Prove That Time Exists

[Dauphin]

Time is imaginery. Or is it imaginery time that is real? I forget what is not and not what's what.

[loinburger]

This is all the proof you need

[zakubandit]

Explain to me this...usually in sci-fi stories people say things like "we are 3 days away at warp 5," or "it's been 33 minutes since we last saw them," or "4000 years ago".....who's time is used? Galactic time? Earth time, which is irrelevant off world? What is the gauge of time in zero-gravity? A year on Earth is 1 full rotation of the Sun, but when you are not on Earth (yes chances are you will go by your original time) but how would one communicate with someone from another world, say a planet that has a different cycle (example: 29 hour days, 4 day weeks, 9.3 month year)?

[Kitschum]

Forget Time. Prove that Love exists.

[Kitschum]

Did you know that we only use 10% of our brains? Imagine what we could do if we could unlock the NINETY other percent!

[Kitschum]

What if Time is a verb? So then, Be-ing is actually Time-ing... I just think that makes a lot of sense.

[Lorizael]

Explain to me this...usually in sci-fi stories people say things like "we are 3 days away at warp 5," or "it's been 33 minutes since we last saw them," or "4000 years ago".....who's time is used? Galactic time? Earth time, which is irrelevant off world? What is the gauge of time in zero-gravity? A year on Earth is 1 full rotation of the Sun, but when you are not on Earth (yes chances are you will go by your original time) but how would one communicate with someone from another world, say a planet that has a different cycle (example: 29 hour days, 4 day weeks, 9.3 month year)?

Bad SF ignores relativity and uses an objective sense of time. Good SF has subjective time, the passage of which is measured independently for the traveler and the traveler's destination.

As far as different cycles, our measurements of time are no longer based on arbitrary stellar phenomenon but on arbitrary atomic phenomenon that we can bring with us.

Forget Time. Prove that Love exists.

Define love first, then we can prove that it exists.

Did you know that we only use 10% of our brains? Imagine what we could do if we could unlock the NINETY other percent!

This is not even remotely true. Jesus. I can't believe this stupid myth has survived to 2009.

[Kitschum]

Define love first, then we can prove that it exists.

First of all, your boyfriend/girlfriend is very lucky.

Second, how could I define something that doesn't (supposedly) exist? That doesn't make sense. And of course love exists, but we can't prove it, that's the point!!

This is not even remotely true. Jesus. I can't believe this stupid myth has survived to 2009.

Whatever. Why don't you open your mind a little? The man whose name you are taking in vain had an open mind, you know!

[Lorizael]

First of all, your boyfriend/girlfriend is very lucky.

Second, how could I define something that doesn't (supposedly) exist? That doesn't make sense. And of course love exists, but we can't prove it, that's the point!!

You fail Logic 101. If you have the ability to point to something and say "this is love" and point to something else and say "this is not love" then love has properties which can be defined. If it has properties, then we can observe it in nature and determine that it does exist.

Whatever. Why don't you open your mind a little? The man whose name you are taking in vain had an open mind, you know!

Humans are capable of quite a lot without having to believe in the 10% brain myth.

[Kitschum]

You fail Logic 101. If you have the ability to point to something and say "this is love" and point to something else and say "this is not love" then love has properties which can be defined. If it has properties, then we can observe it in nature and determine that it does exist.

How exactly do you propose that I "point" to Love, Poindexter?

Humans are capable of quite a lot without having to believe in the 10% brain myth.

I don't see you bringing a whole lot of answers to this thread for all your 'superior airs'. It still just looks like to me like we are all stuck in the same ignorant boat together, and at least I try to think positive!

[Lorizael]

How exactly do you propose that I "point" to Love, Poindexter?

Well, you implied that I love my girlfriend/boyfriend.

More generally, you believe that there are people that love each other. You have a reason for believing this. You also believe that there are people that don't love each other. Presumably, you have a reason for believing this as well. These two observations mean that somewhere in your head you have defined the properties of love, even if you can't enumerate them.

Love clearly exists because it's a label we've given to an observed set of phenomena. We all differ on the the specific phenomena, but we don't (with a few exceptions) believe that there is not a label called love to which we attach these observations.

If there is some true love that transcends our labels, we must first define it. True love is a man and a woman missionary style; true love is five midgets spanking a man covered in thousand island dressing; true love is the right chemicals at the right time. Once we've defined it, we can observe it.

[SlowwHand]

Did you know that we only use 10% of our brains? Imagine what we could do if we could unlock the NINETY other percent!

Imagine if all people would just use the 10%.

[SlowwHand]

What if Time is a verb? So then, Be-ing is actually Time-ing... I just think that makes a lot of sense.

So Time is almost as good a word as F**K. You may be onto something here.

[JEELEN]

Time is another definition of space.

No.

Yes. (Just following the same line of arguement.)

[SlowwHand]

Perhaps.