UnderGround Forums
 

OtherGround Forums >> Scientists can prove that we're living in the past

| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

4/23/14 12:29 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Hunter Thompson's .45
2470 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/13/09
Posts: 10158
MR BIG1 - time does not exist
shiva
Except as a dimension. Those who think time doesn't exist are thinking of time as a measurement of space. In reality, you live within, and cannot escape, time.

Time is relative, but it certainly exists. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 2:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Taz
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/12/07
Posts: 3789
http://vimeo.com/m/73816999 Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 3:15 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
indianrob
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/9/07
Posts: 725
Hunter Thompson's .45 -
MR BIG1 - time does not exist
shiva
Except as a dimension. Those who think time doesn't exist are thinking of time as a measurement of space. In reality, you live within, and cannot escape, time.

Time is relative, but it certainly exists. Phone Post 3.0
Yea it always intrigues me when people understand this incorrectly and assume time isn't real. If time wasnt real there would be no reality. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 3:38 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ryans
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/18/10
Posts: 2077
Tiresias - 

Things are exactly as they seem, because there is no neutral "things in themselves" to compare the way they seem to.  Or if there were, it would be impossible to describe in language!


You could objectively and neutrally measure when an event occurs with scientific instruments, then you could record when it was perceived by the mind. The human mind doesn't change the way things are just by existing; there absolutely is objectivity in this particular case.
4/23/14 3:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ryans
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/18/10
Posts: 2078
^also, you're wrong in claiming that something cannot exist if it's impossible to describe in human language. It can definitely be the case that a neutral "things in themselves" can exist and be impossible to describe. Just like the International Space Station exists but is impossible to describe to a mouse.
4/23/14 5:28 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Moke
230 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 37594
I guess that makes hitting a baseball impossible. Somebody better tell the major leagues to just shut it all down.
4/23/14 6:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Tiresias
395 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/10/09
Posts: 30649
ryans - ^also, you're wrong in claiming that something cannot exist if it's impossible to describe in human language. It can definitely be the case that a neutral "things in themselves" can exist and be impossible to describe. Just like the International Space Station exists but is impossible to describe to a mouse.
I didn't say that at all. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 6:09 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Tiresias
395 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/10/09
Posts: 30650
ryans -
Tiresias - 

Things are exactly as they seem, because there is no neutral "things in themselves" to compare the way they seem to.  Or if there were, it would be impossible to describe in language!


You could objectively and neutrally measure when an event occurs with scientific instruments, then you could record when it was perceived by the mind. The human mind doesn't change the way things are just by existing; there absolutely is objectivity in this particular case.
The recordings and observations you refer to are no less "things as they seem", as per OP, than anything else. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 6:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Tiresias
395 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/10/09
Posts: 30651
In other words 'objective' and 'subjective' don't mean anything, ultimately. And this does NOT mean "we can't be objective". Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 6:26 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
sparkuri
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/4/08
Posts: 17673
I don't have time for this Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 6:56 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TFK_Fanboy
347 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/19/12
Posts: 6323
The Flash can. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 7:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Archangel
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/6/07
Posts: 6866
Apparently it must only take 80 milliseconds to fix a fuckup before you see it.
4/23/14 8:07 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Bisping'sLazyEye
148 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/1/11
Posts: 7742
The Brotorious B.I.G - The clapping example they used can easily be explained by the speed of sound, not by our brain lagging Phone Post 3.0
Is there an appreciable difference in the time it takes so d to travel a meter? Or even 30? I doubt it. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 8:18 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Al Cappucino
362 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/15/13
Posts: 3020
duckhuntgangsta - You're living in the past man Phone Post 3.0

Go fold your little balloon animals, Eric.....Eric....Ha ha. What kind of name is that for a clown?
4/23/14 8:28 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
lordbreakdown
204 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/6/09
Posts: 18753
Right Hand JO Power - What if c-a-t really spelled dog? Phone Post 3.0

thats heavy Oger

4/23/14 8:38 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
droplogic
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/22/07
Posts: 7617
Tiresias -
ryans - ^also, you're wrong in claiming that something cannot exist if it's impossible to describe in human language. It can definitely be the case that a neutral "things in themselves" can exist and be impossible to describe. Just like the International Space Station exists but is impossible to describe to a mouse.
I didn't say that at all. Phone Post 3.0
Why don't you stop living in the past...up your own ass. Talk like a normal person and you'll be understood. Every post you make is masterbatory. Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 8:39 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
bosly
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/27/10
Posts: 1821
In Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 9:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CelticWarrior
15 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/28/02
Posts: 205
Pics or I don't believe.
4/23/14 9:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ILoveWatchingJonesBoneShogun
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/27/08
Posts: 21002
KneeUpperCut Ios - 
Chimp vision - Isn't this just common sense?

