Appolinaria

isn't it guaranteed that as time elapses, objects in space get further from each other? shouldn't distance be incorporated in the definition of time somehow

In physics, it says time is defined by it's measurement. If time is the word, I'll use a clock to define it. Clock; "a device other than a watch for indicating or measuring time commonly by means of hands moving on a dialect" If we use the common idea of a clock with hands on a face, it measures from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 or whatever... 1 to 2, can be described as A to B.... it just measures a change. A clock displays this change, defining time. This simple A to B seems a satisfactory way of describing time, to me. The person asking this question wanted the simplest definition of time, not the most clear in the eyes of a child. If they wanted the simplest definition of the word "naked mole rat" I would give them; "A warm-blooded vertebrate animal of a class" aka mammal rather than "A rodent (Rattus and other genera, family Muridae) that resembles a large mouse" aka rat. So seeing that this question was posted in the Physics section, I defined time according to the realm of physics, leaving no room for any controversial definitions, and concluded that A to B would seem an accurate, simple way of defining time.

the simpler definition you get, usually the more general. it can be interpreted many ways. a naked mole rat > rat > mammal a mammal can be used to describe many specific species. tom hanks > man > useless again, useless can be used to describe many things. just as A to B can be used to describe many different things.

if sunlight can turn grapes into raisins darkons must be able to turn raisins into grapes

green xenon, you are brilliant. i would like to do the same, but the songs i would create would be death metal band covers using only sitars, ocarinas from the legend of zelda and a few more specific wood instruments.

i feel your pain. this state of material existence is terrible.

John Titor was a lot more creative :/ JT <33333333333333333

Okay. But if you're so evolved, you should know that consuming any flesh, even chicken, negatively affects the vibrations of your body. Also, if you are from the future, what planet do I govern you lesser's from?

"Have you ever stuck a beer bottle up your butt?" Glad to know a society capable of time travel consists of such evolved individuals.

earth looks like a sphere so we give it the benefit of the doubt, but when we do calculations it actually has a bulge. it's just god trying to piss us off, he does this often.

Well maybe we're already doing this... the norway spiral kinda looks like a mini quasar. $$ on whoever is sitting at the bottom of that blue trail.

If the whole world puts their faith in a book that's telling them the whole world will be deceived... Sounds a little contradictory, no?

Ah, I've heard of that theory before.... gotta read about it!

I did read your post. Simply, I was trying to get this point across; I agree that those examples are wrong. I agree that the definition of the supernatural you gave is inadequate, but you still draw the conclusion you did in #1... and that is where I disagree with you. You should not come to the conclusion you did in #1 (1. I cannot accept your definition of the supernatural as that which defies observation.) based off of one person (or even a whole group of people's) erroneous interpretation of "supernatural"...

I would probably die from the anxiety that would ensue as opposed to whatever the needle contained. Lol.

Particles exist.. not everything is just a wave. There is no cause before this effect, so I don't think it sounds crazy to think it's coming from the future. Wouldn't this "effect before cause" actually explain our spontaneous existence? The birth of our universe? Lol.

Once I saw the mention of "Trek people" I lost all interest.

If you're going to be picky with the way someone defines something, make sure your definitions are correct. I'm just here for the cookies, thx. supernatural; departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature things traveling faster than the speed of light; ^ same as above ^ IMO My opinion is that anything unobservable would be supernatural. I don't see how justifying the counter argument is "boring" but you can go on your merry way.

I don't see any inequality in my environment. When I'm making my boyfriend's sandwich he lets me use just as much of the Boar's Head thinly sliced ham as him. Ok, but seriously.. I feel blessed to have been raised in a family where the women were genuinely treated equally... if not appreciated for being stronger than the man in many ways. I realized this was not the case in a lot of families. For example; seeing how overly protective/babying some fathers were towards their daughters going off to college- and not doing the same for the boys. Things like that, so deeply rooted into family life, are what contributes to women feeling incapable & not excelling to their full potential. They buy into this stupid stereotype.