Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #671465 > unrolled thread

How is time really organized

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-17 13:36 +0200
    Re: How is time really organized Natividad Ślusarski <rsi@val.pl> - 2026-07-17 12:10 +0000
      Re: How is time really organized Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2026-07-18 00:40 +0200
        Re: How is time really organized Cale Balabuha <eah@baal.ru> - 2026-07-17 23:04 +0000
        Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-18 06:34 +0200
          Re: How is time really organized "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-19 10:44 +0200
          Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-19 15:55 -0700
            Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-20 06:18 +0200
          Re: How is time really organized Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-20 07:39 +0200
            Re: How is time really organized Ivo Balakirev <vaovb@kkrea.ru> - 2026-07-20 10:12 +0000
            Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-20 10:44 -0700
        Re: How is time really organized Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-20 07:37 +0200
          Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-20 08:28 +0200
          Re: How is time really organized "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-20 13:13 +0200
            Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-20 17:21 +0200

#671465 — How is time really organized

2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
This is time.

We use the calendar to number years and
number days within a year. Then we use clocks
to obtain the precision required within a day.

The system is not perfect, but is good enough
to have been serving us well for many centuries.
Perfection may be common in your gedankenwelt.
In the reality it is very rare if exists at
all.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#671466

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
> This is time.

no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the 
past. Time is something completely else.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671469

Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>> This is time.
> 
> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the 
> past. Time is something completely else.

In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".

An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and a time.
 The date above lacks a location, so it is just _a_ time (based on a time
standard, UTC) -- but not time itself, which is a physical quantity.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671470

the imbecile Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn extreme stupid once again:

> Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>> This is time.
>> 
>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of
>> the past. Time is something completely else.
> 
> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
> 
> An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and a
> time.

you dont even capisce engilsh, you funking idiot. When about to register a 
timestamp, that's an event in physics and everywhere, you disgusting 
putrid sack of subhuman excrement. Get yourself a proper education and 
stop posting crap on usenet. Idiot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671472

On 7/18/2026 12:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>> This is time.
>>
>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the
>> past. Time is something completely else.
> 
> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".


In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671474

Den 18.07.2026 06:34, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> 
> In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.
> 

:-D

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671483

=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> 
> On 7/18/2026 12:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > Natividad Åšlusarski wrote:
> >> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
> >>> This is time.
> >>
> >> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the
> >> past. Time is something completely else.
> >
> > In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
> 
> In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.


"Oh, really?" 

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671484

On 7/20/2026 12:55 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
>>
>> On 7/18/2026 12:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Natividad Åšlusarski wrote:
>>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>>>> This is time.
>>>>
>>>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the
>>>> past. Time is something completely else.
>>>
>>> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
>>
>> In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.
> 
> 
> "Oh, really?"
> 

Oh, yes. Physics lives with its gedanken delusions.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671486

Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 06:34 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/18/2026 12:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>>> This is time.
>>>
>>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference 
>>> of the
>>> past. Time is something completely else.
>>
>> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
> 
> 
> In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.
> 

I'm actually not quite sure what an 'event stamp' could possibly be.

Usually points in space do not carry clocks or labels.

TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671490

Thomas Heger wrote:

>> In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.
>> 
>> 
> I'm actually not quite sure what an 'event stamp' could possibly be.
> 
> Usually points in space do not carry clocks or labels.

imbecile, you are making points in space outside the spacetime. Neither 
this cretin doesnt undrestand what spacetime is. Let me guess, you too are 
half german, historically

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671503

Thomas Heger wrote:
> 
> Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 06:34 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
> > On 7/18/2026 12:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Natividad Åšlusarski wrote:
> >>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
> >>>> This is time.
> >>>
> >>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference
> >>> of the
> >>> past. Time is something completely else.
> >>
> >> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
> >
> >
> > In physics there is nobody interested in the reality.
> >
> 
> I'm actually not quite sure what an 'event stamp' could possibly be.
> 
> Usually points in space do not carry clocks or labels.
> 
> TH


an "event stamp" is not measured with clocks...

if one wants to know which horse won...'by a nose', you
take a picture of it.

