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 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-22 08:36 +0200
            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> - 2026-07-23 07:26 +0200
                Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-23 09:26 -0700
                  Re: How is time really organized Fayv Bakharev <kerv@aaaah.ru> - 2026-07-23 18:10 +0000
                    Re: How is time really organized Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-23 15:16 -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 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-22 08:28 +0200
              Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-22 09:41 +0200
                Re: How is time really organized Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-23 07:33 +0200
                  Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-23 07:52 +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
              Re: How is time really organized "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-22 20:44 +0200
                Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-22 22:14 +0200
                  Re: How is time really organized "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-23 13:56 +0200
                    Re: How is time really organized Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-23 14:45 +0200
                    Re: How is time really organized Barton Valetov <btaovl@lln.ru> - 2026-07-23 12:54 +0000
                      Re: How is time really organized Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-07-23 15:54 +0200
                        Re: How is time really organized Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-23 08:31 -0700
            Re: How is time really organized Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-22 08:41 +0200
              Re: How is time really organized "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-22 20:59 +0200
                Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-22 15:48 -0700
          Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-22 15:05 -0700
            Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-22 15:16 -0700
            Re: How is time really organized The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-07-22 15:21 -0700
            Re: How is time really organized Dolph Bazulev <vblpb@vuu.ru> - 2026-07-23 21:16 +0000

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#671595

Am Mittwoch000022, 22.07.2026 um 09:41 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/22/2026 8:28 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am Montag000020, 20.07.2026 um 08:28 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 7/20/2026 7:37 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Has anybody ever found 'labels' at locations in outer space, which 
>> state, where you actually are?
>>
>> Actually: no, since no such thing exists.
>>
>> Instead, you need reference points, if you want to measure or define 
>> distances.
>>
>> Same with time:
>>
>> time is always (and always was of or will be) 'relative'.
> 
> Union of Lublin: 1569-07-01
> Battle of Lepanto: 1571-10-07
> The Boston tea party: 1773-12-16
> and so on.


You name some events and their usual dates.

Ok, so far so good.

But these dates are by no means universal, because they are all 'Earth 
based'.

But even on our own home planets there exist other systems to write 
dates, which would describe the same events by totaly different numbers.


> Sorry, dealing with your moronic physics has
> completely ruined your contact with the reality.
> 

I would express the same idea with slightly different words:

your moronic reality has completely ruined your contact with physics


TH

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

#671596

On 7/23/2026 7:33 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am Mittwoch000022, 22.07.2026 um 09:41 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/22/2026 8:28 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am Montag000020, 20.07.2026 um 08:28 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>>>> On 7/20/2026 7:37 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Has anybody ever found 'labels' at locations in outer space, which 
>>> state, where you actually are?
>>>
>>> Actually: no, since no such thing exists.
>>>
>>> Instead, you need reference points, if you want to measure or define 
>>> distances.
>>>
>>> Same with time:
>>>
>>> time is always (and always was of or will be) 'relative'.
>>
>> Union of Lublin: 1569-07-01
>> Battle of Lepanto: 1571-10-07
>> The Boston tea party: 1773-12-16
>> and so on.
> 
> 
> You name some events and their usual dates.
> 
> Ok, so far so good.
> 
> But these dates are by no means universal, because they are all 'Earth > based'.

Still they are THE time.

>> Sorry, dealing with your moronic physics has
>> completely ruined your contact with the reality.
>>
> 
> I would express the same idea with slightly different words:
> 
> your moronic reality has completely ruined your contact with physics

:)
Agree. I'll keep stuck to the reality, anyway.

[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] | [next] | [standalone]

#671579

Den 20.07.2026 17:21, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/20/2026 1:13 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>> 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?

What does it mean that the point in my office
at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
is geocentric?



-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

#671583

On 7/22/2026 8:44 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 20.07.2026 17:21, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/20/2026 1:13 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>> 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?
> 
> What does it mean that the point in my office
> at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
> is geocentric?

That it is geocentric, poor trash.


> 
> 
> 

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

#671602

Den 22.07.2026 22:14, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/22/2026 8:44 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 20.07.2026 17:21, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 7/20/2026 1:13 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do you understand, BTW, that it is geocentric?
>>> Or are you too stupid even for that?
>>
>> What does it mean that the point in my office
>> at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
>> is geocentric?
> 
> That it is geocentric, poor trash.
> 
An event (point in time and space) does not depend
on the arbitrary choice of coordinate system in
which it is defined. I chose to use a geocentric
coordinate system, but I might equally well have
chosen to use a heliocentric coordinate system,
or a local coordinate system with my desk as origin.

The event is unique, and it is meaningless to call
it geocentric', 'heliocentric' or 'desk-centric'.


-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

#671603

On 7/23/2026 1:56 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 22.07.2026 22:14, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/22/2026 8:44 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> Den 20.07.2026 17:21, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>> On 7/20/2026 1:13 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do you understand, BTW, that it is geocentric?
>>>> Or are you too stupid even for that?
>>>
>>> What does it mean that the point in my office
>>> at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
>>> is geocentric?
>>
>> That it is geocentric, poor trash.
>>
> An event (point in time and space) 

An event is an event, a point is a point.
Do you think mixing these [similar] terms makes
you looking smarter?
And "Latitude 58.328555°N, Longitude 8.567684°E, Altitude
20.5 m" - are geocentric. Definitely.

