"Eugene Shubert" http://www.everythingimportant.org wrote in message
...
"AllYou!" wrote in message
... |
"Eugene Shubert" http://www.everythingimportant.org wrote
...
"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Time is what a clock measures.
A clock is what measures time.

Time is the thing that clocks measure. What do you want to make
out of that?

That time is just a concept invented by man and when we speak of
time dilation and a space-time continuum, they are only valid terms
within that context.

So says the ignorant and untaught.

I've never denied this. But you asked the question and so I answered. So
now I'll make an observation too. One big difference between you and I is
that no matter how much less those who are not expert in *my* field are than
me, I'd never resort to making such a statement as a response to an answer
they gave me to my question.........no matter how silly I thought it was it
was from my educated perspective. That's a distinction from you and some
others here of which I've very proud. Just an observation.

Why do those who insist that they understand these matters always
find it necessary to snip the relevant parts of the post to which
they reply?

You're not saying anything that's relevant.

It was a question, but you'd not understand that.

"Simpletons! How long will you wallow in ignorance?
Cynics! How long will you feed your cynicism?
Idiots! How long will you refuse to learn?"
Proverbs 1:22.

What is it about the following that scares you so much? Is your failure to
address the questions really that threatening?

Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.
A clock is what we look at to measure time.

Definition B:
Splat rays from the Sun are what a clock measure.
A clock is what we look at to count splat rays.

Definition C:
An angel getting it's wings rings a bell.
A bell is what records an angel getting it's wings.


Which definitions are scientifically valid?
What do they all have in common?
Which would still be true if man did not exist?
Is time more than just a man-made concept?
Are splats more than just a man-made concept?
Are angels more than just a man-made concept?

"AllYou!" wrote in message ...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Martin Hogbin

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Really? So time is what a clock measures, but a clock is not what measures
time? I can tell you that all we know about a clock is that it uses motion
to produce events. Any greater significance than this that we might ascribe
to a clock is nothing but unfounded speculation. Very poor science indeed.
--
"Probably the earliest fly swatters were nothing more than some sort of
striking surface attached to the end of a long stick."

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

LOL!

Read and weep:
http://tinyurl.com/4hyfd

Hmmmmmm. Lot's of back and forth and now nothing all of a sudden? Need the
weekend to climb out of this one? This ought to be good.

Let's see what you're made of.

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Really? So time is what a clock measures, but a clock is not what
measures
time? I can tell you that all we know about a clock is that it uses
motion
to produce events.

As has constantly been asked of you, and you have failed to detail, exactly
what motion produces what events in an atomic clock? The best you have been
able to come up with is 'So no theories can be proffered unless all
possibilities to the contrary are disproven'. Indeed since atomic clocks
work using QM principles the concept of a definite motion is not really
applicable - but an understanding of QM does not seem to be in your skill
set. And look at the wording of the above 'I can tell you that all we know
about a clock is that it uses motion to produce events.' - you are not
putting forward a theory for consideration - you are telling us how a clock
works. As Dirk says - 'Sucking Logic, Sucking Algebra, Sucking Attitude,
Sucking Thumbs, the deadly combination of IGNORANCE and ARROGANCE.'

Bill

Any greater significance than this that we might ascribe
to a clock is nothing but unfounded speculation. Very poor science
indeed.
--
"Probably the earliest fly swatters were nothing more than some sort of
striking surface attached to the end of a long stick."

"AllYou!" wrote in message ...

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

"Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

"Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

yes.

A clock is what measures time.

Silly.

To wit:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

b How do we measure time?

By looking at our clock.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Silly indeed. I'll even let you try again on your terms:

Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

yes

A clock is what we look at to measure time.

silly.

Yes, it certainly is, but as the evidence proves, it's a direct quote
from you. LOL!

Google:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...thor%3Amoortel
'did not match any records'

So you are a liar.

Really?

Yes.

You must be pretty desparte to run from that definition. Well not
only am I not a liar, but now your stuck with trying to backtrack from what
you've said AND the claim that it's silly. You've now claimed that your own
words are silly!

LOL!

Read and weep:
http://tinyurl.com/4hyfd

So now not only do you have to admit you're wrong about the definition, you
also have to apologize for calling me a liar. Let's see if you have the
balls, asshole. Let's see what you're made of.

