Jack Martinelli wrote:
> >Don mikulecky replies:
> >
> >John J. Kineman wrote:
> >
> >> Kineman replies to Mikulecky regarding Rosen's concept of time:
> >>
> >> Note: this picks up from the thread: Re: Rosen's def => A car is not a
> >> machine !
> >> and also: Re: Can we agree on what a machine is?
> >>
> >> >> "We may point out explicitly that there is no absolute or objective
> >> >> character to [time]."
>
> Whoa! This is false. Although there is no absolute character to time, it
> is farily easy to construct an
> objective procedure for measuring it. Our sense of time is subjective.
> If this is what you want to model, then good luck.
>
> [...]
>
> >ah...there's the rub....as Rosen points out...the best we can do is "label"
> > time,
> >we do not measure it.
>
> If we don't measure time, what is it that a clock does? And how would you
> compare this kind of encoding to our procedure for measuring length? Is
> there anything common to both?
>
> Regards
>
> Jack Martinelli
>
> http://www.martinelli.org