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

#671604

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> An event (point in time and space) does not depend on the arbitrary
> choice of coordinate system in which it is defined. I chose to use a
> geocentric coordinate system, but I might equally well have chosen to
> use a heliocentric coordinate system,
> or a local coordinate system with my desk as origin.
> 
> The event is unique, and it is meaningless to call it geocentric',
> 'heliocentric' or 'desk-centric'.

yes, but it supposes you have another event as reference, both in time and 
space, otherwise there are no events

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

#671608

On 23/07/2026 14:54, Barton Valetov wrote:
> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> 
>> An event (point in time and space) does not depend on the arbitrary
>> choice of coordinate system in which it is defined. I chose to use a
>> geocentric coordinate system, but I might equally well have chosen to
>> use a heliocentric coordinate system,
>> or a local coordinate system with my desk as origin.
>>
>> The event is unique, and it is meaningless to call it geocentric',
>> 'heliocentric' or 'desk-centric'.
> 
> yes, but it supposes you have another event as reference, both in time and
> space, otherwise there are no events

Or, said more technically, position is a torsor,
and needs a coordinate system to become a number:
only distance is independent of coordinates.

Julio

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

#671610

On 07/23/2026 06:54 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> On 23/07/2026 14:54, Barton Valetov wrote:
>> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>>> An event (point in time and space) does not depend on the arbitrary
>>> choice of coordinate system in which it is defined. I chose to use a
>>> geocentric coordinate system, but I might equally well have chosen to
>>> use a heliocentric coordinate system,
>>> or a local coordinate system with my desk as origin.
>>>
>>> The event is unique, and it is meaningless to call it geocentric',
>>> 'heliocentric' or 'desk-centric'.
>>
>> yes, but it supposes you have another event as reference, both in time
>> and
>> space, otherwise there are no events
>
> Or, said more technically, position is a torsor,
> and needs a coordinate system to become a number:
> only distance is independent of coordinates.
>
> Julio
>

A "torsor" invokes "torsion",
and it's really quite sensible,
for example where "torsors" model "tensors",
about space-contraction, and where
the theory of relativity has real space-contraction and
the theory of the quantum has real wave-collapse.

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

#671546

Am Montag000020, 20.07.2026 um 13:13 schrieb Paul B. Andersen:
> 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'"?
> 
Our common '3-space' is a 'sub-space of spacetime.

Spacetime is coordinates free, but on the surface of our home planet we 
have coordinates (based on our home planet).


The usual notation of spacetime as 'four dimensional' space is imho 
nonsense, since in my oppinion time is an imaginary axis and you need 8 
components to describe spacetime by means of so called 'bi-quaternions'.


In case you like to learn more, you could read my 'book':

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing


TH

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

#671580

Den 22.07.2026 08:41, skrev Thomas Heger:
> Am Montag000020, 20.07.2026 um 13:13 schrieb Paul B. Andersen:
>>
>> 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'"?
>>
> Our common '3-space' is a 'sub-space of spacetime.
> 
> Spacetime is coordinates free, but on the surface of our home planet we 
> have coordinates (based on our home planet).
> 
> 
> The usual notation of spacetime as 'four dimensional' space is imho 
> nonsense, since in my oppinion time is an imaginary axis and you need 8 
> components to describe spacetime by means of so called 'bi-quaternions'.

You didn't answer the question:

Does it make sense to you that I was in my office
at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC ?

That means that I was at a specific point in time and space.

What is your problem with that?



-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

#671590

Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> 
> Den 22.07.2026 08:41, skrev Thomas Heger:
> > Am Montag000020, 20.07.2026 um 13:13 schrieb Paul B. Andersen:
> >>
> >> 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:Â Â Â Â  July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC
> >>
> >> Is this point in spacetime undefined because
> >> Â Â "spacetime is 'coordinates free'"?
> >>
> > Our common '3-space' is a 'sub-space of spacetime.
> >
> > Spacetime is coordinates free, but on the surface of our home planet we
> > have coordinates (based on our home planet).
> >
> >
> > The usual notation of spacetime as 'four dimensional' space is imho
> > nonsense, since in my oppinion time is an imaginary axis and you need 8
> > components to describe spacetime by means of so called 'bi-quaternions'.
> 
> You didn't answer the question:
> 
> Does it make sense to you that I was in my office
> at the time July 20, 2026 11:01.21 UTC ?
> 
> That means that I was at a specific point in time and space.
> 
> What is your problem with that?



I don't trust you were there...you're making it up.

Where's the edvience? Prove it.

fake datestamps.

2nd grade physics.





-- 
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]

#671584

Thomas Heger wrote:
> 
> Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> > 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".
> >
> > 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

Well, guys say here and now...and girls say this and that.

So, I tell girls, you see this here, well I want that now!

-- 
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]

#671586

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Thomas Heger wrote:
> >
> > Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> > > 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".
> > >
> > > 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
> 
> Well, guys say here and now...and girls say this and that.
> 
> So, I tell girls, you see this here, well I want that now!
> 


I was over here, and now I'm over here.





-- 
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]

#671587

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Thomas Heger wrote:
> >
> > Am Samstag000018, 18.07.2026 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> > > 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".
> > >
> > > 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
> 
> Well, guys say here and now...and girls say this and that.
> 
> So, I tell girls, you see this here, well I want that now!

She sez, "I know what you want, you want this!"

I say, "Yeah, I want that!"

Here, now!






-- 
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]

#671626

The Starmaker wrote:

> Thomas Heger wrote:
>> But those system are quite arbitrary, because you could possibly be
>> somewhere else.
>> 
>> TH
> 
> Well, guys say here and now...and girls say this and that.
> 
> So, I tell girls, you see this here, well I want that now!

the tv capitalist jew trumpf is crapping hard into his pants now, worse 
than the smellensky

Backup Trump, you’re watching a movie…central casting [92p5yoys3J3L].mp4

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web