example with Einstein just backs up what I stated. Time has to have matter to exist.

Again: Why?

Time needs mass and space.

The relativity of time correlates with a curved space. Mass curves the so called spacetime (=Minkowski space). But over big distances - even about billions of lightyears - the space is flat, what's unbelievable astonshing. Why has a triangle exactly 180° in such gigantic dimensions?

While I agree time is relatively faster and slower, it depends on altitude or gravitational time dilation.

Mass curving the space is gravity,

Mass is gravity. Gravity curves the spacetime.

another fundamental force discovered by creation scientist Sir Isaac Newton.

?

Moreover, time is past, present, and future; Not just past past and future future. There is no results in both directions.

You are able to calculate where the Earth was and where it will be in the same way.

It's been demonstrated that we cannot go back in time.

How? Name of this experiment or name of the scientist who found this out?

Why? One can't travel faster than light.

Something what has mass is not able to travel faster than light. What about if something has a negative mass?

You believe in science fiction.

You say that mass produces time without to say how mass is doing this.

There is no need to respond to a wacktard who has no understanding of physics nor can write understandable English haha.

 

[Wuwei]

I just said the Christians use C14 on organic, living materials such as fossils. Not rocks or diamonds unless it was to embarrass the atheist scientists and catch them in their lies. How can diamonds and rocks still have C14 remaining when they're found in millions and billions of years old layers as claimed by the atheist scientists?

Creationists embarrass themselves. A scientist knows they are mistaking noise as signal. Read up on noise floor.

You are a hater. No one thinks much of your posts. You think your posts are smart, but they're ones that float in the tb. You don't answer my questions and are usually wrong or post out and out lies. You love noise and that's what you are. Another lolser.

As usual you are reduced to making insults as a substitute for analytic thinking.

.