On Aug 11, 10:29 am, Edward Green <spamspamsp...@netzero.com> wrote: > On Jul 7, 10:40 pm, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > What sort of things are they if they are things? > > > One natural answer is that they comprise continua, three-dimensional > > in the case of space, one-dimensional in the case of time; that is to > > say that they consist of continuous manifolds, positions in which can > > be occupied by substances and events respectively, and which have an > > existence in their own right. > > > It is in virtue of the occupancy of such positions that events and > > processes are to be seen as taking place after each other and > > substances are to be seen in certain spatial relations. > > > Or do space and time have properties of their own independent of the > > objects and events that they contain? > > Not in my way of looking at things. Space and time are abstractions of > the observed regularity of events. > > What are the legal precedents for surveying after an earthquake?
According to Mr Malcolm Fabian of Mount Barker, South Australia, the pyramids in Egypt had a practical purpose. After the flood on the Nile, the boundaries between properties would need to be marked again. So the stable pyramids were the reference, and the referencing data was presumably a legal matter.
Then again, the stability of the pyramids led to more correct observations of the stars, and their positional frequencies fixed time periods, useful for planting and religious ceremonies.
In other words, in a changing surface, we need some absolute points, like pyramids and stars, plus supportive logic and data, to come to standards relating to time and space.