
( , Wed 6 Dec 2023, 15:42, Reply)

but it's under 300 milliseconds unless you arrange some quite specific situations, like Bose-Einstein condensates. Basically, you can stretch out now for as long as you can stop a superposition from collapsing, and even then only in the local area of the particle in a superposition.
Also, the set of all sets does contain itself, but does the set of all sets which do *not* contain themselves contain itself?
( , Wed 6 Dec 2023, 18:02, Reply)

If you could instantly snapshot all the nows across the observable universe (accounting for every kind of time lag/latency) they would not all describe the same moment in terms of causality and the next tick of their quantum woo clocks would all diverge from each other according to local gravity, velocity and distance from each other. So there is no absolute now, only a fuzzy relative now, human perception of time is probably total bullshit, there are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
( , Wed 6 Dec 2023, 19:27, Reply)

( , Thu 7 Dec 2023, 9:23, Reply)

but the guy in the video only mentions the set of all sets and whether it contains itself, which, of course, it does. It seems he was trying to refer to Russel's paradox but got it wrong.
( , Thu 7 Dec 2023, 11:12, Reply)

but that's because life itself is essentially a complicated form of causality, so we are incapable of experiencing reality as a continuum with past present and future all existing together where "now" has no intrinsic meaning beyond the ordinal position of that form in that continuum. That Einsteins relativism is the only way that we can accurately describe that reality, by its relation to other forms. There is no "hour" or "now", just an ordinal relationship of causality depending on the closeness of events and the observer. Therefore, I should not have to pay this parking ticket.
Sincerely
cumquat may
( , Wed 6 Dec 2023, 23:22, Reply)

but that's when now will be then. Then will never be now again.
( , Thu 7 Dec 2023, 11:18, Reply)

But if space isn’t quantised then why should time be?
No need to answer; that’s one of those questions where if you can understand the answer you wouldn’t have needed to ask the question in the first place.
( , Thu 7 Dec 2023, 11:31, Reply)

given that negative mass is a plausible thing, and given that negative mass objects in motion behave as if they're time reversed, and given that observers moving at (or above) relativistic speeds would witness some causality-breaking effects when observing each other...
If time is an emergent quality of space, and space can be manipulated, I think it's plausible that we could arrange energy and mass in ways that allow for meaningful/useful time reversal.
( , Thu 7 Dec 2023, 17:46, Reply)

- by Missery, from The Sulks.
( , Fri 8 Dec 2023, 19:12, Reply)