Does zero exist as material, immaterial or both?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Quantum Quack, Oct 6, 2013.

  1. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Time is a measure of duration, it is not a measure of space. The measure of space is the SI unit the meter, and that is what is used to measure the space between the ball and the center of the earth. You see how that works? The distance between the ball and the center of the earth is a measure of space! We'll use the unit of measure the meter, not the unit of measure the second to measure that distance, K? Now answer my questions, what gives you the weird idea that the ball is accelerating at a rate other than zero while it's on the beach?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,696
    Ok. So why do you need to say the ball is at rest for 10 minutes, or 10 hours, or whatever the time is the ball isn't moving towards the center of the earth? Why even mention time if the ball isn't moving?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Motor Daddy is right , space didn't warp the lights path , the energy within this space did
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Jason.Marshall Banned Banned

    Messages:
    654
    It would seem that 0 is both material and immaterial depending on the angle of perceptive positioning. It would also seem that 0 and 1 are interchangeable objective metaphors of the wave particle dualty, where there is nothing waves exist, where there is something a position exist callasping an otherwise infinite wave into a measurable finite part '1' almost like like the two quanties how ever unmeasurable the other one is are superimposed?
     
  8. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    this wave-particle duality is misunderstood to my mind

    Think of a water wave

    The wave before the crest is a wave

    But when the wave crests , the wave breaks down into particles , the foam of the crest is particle
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    In terms of of whether zero exists as material , immaterial or both ?

    Both

    First zero being an accounting term , as in no money

    And the second in terms of absolute nothing
     
  10. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Motion occurs over a duration of time. There is no instantaneous motion. Distance has units of meters, and time has units of seconds. Motion has units of meters and seconds. In order to talk about motion you need to measure the DISTANCE AND TIME! The change in distance was zero, which makes the motion zero, regardless of the time.
     
  11. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    arfa brane, It appears to me that you have blind faith in your science. That is unless you can tell me why you believe the beach ball is accelerating...
     
  12. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,696
    But motion depends on time. You're saying that a motionless object doesn't have this dependence?
    You're saying this is only true when the object is in motion, it doesn't apply when the object is motionless?

    So what about all the atoms in the object? They aren't moving either?
     
  13. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    I'm not having a one sided conversation. Answer my questions or I'm done educating you.
     
  14. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,696
    Yes, you are.
    You're the only one listening to you. You think gravity acts only in three spatial dimensions, but you insist that the "motionless" ball has zero acceleration for "10 minutes", without explaining what happens to the acceleration during this duration of time. You have no explanation for the existence of time, in this model of gravity acting only in space.

    This is because you are from Kentucky.

    Look, you say:
    And you say:
    So gravity does not "work" in the fourth dimension, according to your theory.

    In fact, gravity is continuous, it "continues" to act on the ball or any other object "at rest" on the earth's surface. It acts in four dimensions.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2013
  15. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Not so quick to respond to my questions about your hallucination that the ball is accelerating, and how, but you're mighty quick to reply with useless information about Kentucky.

    I've already explained that the ball did not accelerate for that 10 minutes. What do you not understand about the ball not accelerating for a duration of 10 minutes?

    If you say that the ball is accelerating then tell me exactly how you arrive at that conclusion? What makes you think the ball accelerated during that 10 minutes? What is the acceleration rate towards the center of the earth? What distance did the ball travel during that 10 minutes towards or away from the center of the earth?

    You would rather live in your fairytale illusion than to answer my questions and face the reality. Sounds like religion to me. The word delusional seems appropriate too!
     
  16. N0THING Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    109
    If gravity stops acting on things at rest, why do things at rest still have weight?
     
  17. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    Do you know the difference between force and acceleration?
     
  18. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,281
    simple: gravity never stops acting....
     
  19. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,696
    Because the universe is actually four dimensional (or, let's assume it is) then gravity cannot act in only three dimensions.

    Therefore when the ball is at rest, it is in fact 'moving' in the time dimension. Otherwise, explain how gravity "stops" acting on objects at rest, or explain how time "disappears" when objects stop moving. Besides, the constituent particles that the ball is made out of, are never motionless, so you need to explain how gravity is not accelerating these particles.

    The thing is, the "force" of gravity depends on mass, mass doesn't disappear either; gravity continues to act on the ball's mass at all times, so what is gravity doing to the ball's mass when the ball is at rest? Excluding gravity from the time dimension introduces certain problems which I expect you are unable to even see, much less address in any meaningful way.
     
