Can you give me some books or philosophers that deal with time?

[travelnjones]

Hi everyone

I am looking for any books that deal with time either philosophically or as a mater of physics. can you point any out to me.

I am beginning to re-evaluate my concept of time. I find myself becoming more sympathetic to the single moment of coexisting time with cognizance representing a vector through that moment.

 

[own8ge]

No I can not.

 

[Milo]

Me!

Time doesn't exist. It is only a construct. There is only matter moving around and us humans decided to make the construct of time by using the base of the speed of light reaching a certain distance as the basis for measuring a second I believe. Something like that.

Think of it this way, if we reversed the velocity of all matter, we would be going back in time.

I don't think I agree with the theory of going forward in time when you are near a black hole either. If you could somehow survive near it as the theory states, it says you can go forward in time, but I'm pretty sure just because you are seeing the light particles go by you faster, that does not change the fact that the light particles outside of the black hole's range are still only going the speed of light. The particles themselves would just be farther apart because the particle in front of the other one would just be accelerating slightly faster than the one behind it leaving a larger gap between each light particle. It would be like a strobe light effect I suppose.

 

[Duxwing]

Me!

Time doesn't exist. It is only a construct. There is only matter moving around and us humans decided to make the construct of time by using the base of the speed of light reaching a certain distance as the basis for measuring a second I believe. Something like that.

Think of it this way, if we reversed the velocity of all matter, we would be going back in time.

I don't think I agree with the theory of going forward in time when you are near a black hole either. If you could somehow survive near it as the theory states, it says you can go forward in time, but I'm pretty sure just because you are seeing the light particles go by you faster, that does not change the fact that the light particles outside of the black hole's range are still only going the speed of light. The particles themselves would just be farther apart because the particle in front of the other one would just be accelerating slightly faster than the one behind it leaving a larger gap between each light particle. It would be like a strobe light effect I suppose.

@Architect Perhaps he can sort this out?

-Duxwing

 

[Etheri]

I'm not aware if you have or haven't, but I think you should start by trying to understand the principles of special and general relativity.

I think the thought experiments often used to derive and explain special relativity are very understandable given some time and thought, even for those who have little knowledge of maths and classic physics. I'm sorry if you're well read up and aware, I simply do and cannot know. I think understanding how time works in the physical world is important to a philosophical understanding.

 

[Architect]

Time doesn't exist. It is only a construct. There is only matter moving around and us humans decided to make the construct of time by using the base of the speed of light reaching a certain distance as the basis for measuring a second I believe. Something like that.

Perhaps you can consider the constructed nature of time as your last meal transits your large intestine. Or the reliable delivery of your next paycheck (or its proxy). If time doesn't exist you wouldn't need to use the toilet and couldn't afford one anyhow.

Besides being wrong these ideas are ignorant and badly stated, time is easily defined by atomic phenomenon such as energy state transitions which have nothing to do with "matter moving around".

Think of it this way, if we reversed the velocity of all matter, we would be going back in time.

What?

The only theoretical way of going backwards in time is via a "closed timelike curve" which is a particular set of solutions to the general field equations. You would create these by some specific gravitational fields (probably intense ones but I haven't looked for solutions myself)

I don't think I agree with the theory of going forward in time when you are near a black hole either.

It's not a theory

If you could somehow survive near it

Problem number one, and what is "near"? At the event horizon, in it, or what? The Cherenkov radiation would surely kill you regardless.

as the theory states, it says you can go forward in time, but I'm pretty sure just because you are seeing the light particles go by you faster, that does not change the fact that the light particles outside of the black hole's range are still only going the speed of light. The particles themselves would just be farther apart because the particle in front of the other one would just be accelerating slightly faster than the one behind it leaving a larger gap between each light particle. It would be like a strobe light effect I suppose.

I can't even understand this.

 

[Etheri]

@Architect or anyone else up for it...

Would you be willing to give a basic and simple explenation of the concept of time according to special relativity? Feel free to do general relativity if you're up for it, but I think that one is alot tougher, and I probably don't entirely understand it myself (It'd be wonderful if you could fix that, but i'm partly stuck on the mathematical implications which tend to matter to me.)

So pretty much the concept of simultaneous being inexistant and the idea of time dilatation, in a way that would be sufficient proof and understanding to discuss the topic further? I honestly don't think you can philosophically discuss time without understanding how it works 'in reality' or atleast our most accurate theories of it.

I tried to type something up, but rereading it I wiped it as it made very little sense, and was getting very, very long. I may attempt again later, or perhaps i'll just find a good video or text somewhere online. I remember special relativity as being very inuitive, so I don't doubt someone with the understanding and teaching skills could explain it.

 

[Architect]

Would you be willing to give a basic and simple explenation of the concept of time according to special relativity? Feel free to do general relativity if you're up for it, but I think that one is alot tougher, and I probably don't entirely understand it myself (It'd be wonderful if you could fix that, but i'm partly stuck on the mathematical implications which tend to matter to me.)