Of the stuff that exposes liars and quote fabricators.
Your tiny url does not show a
"direct quote of me. LOL!",
saying what you say that I am saying. So for the record, you
have provided proof of your pathetic and desperate dishonesty.

"All the lonely people, where *do* they all come from?"

Dirk Vdm

"AllYou!" wrote in message news

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote
in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

LOL!

Read and weep:
http://tinyurl.com/4hyfd

Hmmmmmm. Lot's of back and forth and now nothing all of a sudden? Need the
weekend to climb out of this one? This ought to be good.

Let's see what you're made of.

....
seventy-one-dumb-Allyou!
seventy-two-dumb-Allyou!
seventy-three-dumb-Allyou!
....

Dirk Vdm

"Bill Hobba" wrote in message ...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Really? So time is what a clock measures, but a clock is not what
measures
time? I can tell you that all we know about a clock is that it uses
motion to produce events.

As has constantly been asked of you, and you have failed to detail, exactly
what motion produces what events in an atomic clock? The best you have been
able to come up with is 'So no theories can be proffered unless all
possibilities to the contrary are disproven'. Indeed since atomic clocks
work using QM principles the concept of a definite motion is not really
applicable - but an understanding of QM does not seem to be in your skill
set. And look at the wording of the above 'I can tell you that all we know
about a clock is that it uses motion to produce events.' - you are not
putting forward a theory for consideration - you are telling us how a clock
works. As Dirk says - 'Sucking Logic, Sucking Algebra, Sucking Attitude,
Sucking Thumbs, the deadly combination of IGNORANCE and ARROGANCE.'

Bill

Bill, considering that he clearly has taken a habit of calling the both
of us "bitter old fools"
( http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...you+bitter+old ),
how young do you estimate this particular mental case?

Dirk Vdm

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote
in message ...

"Bill Hobba" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Really? So time is what a clock measures, but a clock is not what
measures
time? I can tell you that all we know about a clock is that it uses
motion to produce events.

As has constantly been asked of you, and you have failed to detail,
exactly
what motion produces what events in an atomic clock? The best you have
been
able to come up with is 'So no theories can be proffered unless all
possibilities to the contrary are disproven'. Indeed since atomic clocks
work using QM principles the concept of a definite motion is not really
applicable - but an understanding of QM does not seem to be in your
skill
set. And look at the wording of the above 'I can tell you that all we
know
about a clock is that it uses motion to produce events.' - you are not
putting forward a theory for consideration - you are telling us how a
clock
works. As Dirk says - 'Sucking Logic, Sucking Algebra, Sucking
Attitude,
Sucking Thumbs, the deadly combination of IGNORANCE and ARROGANCE.'

Bill

Bill, considering that he clearly has taken a habit of calling the both
of us "bitter old fools"
( http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...you+bitter+old ),
how young do you estimate this particular mental case?

Hard one Dirk. I am 49 and am just starting an early retirement due to
health issues (in Australia retirement age is 55 for Government employees,
although you can continue until 65 if you want) - so if you count me as
young I do not know. Mental incompetence can occur at any age - as the
innumerable discussions in my youth with religious fundamentalists show.
But young people are not normally as set in their ways as this poster
obviously is - I suspect he has formed his view over many years and the
reason he fights tooth and nail is he does not want to change long held
beliefs. He definitely demonstrates actions consistent with dementia (my
poor mother has just been diagnosed with it - due to damage to the frontal
part of the brain aggressive behavior will often surface). Thus at a guess
60+.

Of course he will now probably accuse me of saying he is demented which of
course is not what I said - but it would be consistent with his actions on
this newsgroup.

Thanks
Bill


Dirk Vdm

"AllYou!" wrote in message ...
"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"AllYou!" wrote in message
...
Definition A:
Time is what a clock measures.

Yes.

A clock is what measures time.

No, everyone knows what a clock is.

Really? So time is what a clock measures, but a clock is not what measures
time? I can tell you that all we know about a clock is that it uses motion
to produce events. Any greater significance than this that we might ascribe
to a clock is nothing but unfounded speculation. Very poor science indeed.

xxein: I wouldn't say a clock produces events (other than its own)
--- it is used to coorelate events. We still use it improperly in the
scientific fashion of it all.