@natmanprime Ignoring special relativity and using Newtonian time is growing up? Moore is getting his idea from how relativity interprets the nature of time, which is explained in the Rietdijk-Putnam_argument article on Wikipedia.
Brian Greene's book The Fabric of the Cosmos also explains how relativity describes an eternal block universe. The idea may be counter-intuitive, but it's not immature.
@natmanprime Moore describes time in a relativistic manner. The opposite of that would be Newtonian time, which is an absolute past that is gone forever and an absolute future that hasn't happened yet, which is how the universe seems to us. Special relativity describes time differently however. I'd link you to Wikipedia articles, but I can't post links on Youtube. Check out the Rietdijk-Putnam_argument article and relativity articles though, which explain in detail what I'm talking about
@redbrickroadstudios i see...so u assume that i subscribe to newtonian time because anyone who believes different to Moore must subscribe to newtonian time, because of your 2nd assumption that newtonian time is the opposite to relative time.
ur 3rd assumption seems to be that there's only one way to see relative time, and thats Moore's way.
@natmanprime If you don't view time in a classical manner, how do you view it then, since you told me my assumption is wrong? Moore's description of time matches the explanation of how relativity describes time as given by physicist Brian Greene. If there's another way relativity describes time, can you explain it to me or point me in the direction of something to read? Thanks!
@redbrickroadstudios ok i said i meant its wrong to assume, not that the assumptions wrong.
But it is though anyway (!).
ok so: u got the sensation of time, which is the 1st dimension of up/down, the 2nd dimension (perception, left/right) gives you the passage of time, allowing moments to pass. So: linear time. dimensions 5-8 u got holistic time where it's a big scaffold, and then it's resonant time, (dimensions 9-12) where time resonates through the scaffold, and time "zooms in and out".
@natmanprime Also, prior to Einstein, time was viewed as absolute. We now call that view classical or Newtonian. Einstein then described time and space as unified and relative. It's not my assumption that Newtonian time is the opposite of relativistic time, it's the history of western physics.
@redbrickroadstudios ...and thats real time, in the 12d universe. The magical universe (or Adverse) has Side real time, or Dream time. This is the dimensions 14-26. but thats a whole nother thing...
the 13th dimension is the null space or abstract "implication space" between universes, and is outside time.
I'm sure newtonian is different, but to say somethings opposite, you must occupy a third point, and that's arbitrary, no?
Comment removed
redbrickroadstudios 8 months ago
Comment removed
redbrickroadstudios 8 months ago
Oh man Alan's still on his Dr. Manhattan trip
As though we're in a 4d universe I can't believe it
I thought he'd grown out of that by now
natmanprime 1 year ago
@natmanprime Ignoring special relativity and using Newtonian time is growing up? Moore is getting his idea from how relativity interprets the nature of time, which is explained in the Rietdijk-Putnam_argument article on Wikipedia.
Brian Greene's book The Fabric of the Cosmos also explains how relativity describes an eternal block universe. The idea may be counter-intuitive, but it's not immature.
redbrickroadstudios 8 months ago
@redbrickroadstudios who's using newtonian time what on earth are you talking about?
natmanprime 7 months ago
@natmanprime Moore describes time in a relativistic manner. The opposite of that would be Newtonian time, which is an absolute past that is gone forever and an absolute future that hasn't happened yet, which is how the universe seems to us. Special relativity describes time differently however. I'd link you to Wikipedia articles, but I can't post links on Youtube. Check out the Rietdijk-Putnam_argument article and relativity articles though, which explain in detail what I'm talking about
redbrickroadstudios 7 months ago
@redbrickroadstudios i see...so u assume that i subscribe to newtonian time because anyone who believes different to Moore must subscribe to newtonian time, because of your 2nd assumption that newtonian time is the opposite to relative time.
ur 3rd assumption seems to be that there's only one way to see relative time, and thats Moore's way.
3 assumptions
i say thee NAY
thrice NAY
X D
natmanprime 7 months ago
@natmanprime If you don't view time in a classical manner, how do you view it then, since you told me my assumption is wrong? Moore's description of time matches the explanation of how relativity describes time as given by physicist Brian Greene. If there's another way relativity describes time, can you explain it to me or point me in the direction of something to read? Thanks!
redbrickroadstudios 7 months ago
@redbrickroadstudios ok i said i meant its wrong to assume, not that the assumptions wrong.
But it is though anyway (!).
ok so: u got the sensation of time, which is the 1st dimension of up/down, the 2nd dimension (perception, left/right) gives you the passage of time, allowing moments to pass. So: linear time. dimensions 5-8 u got holistic time where it's a big scaffold, and then it's resonant time, (dimensions 9-12) where time resonates through the scaffold, and time "zooms in and out".
natmanprime 7 months ago
@natmanprime Also, prior to Einstein, time was viewed as absolute. We now call that view classical or Newtonian. Einstein then described time and space as unified and relative. It's not my assumption that Newtonian time is the opposite of relativistic time, it's the history of western physics.
redbrickroadstudios 7 months ago
@redbrickroadstudios ...and thats real time, in the 12d universe. The magical universe (or Adverse) has Side real time, or Dream time. This is the dimensions 14-26. but thats a whole nother thing...
the 13th dimension is the null space or abstract "implication space" between universes, and is outside time.
I'm sure newtonian is different, but to say somethings opposite, you must occupy a third point, and that's arbitrary, no?
i think thats right, my brains a bit addled lol
natmanprime 7 months ago
@natmanprime :)
redbrickroadstudios 7 months ago
@redbrickroadstudios i've never known someone to so happily accept a rebuke
good on u chap
...u understood it, right...?
; )
natmanprime 7 months ago