Total Posts:71|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Time

Philosophy101
Posts: 125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.
Annnaxim
Posts: 228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 9:01:25 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
Time flies...

Seriously.
From what I gather, time is really just an axis along which events occur. Time is thus like a yardstick unsed to measure distances in time between events.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 10:45:15 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

One thing is certain, if time doesn't change/move/flow then change wouldn't occur. So is time an agent of change or is it change which gives time legitimacy?

Time seems to flow in one direction and dragging everything along with it, much like gravity which pushes us down. Our entire lives, most of us will fight this downward force, but through science, some have escaped into outer space and experienced zero gravity.

As for time travel, it would open up the possibility of paradoxes occurring, but this in itself is not enough to make time travel itself impossible. If time is affected by the gravitational forces of a black hole, then time is physical and not abstract. If it's physical, science will discover it's cause and how to overcome it.

What few people realize is that we are constantly looking at the past. It takes time for light to travel. The further away an object is, the further back in time we are looking. It also takes time for our brains to process the information it recieves. So even when looking in a mirror at your own reflection, you are seeing a fractionally younger version of yourself. If that mirror was far enough away, you could see yourself coming to stand in front of the mirror.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 6:55:11 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

Time is the distance between two events.
If all events everywhere are simultaneous, there is no time.
If there are no events, there is no time.
Otherwise, time exists.

If I go from one event to another, I have traveled trough time.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 11:32:39 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Time is a function - or expression - of entropy. This fits either model.

Personally, I'm a B-theorist. If we have a spatial graph with X, Y and Z axis, we don't ask whether any point on that graph is 'real' or whether it exists 'yet'. Adding a further axis - Z' - to represent time should be seen in the same way. That we experience it differently is an interesting question, but I don't think it ontologically significant for the same reasons as I don't think it absurd to ask "is this cube really a cube, or simply a square at a funny angle". In fact, I think the fact we can ask it is indicative of the answer "it is really a cube". Or, 4-dimensionally, a tesseract. It's a matter of geometry/topography.
Philosophy101
Posts: 125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 8:53:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 6:55:11 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

Time is the distance between two events.
If all events everywhere are simultaneous, there is no time.
If there are no events, there is no time.
Otherwise, time exists.

If I go from one event to another, I have traveled trough time
Time is the distance between events is an interesting way to look at the issue. What about events distant in space but close in time?
Philosophy101
Posts: 125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 9:01:18 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 10:45:15 AM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

One thing is certain, if time doesn't change/move/flow then change wouldn't occur. So is time an agent of change or is it change which gives time legitimacy?

Time seems to flow in one direction and dragging everything along with it, much like gravity which pushes us down. Our entire lives, most of us will fight this downward force, but through science, some have escaped into outer space and experienced zero gravity.

As for time travel, it would open up the possibility of paradoxes occurring, but this in itself is not enough to make time travel itself impossible. If time is affected by the gravitational forces of a black hole, then time is physical and not abstract. If it's physical, science will discover it's cause and how to overcome it.

What few people realize is that we are constantly looking at the past. It takes time for light to travel. The further away an object is, the further back in time we are looking. It also takes time for our brains to process the information it recieves. So even when looking in a mirror at your own reflection, you are seeing a fractionally younger version of yourself. If that mirror was far enough away, you could see yourself coming to stand in front of the mirror

I agree that paradoxes are a problem for time travel, but it seems like you believe in and of themselves they do not pose enough of a problem. What do you think they at least entail if unresolved?

You also bring up an interesting point about how we are constantly looking at the past. It occurs to me then there is a gap between the world and our minds. Our present is the world's past which brings up an interesting discussion about the conscious flow of time.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 11:53:47 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

Time comes in three forms: physical, natural, and historical.

Physical space-time is linear. It arose when the Big Bang singularity underwent some sort of quantum fluctuation thingy that separated gravity from the other three fundamental forces; this caused the spontaneous unraveling and rapid expansion of the universe that continues to this day.

Natural time is cyclical - life and death, followed by rebirth. These cycles repeat over physical time, being perpetuated by natural processes such as the evolution of stars, the rotation of planets, and the life cycles of organisms.

Historical time is the documentation of human affairs, and combines both linear and cyclical time.

Do you subscribe to A or B theory time?

Both are meaningless.

What do you think of time travel?

