Calvinism and Universalism

[RND]

On earth, dividing the day into 24 hours, and the hour into 60 minutes, and the minute into 60 seconds, has absolutely NO BEARING on any astronomical events --- and it has no relationship to the YEAR (or the length of revolution around the sun). The length of an hour is entirely arbitrary. We could have had a metric hour --- 10 hours in a day; 10 minutes in an hour; 10 seconds in a minute; 10 deciseconds in a second, etc. It would have worked just as well. In that case, there would have been 10 time zones, with 36º in each zone, rather than 24 zones, each covering 15º. Any problem with that?

Paidon, there can be little question regarding the discovery of hours, minute and seconds. The Egyptians are credited for discovering hours, the Babylonians are credited with minutes and seconds. But to suggest time is man-made because it was discovered by man is like saying "El Capitan" in Yosemite was man-made because John Muir discovered it. It is also obvious that the Egyptian model didn't work as well, nor has the metric system of keeping time for if they had they'd still be in use today.

With the rotation of Venus being longer than its revolution, I guess the same side of the planet would be facing the sun most of the time. I don't know how "hours" would work on that planet. So I retract my statement about "any planet".

Progress!

However, there would seem to be no problem in dividing the planet Mars up into 24 time zones with 24 Martian hours in a Martian day. Mars rotation takes only 39 Terran minutes longer than a rotation of the earth. This would mean that each Martian hour would be 61.625 Terran minutes. But the Martian hour could still be defined as 60 Martian minutes, and each Martian minute as 60 Martian seconds. That wouldn't be a problem, would it?

Are you planning on moving to Mars anytime soon? If not, time on Mars is irrelevant.

All of this is manmade, and has no relation to astronomical events.

Had the first person never inquired about the sun and the shadows it caused on earth there may never had been a science called astronomy. Actually the Babylonians did indeed base minutes and seconds on the astrological relationship between earth and sun.

In the case of Venus, I have difficulty visualizing the rotation of a planet whose day is longer than it's year. It would seem that the same side would be facing the sun most of the time, just as the same side of the moon faces the earth. So I'm not sure that that "day" could be divided into hours.

Considering a day on Venus is irrelevant to life on earth I think the information regarding Venus would only be useful at a cocktail party or to astronomer.

[Paidion]

Paidon, there can be little question regarding the discovery of hours, minute and seconds. The Egyptians are credited for discovering hours, the Babylonians are credited with minutes and seconds. But to suggest time is man-made because it was discovered by man is like saying "El Capitan" in Yosemite was man-made because John Muir discovered it. It is also obvious that the Egyptian model didn't work as well, nor has the metric system of keeping time for if they had they'd still be in use today.

The Egyptians didn't "discover" hours; there was nothing to discover; they invented them. The Babylonians didn't "discover" minutes and seconds. There was nothing to discover; they invented them.

RND, why don't you just admit that only the day and the year are determined astronomically? that is, by the rotation and revolution of the earth respectively? ... and that the week is patterned after the seven days of creation; but that hours, minutes, and seconds are entirely the invention of man.

[RND]

The Egyptians didn't "discover" hours; there was nothing to discover; they invented them.

Paidon, no offense but you are so far from the truth it is really not funny....it's actually quite sad.

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

"The hour was originally defined in ancient civilizations (including those of Egypt, Sumer, India, and China) as either one twelfth of the time between sunrise and sunset or one twenty-fourth of a full day. In either case the division reflected the widespread use of a duodecimal numbering system. The importance of 12 has been attributed to the number of lunar cycles in a year, and also to the fact that humans have 12 finger bones (phalanges) on one hand (3 on each of 4 fingers).[1] (It is possible to count to 12 with your thumb touching each finger bone in turn.) There is also a widespread tendency to make analogies among sets of data (12 months, 12 zodiacal signs, 12 hours, a dozen).

