[aetzbar (OP)]

Does time have a beginning? You have to say what time it is.
Passive time is a quantitative thing that fills the infinite space.
Does infinite space have a beginning? There is no answer to this question.
Does active time have a beginning? Yes
When physical change began in the world, active time began.
when was that ? Just when physical change began in the world.
When did a physical change begin? Just when the active time appeared.

[Bogie_smiles]

Time, to me, is a measurement associated with the accounting of a sequential passing of increments accomplished by anything that has a consistent "tick" feature as in a clock, that can be used to measure the rate that time passes (but than can include comparable aging of things that have a well known rate of aging). All known clocks will measure the rate of passing time, and the rate measured is relative to some factor in or of the environment of the clock, like acceleration, relative motion, or altitude in a gravitational field,


The concept of time passing began in the intelligent minds, but the passing of time would have begun with the origin of the universe if the universe began at a point in time. If the universe has always existed, the passing of time has always existed.

[aetzbar (OP)]

You deal with time that is close to physical activity, like a heartbeat.
I call this time ... active time.
To this day, this is the only time humanity has discussed it, and measured it.
This time has a subjective direction, in the consciousness of man.

But there is still time in reality, which I call passive time.
Passive time is quantitative and measured, and has no directional orientation.
Passive time fills the infinite space,
Passive time has a very important physical role in creating matter.

[Bogie_smiles]

You deal with time that is close to physical activity, like a heartbeat.
I call this time ... active time.
To this day, this is the only time humanity has discussed it, and measured it.
This time has a subjective direction, in the consciousness of man.

But there is still time in reality, which I call passive time.
Passive time is quantitative and measured, and has no directional orientation.
Passive time fills the infinite space,
Passive time has a very important physical role in creating matter.

I put your idea of passive time into the category of things that are outside of my life experiences, knowledge and appreciation, and so I can’t lend anything to the  discussion of it.

You are repeating the idea here and there, and so you might have some of your own life experiences that make the concept meaningful to you. If so, share.

However, in the absence of any sharing you may be able offer, it is a bold statement to make that passive time has a very important physical role in creating matter. Right away, “creating” raises the common questions in my mind about a supernatural event, but you may not be meaning that. Would it be right or wrong to rephrase that statement, using “causing” in place of “creating”? It would read, “Passive time has a very important physical role in 'causing' matter".

[aetzbar (OP)]

In physical reality there are only 5 "quantitative things"
Length, area, volume, time and energy.
"Quantitative things are scientific because they are measured.
With these five things one has to create a physical theory that will explain where the material came from.
The only option is a combination of time and energy.
For this to be realized, the passive time had to be invented.
Oddly, passive time is measured, so it is realistic science.

[Bogie_smiles]

In physical reality there are only 5 "quantitative things"
Length, area, volume, time and energy.

I can agree with you on that. I refer to them as space, time and energy, and in my view they are all infinite.

"Quantitative things are scientific because they are measured.

When you say, “they are measured”, do you mean they are measurable, not quantified in their full extent?

With these five things one has to create a physical theory that will explain where the material came from.
The only option is a combination of time and energy.

Hmm.

For this to be realized, the passive time had to be invented.
Oddly, passive time is measured, so it is realistic science.

I don’t agree with the statement that passive time needed to be invented. My view is quite simple; space, time, and energy have always existed. No need to invent passive time, no creation, no “something from nothing”, just “always existed”.

[aetzbar (OP)]

And what about the material? This is the key to any physical theory.
The material is not a quantitative concept.
The material is a physical form.
If a theory does not explain the appearance of matter in reality, it is doomed to failure.
The explanation I suggested sounds fantastic, but it is simply realistic.
As there is passive energy, so there is passive time.
It's hard to get used to the idea of passive time, but it introduces new physics.

[Bored chemist]

In physical reality there are only 5 "quantitative things"

That's still obviously wrong.
Why do you keep saying it?

Oddly, passive time is measured, so it is realistic science.

No.
It's a thing you made up.

[aetzbar (OP)]

Do you know any more "quantitative object" except length, space, volume, time and energy?
Note that you have a natural ability to identify a "quantitative object"
I claim that there are only five quantitative objects in the world, and from them one can create a new physical theory.
It is an amazing physics, in which matter is created by the fusion of energy and passive time.
This is another physics, Newton's physics and Einstein.
In this physics there is passive energy, which does not participate in the conservation law.