We haven't met time travelers and have no viable mechanism for backwards travel through physical time. The simplest explanation is that such travel is impossible and we just haven't figured out why yet.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 11:42:24 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/9/2016 11:53:47 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

Time comes in three forms: physical, natural, and historical.

Physical space-time is linear. It arose when the Big Bang singularity underwent some sort of quantum fluctuation thingy that separated gravity from the other three fundamental forces; this caused the spontaneous unraveling and rapid expansion of the universe that continues to this day.

Natural time is cyclical - life and death, followed by rebirth. These cycles repeat over physical time, being perpetuated by natural processes such as the evolution of stars, the rotation of planets, and the life cycles of organisms.

Historical time is the documentation of human affairs, and combines both linear and cyclical time.

Do you subscribe to A or B theory time?

Both are meaningless.

What do you think of time travel?

We haven't met time travelers and have no viable mechanism for backwards travel through physical time. The simplest explanation is that such travel is impossible and we just haven't figured out why yet.

Who says we haven't met time travelers? It's not like they would reveal themselves to us. Perhaps so called alien encounters are visitors from the future. Creating a paradox is however a major issue and would have to be avoided at all costs but this would easily be avoided by an all-knowing being. Apart from ensuring our survival as a species, this being would have no reason to interfere in our day to day lives.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.
David_Debates
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 12:03:23 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

I'd say that time is a reality. It is certainly not an illusion, it affects us daily.

From what I can tell, it is like a ray: continuing forever. However, we can only say that this ray exists in the physical realm. We don't have enough data on the non-physical realm.

I don't know if we can time travel. After all, time only moves forward, for what we can tell. In order to go back in time, you'd have to reverse it. That's different, however, from rewinding a tape, because even while you rewind a tape it is moving in a straight, definable pattern. Thus, time-travel would require us to change the direction of time, something I don't think can happen.
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 6:13:13 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.

I'm not sure I agree. Although how valid the concept of 'travel' is in B-theory might also be relevant.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 8:50:09 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 6:13:13 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.

I'm not sure I agree. Although how valid the concept of 'travel' is in B-theory might also be relevant.

Can you elaborate?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 12:03:07 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:01:25 AM, Annnaxim wrote:
Time flies...

Seriously.
From what I gather, time is really just an axis along which events occur. Time is thus like a yardstick unsed to measure distances in time between events.
Circular reasoning
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 12:30:18 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.
Theories of time are nothing but religions. People worship something they have absolutely no physical evidence of and can't prove exists, which would be time.
You'll get nothing but circular nonsense. Time travel is a contradiction in terms. In order to travel one must have a specifically defined starting point. There is no way to have a specifically defined point in time to begin from because it is simultaneously 6pm Monday evening in Texas and 6am Teusday morning in the Philippines....I.e. no specific time to start from therefore no way to begin "traveling".
Graincruncher
Posts: 2,799
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 7:46:26 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 8:50:09 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/11/2016 6:13:13 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.

I'm not sure I agree. Although how valid the concept of 'travel' is in B-theory might also be relevant.

Can you elaborate?

Probably! Which bit?
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 9:23:51 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 12:30:18 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.
Theories of time are nothing but religions. People worship something they have absolutely no physical evidence of and can't prove exists, which would be time.
You'll get nothing but circular nonsense. Time travel is a contradiction in terms. In order to travel one must have a specifically defined starting point. There is no way to have a specifically defined point in time to begin from because it is simultaneously 6pm Monday evening in Texas and 6am Teusday morning in the Philippines....I.e. no specific time to start from therefore no way to begin "traveling".

So you need a starting time and location. I guess you also gonna need a destination time and location.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 10:00:13 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 9:23:51 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 10/11/2016 12:30:18 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time? Do you subscribe to A or B theory time? Do you think it is an illusion or real? How would you describe it? What do you think of time travel?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.
Theories of time are nothing but religions. People worship something they have absolutely no physical evidence of and can't prove exists, which would be time.
You'll get nothing but circular nonsense. Time travel is a contradiction in terms. In order to travel one must have a specifically defined starting point. There is no way to have a specifically defined point in time to begin from because it is simultaneously 6pm Monday evening in Texas and 6am Teusday morning in the Philippines....I.e. no specific time to start from therefore no way to begin "traveling".