The Ancient Egyptian civilization is usually credited with establishing the division of the night into 12 parts, although there were many variations over the centuries. Astronomers in the Middle Kingdom (9th and 10th Dynasties) observed a set of 36 decan stars throughout the year. These star tables have been found on the lids of coffins of the period. The heliacal rising of the next decan star marked the start of a new civil week, which was then 10 days. The period from sunset to sunrise was marked by 18 decan stars. Three of these were assigned to each of the two twilight periods, so the period of total darkness was marked by the remaining 12 decan stars, resulting in the 12 divisions of the night. The time between the appearance of each of these decan stars over the horizon during the night would have been about 40 modern minutes. During the New Kingdom, the system was simplified, using a set of 24 stars, 12 of which marked the passage of the night."

The Babylonians didn't "discover" minutes and seconds. There was nothing to discover; they invented them.

Again, Paidon you are seemingly unable to process the truth of the matter. Babylonians did indeed discover minutes and seconds. The proof that these is a logical extension of time is self-explanatory.

RND, why don't you just admit that only the day and the year are determined astronomically? that is, by the rotation and revolution of the earth respectively?

Brother Paidon I have no need to admit the obvious!

... and that the week is patterned after the seven days of creation;

By who's creation?

but that hours, minutes, and seconds are entirely the invention of man.

Discovery of man.

[Michelle]

RND, are you joking?

[RND]

RND, are you joking?

Regarding?

[Paidion]

As the saying goes, if you put both your feet in your mouth, you haven't a leg to stand on.

Anyway, thanks for quoting the Wikipedia article which backs me up so well, even the first five words:

"The hour was originally defined ..." DEFINED not DISCOVERED. You don't define what you discover. It was DISCOVERED that the force of gravity varies as to the square of it's distance from earth. No one DEFINED the mathematical relationship that way. On the other hand a "millisecond" was DEFINED as a a thousandth of a second.This wasn't a DISCOVERY which someone made.

I am getting tired of this inane argument against the obvious. It's like trying to argue with somone who insists that the sum of 2 and 2 is 5. I quit... victorious of course, but my victory is trivial, and I am very weary. I must be getting old.

[RND]

As the saying goes, if you put both your feet in your mouth, you haven't a leg to stand on.

Anyway, thanks for quoting the Wikipedia article which backs me up so well, even the first five words:

"The hour was originally defined ..." DEFINED not DISCOVERED. You don't define what you discover.

And what do you base such a statement on? For example, what purpose would there be to "define" the "lights" discovered in the night sky? They're starts right? No need for "definition" then. And yet, when "defined" we find that these "stars" are in fact "galaxies." Explored even deeper we find thousands more galaxies are revealed even though the light of these galaxies isn't even visible.

Definition of a discovery is vital in understanding what has been discovered!

It was DISCOVERED that the force of gravity varies as to the square of it's distance from earth. No one DEFINED the mathematical relationship that way. On the other hand a "millisecond" was DEFINED as a a thousandth of a second.This wasn't a DISCOVERY which someone made.

No doubt. But the definition in no way nullifies the discovery.

I am getting tired of this inane argument against the obvious. It's like trying to argue with somone who insists that the sum of 2 and 2 is 5. I quit... victorious of course, but my victory is trivial, and I am very weary. I must be getting old.

So, do you still think God did not create time?

BTW, Paidon there is an old legal maxim that states, "HE WHO LEAVES THE BATTLEFIELD FIRST LOSES BY DEFAULT."

[Homer]

Amazing to think my little post about the relative (or rather lack of ) scriptural support for Calvinism & Universalism caused all this.

[RND]

Amazing to think my little post about the relative (or rather lack of ) scriptural support for Calvinism & Universalism caused all this.

Rabbit holes are like that. My bad. You were saying....?

[Michelle]

RND, are you joking?

Regarding?

I asked if you were joking because the article you pasted from wikipedia doesn't make your point at all. It seems like either you didn't read it, you read it without any comprehension, or you are making some kind of loony joke.

I guess you won this argument by default...congratulations?

My apologies, Homer, for prolonging the derailment.