  20. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425

    Again you fail to understand what acceleration is. If an object such as a ball has a velocity, and the velocity remains unchanged over a duration of time, then there is zero acceleration for that duration of time. If you are in a car and the car is cruising at a steady 30 MPH for 10 minutes, then the car did not accelerate for that 10 minutes. The car's acceleration rate was zero for those 10 minutes. On the other hand if the car's velocity increased or decreased during that 10 minutes then the car accelerated. Acceleration is the RATE OF CHANGE OF VELOCITY. No change in velocity means no acceleration.

    You still do not understand what acceleration is. The ball has a zero velocity compared to the center of the earth. The ball's velocity remains zero for the entire ten minutes.

    I've asked you repeatedly to explain to me how it is you conclude the ball's velocity changed. What was the initial velocity at 12:00:00? What was the final velocity at 12:10:00? If the ball had an initial velocity of 0 m/s at 12:00:00 and it accelerated at \(9.8m/s^2\) for 10 minutes, then it had to have a final velocity of 5,880 m/s at 12:10:00, right? Are you saying that after the 10 minutes the ball increased its velocity 5,880 m/s??? Is that what you are saying? If not, please explain to me your personal interpretation of the term acceleration. The world wants to know!
     
  21. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    I think I figured out how to get the ball to travel at a velocity of 299,792,458 m/s (the speed of light). According to you if I place a beach ball on the beach and let it stay there for ((((299,792,458/9.8)/60)/60)/24)=354 Days it will have a velocity of the speed of light. So it's easy to get the beach ball to travel faster than the speed of light, just let it stay on the beach and accelerate at the rate of \(9.8m/s^2\) for a year! Whoda thunk it would be so easy?? Wait...is there some kind of rule of yours that the acceleration stops at 354 days so as to not surpass the speed of light and totally screw up Einstein's theory?
     
  22. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,696
    But you don't seem to understand how gravity acts, and that there are four, not three, dimensions for gravity to "act in". You don't seem to understand that your idea of gravity only acting in three dimensions has a big problem. Maybe you should move to Kansas.

    Think of it like this: when the ball is at rest, relative to the center of the earth, it's still moving in the time dimension. The ball still has the same mass, and gravity means the ball has weight; the force of gravity doesn't disappear when the ball is at rest.

    So gravity must still be acting on the ball, in all four dimensions. So the ball still has acceleration towards the center of the earth (in the time dimension), its constituent parts are not at rest (all its atoms are in motion), so "at rest" only applies to the shape of the ball and its apparently continuous 'materiality'.
     
  23. Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    How do you calculate this acceleration in the time dimension? What units do you use and how are they derived?

    I say the following equations apply to acceleration. How does your "the ball accelerates in the time dimension" statement apply to the equations if at all? If not, then which equation do you disagree with and why, and show me the equation you would use to calculate the acceleration in the time dimension.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    So for example, if I drop a bowling ball from a height of 362 meters above the surface of the earth, before I drop the ball it has an initial velocity of 0 m/s towards the center of the earth. When I release the ball the ball accelerates at a rate of \(9.8 m/s^2\). At t=0 the velocity of the ball is 0 m/s. At t=1 second the ball has a velocity of 9.8 m/s, and has traveled a total distance of 4.9 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=2 seconds the ball has a velocity of 19.6 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 19.6 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=3 seconds the ball has a velocity of 29.4 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 44.1 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=4 seconds the ball has a velocity of 39.2 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 78.4 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=5 seconds the ball has a velocity of 49 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 122.5 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=6 seconds the ball has a velocity of 58.8 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 176.4 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=7 seconds the ball has a velocity of 68.6 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 240.1 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=8 seconds the ball has a velocity of 78.4 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 313.6 meters towards the center of the earth. At t=8.5952 seconds the ball has a velocity of 84.23 m/s and has traveled a total distance of 362 meters towards the center of the earth as it impacts the earth.

    \( Distance: \ 362 \ meters Initial \ Velocity: \ 0 m/s Final \ Velocity: \ 84.23 m/s Acceleration: \ 9.8m/s^2 Time: \ 8.5952 \ seconds \)

    I showed you mine, now you show me yours!!! You can't, because your numbers do not add up because you DO NOT ACCELERATE IN THE TIME DIMENSION!!!
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2013

Share This Page