A photo finish.

The whole entire universe is measured frame by frame.

So in one frame, you have two noses that seem equal, but the finish line
is in a different frame of time.
One nose is a little ahead of the other nose at the frame of reference,
relative to the finish line.


Won by a nose.

winner winner, chicken dinner.




-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671485

Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>> This is time.
>>
>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference of the
>> past. Time is something completely else.
> 
> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
> 
> An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and a time.
>   The date above lacks a location, so it is just _a_ time (based on a time
> standard, UTC) -- but not time itself, which is a physical quantity.
> 

No, spacetime is 'coordinates free'.

You need an 'anchor point' to define space and time, because points do 
not carry labels or calendars.

Somethings you always have as reference is your own position and some 
time called 'now'.

So, most of the time some 'here-and-now-systems' are used.

But those system are quite arbitrary, because you could possibly be 
somewhere else.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671487

On 7/20/2026 7:37 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
>> Natividad Ślusarski wrote:
>>> Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>>>> 2026-07-10 14:32:12.000000000 UTC.
>>>> This is time.
>>>
>>> no it's not; it's a event stamp regarding an unachievable reference 
>>> of the
>>> past. Time is something completely else.
>>
>> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
>>
>> An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and a 
>> time.
>>   The date above lacks a location, so it is just _a_ time (based on a 
>> time
>> standard, UTC) -- but not time itself, which is a physical quantity.
>>
> 
> No, spacetime is 'coordinates free'.
> 
> You need an 'anchor point' to define space and time, because points do 
> not carry labels or calendars.

For an ape they don't. For a human they do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671493

Den 20.07.2026 07:37, skrev Thomas Heger:
> Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
>>
>> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
>>
>> An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and a 
>> time.
>>   The date above lacks a location, so it is just _a_ time (based on a 
>> time
>> standard, UTC) -- but not time itself, which is a physical quantity.
>>
> 
> No, spacetime is 'coordinates free'.
> 
> You need an 'anchor point' to define space and time, because points do 
> not carry labels or calendars.
> 
> Somethings you always have as reference is your own position and some 
> time called 'now'.
> 
> So, most of the time some 'here-and-now-systems' are used.
> 
> But those system are quite arbitrary, because you could possibly be 
> somewhere else.
> 
> 
> TH

Does the following make sense to you?

I was at the point in space and time (event):
Position: Latitude 58.328555°N, Longitude 8.567684°E, Altitude 20.5 m
Time:     July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC

Is this point in spacetime undefined because
  "spacetime is 'coordinates free'"?

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671498

On 7/20/2026 1:13 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 20.07.2026 07:37, skrev Thomas Heger:
>> Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
>>>
>>> In physics, there is such such thing as an "event stamp".
>>>
>>> An event is a point of (a) spacetime: it has a location in space and 
>>> a time.
>>>   The date above lacks a location, so it is just _a_ time (based on a 
>>> time
>>> standard, UTC) -- but not time itself, which is a physical quantity.
>>>
>>
>> No, spacetime is 'coordinates free'.
>>
>> You need an 'anchor point' to define space and time, because points do 
>> not carry labels or calendars.
>>
>> Somethings you always have as reference is your own position and some 
>> time called 'now'.
>>
>> So, most of the time some 'here-and-now-systems' are used.
>>
>> But those system are quite arbitrary, because you could possibly be 
>> somewhere else.
>>
>>
>> TH
> 
> Does the following make sense to you?
> 
> I was at the point in space and time (event):
> Position: Latitude 58.328555°N, Longitude 8.567684°E, Altitude 20.5 m
> Time:     July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
> 
> Is this point in spacetime undefined because
>   "spacetime is 'coordinates free'"?

Do you understand, BTW, that it is geocentric?
Or are you too stupid even for that?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web