Do you think that you become old because a strange substance (time) infects your body and progressively ruins it?
Dang. I’m gonna hafta stop putting thyme in my food…
Aging whether premature or not occurs over a period of time.
"By reason of its character as continuous, successive, divisible, and measureable, time belongs to the category of quantity, which is a general attribute of bodies, and cosmology has for its object the essence and general attributes of matter"
Well, no it is impossible to define momentum without time.
That is the way we usually speak about processes. However, it does not mean that time is a “substance”.JuanFlorencio:
Aging whether premature or not occurs over a period of time.
Certainly, it took some time for Leibniz to define momentum for the first time in history. However, Leibniz used to say that time is not a thing but “the order of successive events”; that is to say, that it is ideal.AlNg:
Well, no it is impossible to define momentum without time.
Where is this taking us? You are wrong about mathematics because mathematics combined with certain physical quantities can tell us what initial velocity is needed to escape the gravitational pull of the earth. Your discussion about time is basically useless and tells us nothing about the altitude required to attain a geostationary orbit about earth.
I would like to see how conceiving time as a substance is a necessary condition to attain a geostationary orbit about earth; and why a relational conception is insufficient.
That is possible as it’s opposite is possible.H.L. Mencken is often (somewhat misquoted) as having said, “For Every Complex Problem, There Is an Answer That Is Clear, Simple, and Wrong”.
I think I have said enough. I am not here to convince all people but to just provide my reasoning.
Time is a measure of the irreversible progression of events in succession. I don’t know what you mean by calling it a substance.
Ah, but is time a “timeless” measure that holds without a necessary reference to events in succession? I.e., is it mathematical in the sense of having to do with “quantitative relations, which are timeless?” That was, I believe, @JuanFlorencio’s question to you.
It is a measure, yes, but not of irreversibility. There are no processes which are more or less irreversible than others. Or they are reversible or they are irreversible. And as time is a measure, there must be someone who measures (you, she, me…); and without him, there is no time, but only processes.
If a tree falls in a far away forest and nobody is there to hear anything, does it make a sound?
Absolutely not, at least when you are outside of the Planck length. There is no possibility of going back in the past and reliving your life. Abortion is always gravely wrong of course. But to take an extreme example and speaking hypothetically about time travel in the past, there is no possibility of someone going back in time and aborting or somehow preventing the birth of her great grandfather. In such a case her great grandfather would never have existed and then where does that leave the great granddaughter who traveled backward in time?
Not really. It still sends vibrations and such on the air but it isn’t sound as we know it until the vibrations reach the ear and is translated.