• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Seeing things in their past? You are full of beans!

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
I couldn't care less what mainstream garbage says it is , it is a time.

3.154e+7.s * 299 792 458 m = 1ly

Try again...
The only amount of "time" associated with the term "lightyear" is "year" - but that is only a frame of reference for the unit, not an indication that the measurement of time plays a part in its reality. A "lightyear" is definitively only a distance. I think what is confusing you is the inclusion of the word "year" in its name. It could have been called anything else... "megaspan", "spacec", "longone", "lightshot" - it wouldn't matter what. And were it called any of those, it would still be the same thing... a unit measuring distance.

Fairly recently the definition of a "meter" was also defined in terms of light, to make the unit itself more robust, constant and exacting:

1 meter = the distance light travels in 1/299,792,458 of a second

Would you say that a meter also imparts some amount of time also because of this definition? I'll give you a hint... if you say "yes", you'd be wrong.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
500m/s ? Would take longer

299 792 458 m / s
You missed the obvious point of the post. It was to get you to have to admit that "lightyear" is not a measure of time - something you claimed at the start of this thread. Because yes... traveling a DISTANCE of a lightyear (or two as the case may be), it very obviously depends on the velocity the object is traveling as to how much TIME it will take to travel that distance.
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
You missed the obvious point of the post. It was to get you to have to admit that "lightyear" is not a measure of time - something you claimed at the start of this thread. Because yes... traveling a DISTANCE of a lightyear (or two as the case may be), it very obviously depends on the velocity the object is traveling as to how much TIME it will take to travel that distance.
Can you admit that all that you think you know is everything you have learnt and there is nothing in your own mind that is you ?

The very words you speak are not even your words.

You inherited these words by special permissions.
 

Thermos aquaticus

Well-Known Member
Can you admit that all that you think you know is everything you have learnt and there is nothing in your own mind that is you ?

The very words you speak are not even your words.

You inherited these words by special permissions.

That object you see flying through the air is a red herring.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Can you admit that all that you think you know is everything you have learnt and there is nothing in your own mind that is you ?

The very words you speak are not even your words.

You inherited these words by special permissions.
Look... I get that you have finally realized how wrong you are and that this "the world is all abstract" schtick is just you trying to backpedal your way out of being called out... but the fact remains that you were trying to utilize the consensus-accepted meaning of the word "lightyear" but botched it horribly due to a lack of understanding on your part. You don't just get to redefine the word "lightyear" for everyone else who is already using the accepted term, just to save face. It doesn't work that way. That's the way to getting yourself discredited, ignored or worse.
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Look... I get that you have finally realized how wrong you are and that this "the world is all abstract" schtick is just you trying to backpedal your way out of being called out... but the fact remains that you were trying to utilize the consensus-accepted meaning of the word "lightyear" but botched it horribly due to a lack of understanding on your part. You don't just get to redefine the word "lightyear" for everyone else who is already using the accepted term, just to save face. It doesn't work that way. That's the way to getting yourself discredited, ignored or worse.

You are not bypassing your Ai, taking control of the system, you are in error .
 
Top