dkreezy by your arguement Time would be both the 3rd and 4rth dimensions.I am sorry but when it comes to society's understanding of time as per it being constant that is just WRONG it is not constant in any way, shape, form or fashion.
venuspcs... Firstly, I can't resist... 3rd dimension? I don't recall claiming that time is height/depth, or the z coordinate of the Cartesian coordinate system. Please, don't put words in my mouth, especially words that make no sense. My commentary was regarding other people's arguments on time, and was by no means concocting a new definition of time.Secondly, the second paragraph of your reply served no function but to reiterate and strengthen my argument - You obviously subscribe to the theory of relativity's definition of time. You can't honestly claim that either definition is wrong, they are simply referring to two different things. It just so happens that in most contexts, time is considered to be constant.
max420Jan 5, 2009
This is an excellent movie...
Closed AccountJan 5, 2009
"Quantum physics, on the other hand, causes aneurysms."Only sometimes.
Closed AccountJan 6, 2009
This articles perception of time travel is highly inaccurate. What would Stephen Hawking say about this?
mfhayesJan 6, 2009
Yeah! Great book.
southernxfriedJan 7, 2009
You too. I have gotten as fast as one second at a time.
venuspcsJan 13, 2009
dkreezy by your arguement Time would be both the 3rd and 4rth dimensions.I am sorry but when it comes to society's understanding of time as per it being constant that is just WRONG it is not constant in any way, shape, form or fashion.
dkreezyJan 29, 2009
venuspcs... Firstly, I can't resist... 3rd dimension? I don't recall claiming that time is height/depth, or the z coordinate of the Cartesian coordinate system. Please, don't put words in my mouth, especially words that make no sense. My commentary was regarding other people's arguments on time, and was by no means concocting a new definition of time.Secondly, the second paragraph of your reply served no function but to reiterate and strengthen my argument - You obviously subscribe to the theory of relativity's definition of time. You can't honestly claim that either definition is wrong, they are simply referring to two different things. It just so happens that in most contexts, time is considered to be constant.