Everything would be delayed due to the speed of light.

Just like the time it takes for the light of a star to reach earth, on a smaller scale, the light of the clap needs to reach your eyes and be interpreted by the electrical impulses of the brain. Phone Post 3.0

The point his that from 0 to 30m the clap and sound are in sync.

At 31 meters there is an abrupt loss of this correspondence between the sight and sound.

You know a lot about this shit, don't we process sound faster than light at close distances because the chemical reactions that happen in our brain to see take longer than hearing in our ears? If so, couldn't that explain why the sound seperates at this particular distance?
4/23/14 10:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ILoveWatchingJonesBoneShogun
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/27/08
Posts: 21003
So if we don't process light and sound at the same speed, and we process sound faster than our eyes ability to detect light, the distance would have to be far enough away for the speed of light to offset the speed advantage of auditory processing
4/23/14 10:08 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Druken Fist Fight
94 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/16/13
Posts: 565

I have an erection!

4/23/14 10:34 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
sycotik
214 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/16/12
Posts: 1783

I was tested that I only live 60 milliseconds in the past.  AMA

4/23/14 10:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
iclimb513
347 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/5/03
Posts: 12346
Right Hand JO Power - What if c-a-t really spelled dog? Phone Post 3.0

They're called "fingers", but I've never seen them fing.
4/23/14 10:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Jack Carter
1356 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/25/04
Posts: 83128
I think I can put it in a way that everyone can easily understand.

Before the threshold is reached, the light and the sound reach the brain at exactly the same time so both signals are processes as a single event.

The moment that threshold is passed, the light reaches the brain before the sound, so the brain has to process both as independent events and then link the two together so that both events are perceived as one single event.

Two additional processes, which require processing time, are required by the brain to perceive the event of someone clapping beyond the threshold Phone Post 3.0
4/23/14 10:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ILoveWatchingJonesBoneShogun
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/27/08
Posts: 21004
KneeUpperCut Ios - 
ILoveWatchingJonesBoneShogun - 
KneeUpperCut Ios - 
Chimp vision - Isn't this just common sense?

Everything would be delayed due to the speed of light.

Just like the time it takes for the light of a star to reach earth, on a smaller scale, the light of the clap needs to reach your eyes and be interpreted by the electrical impulses of the brain. Phone Post 3.0

The point his that from 0 to 30m the clap and sound are in sync.

At 31 meters there is an abrupt loss of this correspondence between the sight and sound.

You know a lot about this shit, don't we process sound faster than light at close distances because the chemical reactions that happen in our brain to see take longer than hearing in our ears? If so, couldn't that explain why the sound seperates at this particular distance?

But why would it ABRUPTLY separate?

Unless there's an active process syncing the two events, you would expect there to be a gradual loss of syncing as you moved away. Instead what you have happening is the two events remain synced up to a certain distance/delay, at which point the brain says fuck it and all of a sudden the full extent of the delay is realized.

The further away lightning is, the longer the delay from the time you see the lightning to the time you hear it, but there is a point where if lightning is close enough to you, you would hear it before you see it because the circuitry pathways take longer to experience through your eyes consciously than auditory processing.

This seperation is so miniscule at a close distance that we could never be aware that we heard sound before we saw the lightning, but we still know this must be the case. If we assume there is a limit to a labs ability to detect intervals of time, which i'm sure is the case, then there is a threshold where there appears to be a perfect sync only because of our inability to recognize the miniscule time elapse. Maybe the time elapse is a tenth of what we have the ability to detect so for all intents and purposes there is no time elapse at all.

So when we say we experience the clap visually and the sound of the clap in perfect sync, it might only be because the time elapse inside a particular difference is so tiny, that we don't have the technology to detect such a small time interval and only when it reaches a certain distance, which happens to be 31 meters, allows enough of a difference in the time elapse for us to recognize with our technology.

It might appear to abruptly seperate, but it could have been a gradual seperation at a time level that we can't detect, so when it reached a certain threshold it appears to be abrupt. We would expect the further away the clap is after 31 meters a gradual increase delay between sight and sound. Unless we can say with certainty that we can detect the tiniest time intervals, then I think this is a reasonable explanation of why it appears to be synced up until 31 meters before there is seperation.

| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.