(August 5, 2011 at 12:23 pm)Napoleon Wrote: Does it?
He/She said there would be no point to the passage of time. I was trying to point out that time only has a point because WE measure it.
Obviously objectively it serves other purposes but I was under the impression that the OP was talking about something subjective (consciousness).
I gota disagree, it doesn't only have a point because we measure it, it has a point because of the change in the increase of the disorder of a system, without time nothing would progress and entropy would not exist - Our measurement of time is really just a way to quantify regularities, such as the motion of the earth around the sun, the frequency a caesium atom vibrates in an atomic clock etc.
I believe the point the OP was trying to make in this regard is that because all 'moments' in time exist simultaneously in our 4dimensional universe there in a sense exists both consciousness and the universe simultaneously, just like the two dots on this line .--------. exist 'simultaneously', it was his conclusion from this that is misguided, he was arguing that because consciousness and the beginning of the universe exist simultaneously from a 4th dimensional perspective consciousness must be a necessary part.
This is of course under the premise of a B-Theory of time.
His whole argument was essentially a big non sequitur.
.