So you need a starting time and location. I guess you also gonna need a destination time and location.
No, you need a starting time to time travel. Location is irrelevant.
keithprosser
Posts: 1,979
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 11:26:55 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
I think it is easier to think about the controversy over the nature of time as boiling down to an argument over 'presentism' and various forms of 'non-presentism'.

Presentism is the philosophical position that only the present moment exists, ie the past and future do not exist. Time is the process by which 'future' is transformed into 'past'. Non-presentism is the position that the past and present (and possibly the future, depending on the flavour of non-presentism) exist equally.

In (most versions of) non-presentism, time is purely a matter of perception. The present moment is not distinguished from any other moment in any physical way - it is distinguished only by virtue of it being perceived as the present.

So in presentism, temporal change is real. In non-presentism there is no physical change, there is only change in our viewpoint of a fixed reality. In McTaggart's terms, presentism corresponds to 'A' and non-presentism corresponds to 'B'.

I tend to presentism, but I recognise that there are problems such as how to define a present moment ('now') that is compatible with special relativity which denies the existience of a unique 'now' moment, but I think such problems can be overcome with a more sophisticated formalism for defining the 'present moment' - I'm not clever enough to do that tho'!

Presentism puts a major obstacle in the way of time travel because it denies the existence of the past and the future. One cannot travel to something that does not exist. I can travel to existing places like Australia or Egypt, but I cannot travel to non-existing places like Utopia or Shangri La.

Non-presentist theories do not suffer that limitation because they explicitly maintain that the past and future do exist, suggesting time travel could be possible, Whether that makes presentism or non-presentism more or less likely I leave to the reader to decide!
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 11:30:17 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 7:46:26 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/11/2016 8:50:09 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/11/2016 6:13:13 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.

I'm not sure I agree. Although how valid the concept of 'travel' is in B-theory might also be relevant.

Can you elaborate?

Probably! Which bit?

You disagreed that "no time travel" is the simplest/easiest way to avoid paradoxes. If we can't travel back in time, then it doesn't matter whether A or B theory is correct, nor does it matter whether we have free will. Can you please explain why this is false, and/or how another model works better, and/or how I've misunderstood you?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 4:04:29 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/9/2016 11:53:47 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/8/2016 5:40:15 AM, Philosophy101 wrote:
What are your views on time?

Please, answer any or all of the questions, I would love to hear your responses.

Time comes in three forms: physical, natural, and historical.

Physical space-time is linear. It arose when the Big Bang singularity underwent some sort of quantum fluctuation thingy that separated gravity from the other three fundamental forces; this caused the spontaneous unraveling and rapid expansion of the universe that continues to this day.

Natural time is cyclical - life and death, followed by rebirth. These cycles repeat over physical time, being perpetuated by natural processes such as the evolution of stars, the rotation of planets, and the life cycles of organisms.

Historical time is the documentation of human affairs, and combines both linear and cyclical time.

Do you subscribe to A or B theory time?

Both are meaningless.

What do you think of time travel?

We haven't met time travelers and have no viable mechanism for backwards travel through physical time. The simplest explanation is that such travel is impossible and we just haven't figured out why yet.
So basically your screen name reflects bitterness because your whole post is logically inept blathering.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 4:37:40 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 4:04:29 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
So basically your screen name reflects bitterness because your whole post is logically inept blathering.

You're a definite example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 9:49:39 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 11:30:17 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/11/2016 7:46:26 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/11/2016 8:50:09 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/11/2016 6:13:13 AM, Graincruncher wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:18:42 PM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/10/2016 12:10:01 PM, Graincruncher wrote:
I think B-theory inherently resolves the paradox problem by doing away with freewill.

Doing away with time travel resolves it even better.

I'm not sure I agree. Although how valid the concept of 'travel' is in B-theory might also be relevant.

Can you elaborate?

Probably! Which bit?

You disagreed that "no time travel" is the simplest/easiest way to avoid paradoxes. If we can't travel back in time, then it doesn't matter whether A or B theory is correct, nor does it matter whether we have free will. Can you please explain why this is false, and/or how another model works better, and/or how I've misunderstood you?

I agree that is the simplest solution to a possible problem. But you will first have to prove the problem is possible. It's my contention that a being capable of time travel would also be emotionally mature enough to avoid tampering with the past unnecessarily. So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything. The future/past will undoubtedly unfold as it should. Ie, no paradox.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 10:41:55 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 9:49:39 AM, Furyan5 wrote::
I agree that is the simplest solution to a possible problem. But you will first have to prove the problem is possible.

