News3 mins ago
If You Had The Option To Pause Time Would You? And Why?
17 Answers
I would because I would love to just roam around places without rules.
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by EmilyAdkins1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If it meant Dave would be in the time standing still place and I could move then yes.
I would find a home for the thirty seven cameras on his office floor and take at least seventeen of the jackets he is never going to wear and about a dozen unworn pairs of shoes to the charity shop.
He can keep the crazy tee shirts he sometimes buys as they eventually make fun cushions.
I would find a home for the thirty seven cameras on his office floor and take at least seventeen of the jackets he is never going to wear and about a dozen unworn pairs of shoes to the charity shop.
He can keep the crazy tee shirts he sometimes buys as they eventually make fun cushions.
Etch - // I'd be interested to know who Emily thinks you mean when you say 'Russell' - no clues Atheist :-) //
Ok, a Roobaba clue.. It's not H. G. 'Bertie' Wells (who famously wrote The Time Machine and The Invisible Man).. could it be the world-renowned Bertie Russell?
Emily, you do think of some interesting ideas, not in the slightest bit stupid. I would suggest being invisible may be better, pausing or stopping time would mean that everything around you would be 'frozen' and not move, like a photograph being an image of one frozen moment in time. I'd prefer to be invisible, that way you could roam around places with people still living their lives and you not observing the rules they do. I have thought of this before, as I am sure have many others, the difference with me being I need to pursue the idea to find the answer.. I'd ask the question - 'could this be possible?'... Timeless physics?
Julian Barbour in his 1999 book The End of Time advances timeless physics: the controversial view that time, as we perceive it, does not exist as anything other than an illusion, and that a number of problems in physical theory arise from assuming that it does exist. He argues that we have no evidence of the past other than our memory of it, and no evidence of the future other than our belief in it. "Difference merely creates an illusion of time, with each individual moment existing in its own right, complete and whole." He calls these moments "Nows". It is all an illusion: there is no motion and no change. He argues that the illusion of time is what we interpret through what he calls "time capsules", which are "any fixed pattern that creates or encodes the appearance of motion, change or history".
https:/
Very interesting.. something to think about! :O)
Ok, a Roobaba clue.. It's not H. G. 'Bertie' Wells (who famously wrote The Time Machine and The Invisible Man).. could it be the world-renowned Bertie Russell?
Emily, you do think of some interesting ideas, not in the slightest bit stupid. I would suggest being invisible may be better, pausing or stopping time would mean that everything around you would be 'frozen' and not move, like a photograph being an image of one frozen moment in time. I'd prefer to be invisible, that way you could roam around places with people still living their lives and you not observing the rules they do. I have thought of this before, as I am sure have many others, the difference with me being I need to pursue the idea to find the answer.. I'd ask the question - 'could this be possible?'... Timeless physics?
Julian Barbour in his 1999 book The End of Time advances timeless physics: the controversial view that time, as we perceive it, does not exist as anything other than an illusion, and that a number of problems in physical theory arise from assuming that it does exist. He argues that we have no evidence of the past other than our memory of it, and no evidence of the future other than our belief in it. "Difference merely creates an illusion of time, with each individual moment existing in its own right, complete and whole." He calls these moments "Nows". It is all an illusion: there is no motion and no change. He argues that the illusion of time is what we interpret through what he calls "time capsules", which are "any fixed pattern that creates or encodes the appearance of motion, change or history".
https:/
Very interesting.. something to think about! :O)
1 to 17 of 17
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.