Re: Humans can't observe time. Even less, the pass of time. Science is an illusion.

On Sun, 27 Apr 2025 23:45:21 +0000, rhertz wrote:

>
Humans can't observe time. Even less, the pass of time.

>
Completely false.  The word "observe" means much more than to SEE.
An engineer observes what he doesn't see directly.  Defaults in
jet engines are observed but not seen.  They observe voltages and
currents without being electrocuted.  And they observe time with
clocks and frequency meters, etc.
>

Science is an illusion.

>
An engineer that doesn't understand technology has no business
making such a ridiculous claim.  He is delusional.
>

This is the topic of this thread but some people didn't get it AT ALL.

>
He also fails to understand that HE is the one who doesn't "get it."
>

As a dimension, time is a human construct, an artificial one, and
probably ill defined.

>
Words are human constructs, and "dimension" is a word.  Duh!
>

You can't OBSERVE time as you can observer REAL SPATIAL DIMENSIONS.

>
I observe spatial dimensions by seeing, true, but I also observe
them instruments (e.g., laser distance meter).  And airplanes are
located with radar.
>

If you place yourself in any given point (3D defined), you CAN
OBSERVE ANY DIMENSION in its depth, if you mark the axis of
observation with proper markers, equally spaced, until your sight
can't see any deeper.
>
You CAN'T OBSERVE TIME, because your brain CAN'T HOLD any account of
this abstraction.

>
Sure you can.  Galileo used his pulse and pendulums.  He also counted.
>

If you say you could, such temporal point didn't exist
one nanosecond after it.

>
And you can't observe a virus (or its location) without an instrument.
>

You CAN'T OBSERVE THE PASS OF TIME. Your human brain IS UNABLE to
register on such flow of this "dimension", because you DON'T
POSSESS THE ABILITY TO REGISTER EVENTS THAT EXIST DURING THE FLOW
OF TIME. Your brain ISN'T POWERFUL ENOUGH AND HAVE NOT THE FOCUS
TO REGISTER SUCH FLOW, which is given by the changes in objects
in the surrounding environment as time flows. You can't even
register your own biological markers, like your heartbeat,

>
Galileo did.
>

and gain consciousness about how time flows when you try to
register it.

>
Hertz must be unaware of the oscilloscope.
>

This is one of the reasons because of which SPACETIME IS PURE CRAP.

>
Spacetime may be incorrect, but not for the reasons Hertz rants about.
>
“spacetime is likely to be an approximate description of something
quite different.” – Steven Carlip
>

Without even moving spatially, you would find (CONSTANTLY) changing 4D
positions.

>
Yeah, I went into that.  Did Hertz read my comments about that and then
plagiarized me?
>

When I wrote that SCIENCE IS AN ILLUSION, it was not a random concept.

>
Au contraire.
>

Everything presented by science to you, IN ANY FORM AND IN ANY FIELD,
is in THE PAST.

>
Everything in the world that you experience is IN THE PAST.  Even the
last heartbeat that your brain registers.
>

So, you have to believe,

>
that you're still alive :_))
>

not to register. That's why science is an illusion, and
the proofs vanish in the past. THERE IS NOT NOW. GOT IT?

>
I got it long before Hertz did.  The difference is that he seems to
believe that this somehow disproves "science."  If his claim were
valid, it would disprove LIFE.  Anyone who believed his nonsense
would immediately nip off and shoot themselves.  Hopefully, no one
is that stupid (if they were and if they did, I suppose it would
improve the gene pool).
>
What Hertz fails to understand is that science is KNOWLEDGE:
>
"Science, any system of knowledge that is concerned with the
physical world and its phenomena and that entails unbiased
observations and systematic experimentation."
>
https://www.britannica.com/science/science
>
All knowledge is in the past, so of course science is in the
past Duh!