First we prove that time travel works. If it doesn't, the paradox problem cannot arise anyway. If it does, we have to explain why paradoxes don't occur.

It's my contention that a being capable of time travel would also be emotionally mature enough to avoid tampering with the past unnecessarily.

How does this logically follow?

So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything. The future/past will undoubtedly unfold as it should. Ie, no paradox.

God is not an answer.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 10:54:56 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 10:41:55 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/12/2016 9:49:39 AM, Furyan5 wrote::
I agree that is the simplest solution to a possible problem. But you will first have to prove the problem is possible.

First we prove that time travel works. If it doesn't, the paradox problem cannot arise anyway. If it does, we have to explain why paradoxes don't occur.

It's my contention that a being capable of time travel would also be emotionally mature enough to avoid tampering with the past unnecessarily.

How does this logically follow?

So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything. The future/past will undoubtedly unfold as it should. Ie, no paradox.

God is not an answer.

God? Who said anything about God? We are discussing time travel. Try to stay focussed.
Genius_Intellect
Posts: 339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 11:17:23 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 10:54:56 AM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 10:41:55 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/12/2016 9:49:39 AM, Furyan5 wrote::
I agree that is the simplest solution to a possible problem. But you will first have to prove the problem is possible.

First we prove that time travel works. If it doesn't, the paradox problem cannot arise anyway. If it does, we have to explain why paradoxes don't occur.

It's my contention that a being capable of time travel would also be emotionally mature enough to avoid tampering with the past unnecessarily.

How does this logically follow?

So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything. The future/past will undoubtedly unfold as it should. Ie, no paradox.

God is not an answer.

God? Who said anything about God? We are discussing time travel. Try to stay focussed.

"So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything."

Sure sounds like you're implying God.

Also, you have not addressed either of my other two points.
Perussi
Posts: 760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 11:42:03 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
Tme is a parameter of movement, movement is what causes events.

"Time is the essence of movement, movement is the essence of events."
Forum Record: 6/0

Funny Quotes:

"i worship satan and allahu akbar and hispanic muslims i am an illigal immigrant"
-communist_snake-

"What fuking dates are you talking about child. the and ridiculous and stay out of mummies drugs, you're fuked."
-I'll keep this anonymous...-

"fuk off bog, no one even reads your crap, what price is you hooker now?"
-same dude as above....-
Furyan5
Posts: 1,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:09:10 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 11:17:23 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/12/2016 10:54:56 AM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 10/12/2016 10:41:55 AM, Genius_Intellect wrote:
At 10/12/2016 9:49:39 AM, Furyan5 wrote::
I agree that is the simplest solution to a possible problem. But you will first have to prove the problem is possible.

First we prove that time travel works. If it doesn't, the paradox problem cannot arise anyway. If it does, we have to explain why paradoxes don't occur.

Right now we can't, but the same was once said about defying gravity. Quantum mechanics has proven that the present can affect the past so it's just a matter of time till we figure it out.

It's my contention that a being capable of time travel would also be emotionally mature enough to avoid tampering with the past unnecessarily.

How does this logically follow?

What motivates us to want to change the past? Greed, regret, remorse, all human emotions. Like technology, humanity is also growing emotionally. We have a long way to go, but the progress is undeniable.

So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything. The future/past will undoubtedly unfold as it should. Ie, no paradox.

God is not an answer.

God? Who said anything about God? We are discussing time travel. Try to stay focussed.

"So apart from creating the universe and seeding young earth with life, this being has no reason to change anything."

Sure sounds like you're implying God.

Creating the universe. Seeding a planet with life. Although these may seem miraculous to you just as our current technology would seem miraculous to humans a thousand years ago. Hardly the voice from a burning bush you envision. Just advanced technology.

Also, you have not addressed either of my other two points.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 12:56:48 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 12:03:07 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:01:25 AM, Annnaxim wrote:
Time flies...

Seriously.
From what I gather, time is really just an axis along which events occur. Time is thus like a yardstick unsed to measure distances in time between events.
Circular reasoning

I don't see that at all.
Maybe you can explain it, but I don't see it.
What I see is the fallacy of equivocation.