[Bogie_smiles]

And what about the material? This is the key to any physical theory.
The material is not a quantitative concept.
The material is a physical form.
If a theory does not explain the appearance of matter in reality, it is doomed to failure.
The explanation I suggested sounds fantastic, but it is simply realistic.
As there is passive energy, so there is passive time.
It's hard to get used to the idea of passive time, but it introduces new physics.

Matter is composed of particles, and particles, having wave-particle duality, can also be called wave-particles. Waves carry energy, and as such are part of the three infinities that you recognize, and call the 5 quantitative things; space, time, and energy.

I’ve been in the situation where a long term effort to understand the universe met with a concept that falsified a major premise, sending me back to the drawing board. It wasn’t a negative experience though, it was a learning and growing experience. If you ever decide to revise your premise on passive time, you may, as a result, find new, open avenues toward a better understanding of what interests you most in regard to science.

[Bored chemist]

I claim that there are only five quantitative objects in the world,

You do make that claim.
And it's clearly nonsense, but you keep claiming it.
It is, for example, obvious that weight is a quantitative thing and people can estimate it quite well without any other equipment.
Obviously, we can do even better with a balance- it's not difficult to get one that will sense  changes in weight of a part in a million or so.


So.
Given that it is obvious that what you are saying is a lie, why do you keep telling that lie?

[aetzbar (OP)]

You claim that weight is a "quantitative object" but you mean passive energy.
Inside the device "hides a spring" and it measures passive energy.
If you stand on the device it will shrink, and so it will measure your passive energy.
If we mark the passive energy of 125 cubic meters of iron, in 1 - then we will get.
The amount of passive energy of an adult is about 80
The amount of passive energy of a car is about 1200
The amount of passive energy of a watermelon is about 5

[Bored chemist]

You claim that weight is a "quantitative object" but you mean passive energy

No
I mean weight.
Why would you choose to call it by a silly name?
The reason the name is silly is that wight changes- if you are on the moon, it's roughly a sixth of what it is here.
But energy is independent of location.
This has also been explained to you before.
Why do you keep saying things that you know are not true?

Also you have got the arithmetic stupidly wrong because of your silly choice of units.

If we mark the passive energy of 125 cubic meters of iron, in 1 - then we will get.
The amount of passive energy of an adult is about 80
The amount of passive energy of a car is about 1200
The amount of passive energy of a watermelon is about 5

That's one good reason for not inventing random words and ideas,

[aetzbar (OP)]

The amount of passive energy of a bucket filled with water, (on the planet) is about 12
The measuring instrument is a simple spring, which is matched with identical iron cubes with a volume of 125 cc.
In the experiment on the surface of the moon, the passive energy of the bucket of water will be about 2
The spring of the device is stretched less, and indicates the number 2
You use the name weight, but you mean passive energy.
If you wish, we can agree to the equation weight = passive energy.
Next we may agree on

[Bored chemist]

You use the name weight, but you mean passive energy.

On what authority do you presume to tell me that I am wrong (not to mention everyone else)?

You have not put forward a single sensible idea.
You have certainly not put forward any reason to rewrite science using a clumsy new set of words.

Why should we pay you any attention at all?
After all, you keep saying things that we know are wrong- and you keep doing it even after we point out that you are wrong.

[aetzbar (OP)]

Thanks so much for your response.
Such a response is appropriate for any novel theory.

[reader01]

Does time have a beginning? You have to say what time it is.
Passive time is a quantitative thing that fills the infinite space.
Does infinite space have a beginning? There is no answer to this question.
Does active time have a beginning? Yes
When physical change began in the world, active time began.
when was that ? Just when physical change began in the world.
When did a physical change begin? Just when the active time appeared.

Time, to me, is a measurement associated with the accounting of a sequential passing of increments accomplished by anything that has a consistent "tick" feature as in a clock

[guest39538]

Does time have a beginning? You have to say what time it is.

Are you a Turin test?

For absolute time is endless with no beginning, but relativistic time begins when somebody decides to measure it.  For time is a quantifiable measurement directly proportional to the measured past.

[Bored chemist]

Thanks so much for your response.
Such a response is appropriate for any novel theory.

And the correct response to my point sis to either refute them (with evidence and logic), or stop talking nonsense.

Are you going to do that?

[guest39538]

Does time have a beginning? You have to say what time it is.
Passive time is a quantitative thing that fills the infinite space.
Does infinite space have a beginning? There is no answer to this question.
Does active time have a beginning? Yes
When physical change began in the world, active time began.
when was that ? Just when physical change began in the world.
When did a physical change begin? Just when the active time appeared.

7 lines