Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Arrow of Time Issue



On Mar 7, 2012, at 7:27 PM, Jack Uretsky wrote:
I don't understand you. Let me try to explain why in two ways:
"If time is increasing" suggests that "time" is defined in such a
way that it could be non increasing. "Time" is not so defined. We define
"time" by findng a periodic phenomenum, and then counting periods. The
count always increases - by definition. "If time is increasing" is
logically like saying "if four is greater than three". But four is
defined as three plus one. So the "if" in the statement is surplusage;
there is no laternate possibility. Same with "time". We define it so
that there is no alternate possibility.
Regards,
Jack
Well! This is no fun at all: not only is H.G Wells confabulating the device whose parts were of nickel, parts of ivory, parts that had certainly been led or sawn out of rock crystal, but that other recent contraption which prognosticates a certain parameter of an entity, one of a pair so intimately twisted together that knowing at any moment the value of that parameter in the one, leaves no doubt about the value to be found in its twin, no matter how remotely situated, at that very same moment, faster even than a speeding neutrino can carry news from Switzerland to the depths of a deep Italian mine. It is all too much!


Brian W