1. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    09 Feb '09 04:21
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
  2. Break-twitching
    Joined
    30 Nov '08
    Moves
    1228
    09 Feb '09 04:39
    Originally posted by josephw
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    There is no such thing as time in the natural world. Time is man-made; therefore the smallest unit of man-made time is immeasurable.
  3. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    09 Feb '09 06:061 edit
    Originally posted by josephw
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    I don't answer any specific scientifical questions in the Spiritual Forum (unless there is something Spiritual about it) as I don't answer any Spiritual Questions in the Science Forum.

    Science and Religion doesn't ever mix.
  4. Joined
    26 May '08
    Moves
    2120
    09 Feb '09 19:57
    Originally posted by josephw
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    The answer is Planck time

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time

    And I am afraid this has nothing to do with spirituality -it is a strictly scientific concept.
  5. Melbourne, Australia
    Joined
    17 Feb '04
    Moves
    49979
    09 Feb '09 21:49
    Originally posted by josephw
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    That's probably a bit like asking what's the smallest length measure. For any unit you come up with - metres, millimetres, micrometres, nanometres, and so on - you can always get smaller.
    So, I think the correct answer is probably, there is no smallest measure of anything.

    Of course, there are limits on the measuring devices we use to make these measurements. Is that what you were actually asking? What's the smallest we can actually measure?
  6. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86339
    09 Feb '09 21:521 edit
    Originally posted by amannion
    That's probably a bit like asking what's the smallest length measure. For any unit you come up with - metres, millimetres, micrometres, nanometres, and so on - you can always get smaller.
    So, I think the correct answer is probably, there is no smallest measure of anything.

    Of course, there are limits on the measuring devices we use to make these measurements. Is that what you were actually asking? What's the smallest we can actually measure?
    Does the boredom effect come into play at all. I.e even if you are bored even for the smallest amount of time - is it extended? A bit like it is being stuck in traffic?

    Edit: PS i'm really bored at the moment - apologies!
  7. Melbourne, Australia
    Joined
    17 Feb '04
    Moves
    49979
    09 Feb '09 22:13
    Originally posted by divegeester
    Does the boredom effect come into play at all. I.e even if you are bored even for the smallest amount of time - is it extended? A bit like it is being stuck in traffic?

    Edit: PS i'm really bored at the moment - apologies!
    Ah, now there you're talking about our perception of time.
  8. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    09 Feb '09 23:341 edit
    Originally posted by josephw
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    ==============================================
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    =======================================



    The smallest measure of time is the amount of time between the moment a person confesses the need for the Savior Jesus and the moment that person is flooded with the love of God in forgiveness of all of his or her sins and is received by the Father as a saved sinner.
  9. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    10 Feb '09 00:19
    Originally posted by amannion
    That's probably a bit like asking what's the smallest length measure. For any unit you come up with - metres, millimetres, micrometres, nanometres, and so on - you can always get smaller.
    So, I think the correct answer is probably, there is no smallest measure of anything.

    Of course, there are limits on the measuring devices we use to make these measurements. Is that what you were actually asking? What's the smallest we can actually measure?
    Yes. What is the smallest amount, or measure of time that we(human kind) have been able to learn exists?

    To be perfectly honest, I'm thinking of a measure of time I know of that is mentioned in the Bible. Albeit in a round-about way. I'm going to hold off telling what it is untill either someone can name it before I do and/or untill I read a reply that says what "science" has discovered.

    But I see what you mean. The more one tries to get at a smaller measure the smaller the measure becomes, and so on.

    But, I'll not pretend to know, really, the answer. I just thought it might make for an interesting discussion, at least for some.
  10. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    10 Feb '09 00:20
    Originally posted by jaywill
    [b]==============================================
    Not that it has anything to do with spirituality, but who can tell me what the smallest measure of time is?
    =======================================



    The smallest measure of time is the amount of time between the moment a person confesses the need for the Savior Jesus and the mo ...[text shortened]... of God in forgiveness of all of his or her sins and is received by the Father as a saved sinner.[/b]
    Wonderful answer! šŸ™‚
  11. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    10 Feb '09 04:54
    Originally posted by amannion
    That's probably a bit like asking what's the smallest length measure. For any unit you come up with - metres, millimetres, micrometres, nanometres, and so on - you can always get smaller.
    So, I think the correct answer is probably, there is no smallest measure of anything.

    Of course, there are limits on the measuring devices we use to make these measurements. Is that what you were actually asking? What's the smallest we can actually measure?
    Not necessarily true. It is quite possible that both space and time are made up of a finite number of indivisible units.
  12. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14510
    10 Feb '09 06:33
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
    The answer is Planck time

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time

    And I am afraid this has nothing to do with spirituality -it is a strictly scientific concept.
    And why my dear sir you claim that Spiritualism has nothing to do with Science?

    It seems to me that Spiritualism is a tool as important as Science and Philosophy, and that it is necessary for the individual who looks for well backed up answers at every field. Spiritulism is not related strictly with religion and, therefore, with the pseudoscience of Theology, althouh many people use to believe that this is the case. But this is merely a false impression.

    Spiritualism has primarly to do with constant awareness and metaphysics; Philosophy has to do with both Science and awareness and metaphysics; and Science can occur solely through the evalution of the mind along with scientific methods, finds and evidence.
    Therefore, in my opinion the scientist cannot proceed if s/he is a bad philosopher -and you know the drillšŸ˜µ
  13. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    10 Feb '09 06:51
    Originally posted by black beetle
    And why my dear sir you claim that Spiritualism has nothing to do with Science?

    It seems to me that Spiritualism is a tool as important as Science and Philosophy, and that it is necessary for the individual who looks for well backed up answers at every field. Spiritulism is not related strictly with religion and, therefore, with the pseudoscience of ...[text shortened]... n my opinion the scientist cannot proceed if s/he is a bad philosopher -and you know the drillšŸ˜µ
    Science and religion cannot ever be mixed.

    Try to heat water with prayers...
    Try to prove afterlife...
  14. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    ZellulƤrer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    10 Feb '09 07:04
    Originally posted by black beetle

    Spiritualism has primarly to do with constant awareness and metaphysics; Philosophy has to do with both Science and awareness and metaphysics; and Science can occur solely through the evalution of the mind along with scientific methods, finds and evidence.
    Therefore, in my opinion the scientist cannot proceed if s/he is a bad philosopher -and you know the drillšŸ˜µ
    Are you suggesting that scientists are human beings?
  15. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14510
    10 Feb '09 08:08
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Science and religion cannot ever be mixed.

    Try to heat water with prayers...
    Try to prove afterlife...
    Religion is a thing and Spiritualism another; sun is shining, the weather is sweet -here I stand:

    I use to heat water using common sens, and I use spiritualism using common sens. I accept or deny afterlife according the evaluation of the mind -ie examining the position evolving together common sens, spiritualism, my personal philosophy, my ever questioned knowledge and the scientific doctrins I am able to perceive.

    Spiritualism offers me the chance to cross check at yet another levels the procedure of my thoughts and to realise what I may see as temporary granded, what I may see as a long-term delusion, what I may see as temporary known and what I see as temporary or long-term unknown.
    So Science, like Spiritualism, is just a tool of mine of great importance -say, a scalpel. I will definately use not a scalpel when I want to replace a bulb, but I will the scalpel handy -just in casešŸ˜µ
Back to Top