Was Adara discussed? Plus: Injecting race. Scientists gone maverick. Death of a giant. And more.
(Page 2 of 2)
There is actually a very basic explanation. While we, existing in the present, do go from past events to future ones, these events go the other way. First they are in the future and then in the past.
The question is whether time is a fundamental dimension along which the present moves/exists, or is it that motion is constantly rearranging the situation, so that the configuration of the pattern of what exists is continually changing and time is simply a consequence of this motion, as each arrangement is relaced by the next?
Does the earth travel the fourth dimension from yesterday to tomorrow? Or does tomorrow become yesterday because the earth rotates?If you can appreciate that it is the latter, it does explain the many anomalies of time with which physics must contend, such as why it is affected by gravity and velocity. These affect the rate of atomic activity and thus the ticking of the clock determined by that activity. Time as the probabilities of the future collapsing in the activity of the present, then into the determined order of past events, describes a dynamic process, while time as a dimension going from the determination of the past into the vagaries of the future leads to the many worlds scenario, which proposes all possible paths be taken.
Simply, time is a consequence of motion, not the basis for it. This means it actually has more in common with temperature, the scalar average of motion, than space. In fact, I suspect this means space isn’t relativistic, but is an inertial frame that does determine such things as the speed of light and why atomic activity slows as it increases velocity. This point raises questions about current cosmology, but that’s another topic.
Suffice to say, I get little positive response when I
raise this issue on various physics forums.
— John B. Merryman
Re: Ken Blackwell’s Obama Is Right and Carter Is Wrong:
Has anyone asked Jimmy Carter, Bill Cosby, or the
mainstream media if Obama’s persistent and ongoing criticism and
slander of George W. Bush is racially motivated?
— Gerry Kendall
THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS
Re: A Conversation With Irving Kristol:
With Kristol’s passing conservatism has lost what I
consider the third of modern conservatives’ giants: Friedman,
Buckley and Kristol. Their writings and editorships took this
squishy early twenties moderate on an intellectual journey that
settled me into a mature, deeply committed
— Paul Z.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?