I specialized in GR during undergrad so am up to it, but SR is an easier and better approach.

It's instructive to read Einsteins original paper on special relativity, where it is stated plain and square.

If we wish to describe the motion of a material point, we give the values of its co-ordinates as functions of the time. Now we must bear carefully in mind that a mathematical description of this kind has no physical meaning unless we are quite clear as to what we understand by “time.” We have to take into account that all our judgments in which time plays a part are always judgments of simultaneous events. If, for instance, I say, “That train arrives here at 7 o’clock,” I mean something like this: “The pointing of the small hand of my watch to 7 and the arrival of the train are simultaneous events.”

The rest of the paper is basically explaining that last sentence. Before anybody gets moist on the fact that both of these events are based on motion, the 1970's rewrite of the paper could instead talk about a digit on an LCD display which was caused by an oscillation of a quartz crystal.

Technical note; SR and GR are all about coordinate systems. Look how many times he mentions them in that paper, and GR is nothing but tensor calculus which is the most abstract formulation of coordinates. This is because the theories are all about translating simultaneous events from one coordinate to another, SR explaining that in terms of when the two systems are in relative velocity or acceleration to each other, GR when the two are at different points in a gravitational field.

 

[Duxwing]

I specialized in GR during undergrad so am up to it, but SR is an easier and better approach.

It's instructive to read Einsteins original paper on special relativity, where it is stated plain and square.



The rest of the paper is basically explaining that last sentence. Before anybody gets moist on the fact that both of these events are based on motion, the 1970's rewrite of the paper could instead talk about a digit on an LCD display which was caused by an oscillation of a quartz crystal.

...which is not motion?

Technical note; SR and GR are all about coordinate systems. Look how many times he mentions them in that paper, and GR is nothing but tensor calculus which is the most abstract formulation of coordinates. This is because the theories are all about translating simultaneous events from one coordinate to another, SR explaining that in terms of when the two systems are in relative velocity or acceleration to each other, GR when the two are at different points in a gravitational field.

Huh, wow, that doesn't sound so scary...

...until the tensor calculus hits you like a baseball at .9c.

-Duxwing

 

[Vrecknidj]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ernst-mach/

http://philosophy.cah.ucf.edu/fpr/files/10_1/brenner.pdf

http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/aquinas/

 

[Wolf18]

Foundation trilogy by Asimov. Psychohistory is preventing the future through the past. Fascinating.

SW

 

[travelnjones]

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ernst-mach/

http://philosophy.cah.ucf.edu/fpr/files/10_1/brenner.pdf

http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/aquinas/

Thanks

I am really am just looking for different thoughts to read. Speaking for myself I am idealist so I am open to philosophical interruptions

 

[Puffy]

Henri Bergson stands out in my mind, Matter and Memory, Time and Free Will, Duration and Simultaneity , etc.

 

[kantor1003]

John McTaggert and his notion of A-series and B-series, which are two different ways in conceiving events as ordered in time, and is argument for the unreality of time. See: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time/#McTArg. For a shorter, more accessible overview see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-series_and_B-series
I doubt any decent introductory text to modern metaphysics would fail to include it.

 

[Architect]

...which is not motion?

Ha! I didn't realize those used piezo. You get the point though, there are other examples.

 

[kantor1003]

Reading the introduction to McTaggart and his argument for the reality of time in E.J. Lowe's 'A survey of metaphysics' gave me a jolly good laugh!

"In the present chapter... I shall examine another and perhaps a more compelling way in which this line of argument against the reality of time may be pursued----one which we owe to the Cambridge philosopher J.M.E. McTaggart, who wrote extensively on this topic in the early years of the twentieth century. (Of course, if McTaggart's argument is correct, he really did no such thing, since there are in reality no 'years' and 'centuries'---but let us pass over the irony of this situation)."

 

[Milo]

@Architect It is easily understood one you understand how simple the universe really is. It of course seems complex with all the abstractions humans make up and try to plug into the system. You're looking too closely to see the whole thing.

I guess instead of saying all matter reversing, I should have said everything that exists reversing directions. Think about it, your mind is no exception because it is still something.

Ignorance is pointing in your direction this time, but it happens to everyone. If your try to understand it, it will make perfect sense.

You are also ignoring many of the premises I made such as "if you were able to survive near a black hole." I know this because you stated I would die. Of coarse I would. That is why I said "if."

 

[Architect]

Milo, take some graduate level physics courses and then we'll be speaking the same language at least.

 

[travelnjones]

Side note, does anyone know of an English translation of Being and time that is not horrific?

The hardback i have is a train wreck, i have questioned if I don't need to learn german. Also does it really get much into time , it seems like it doesn't. Flagrant false advertising?

 

[Brontosaurie]

heidegger

 

[Milo]

Milo, take some graduate level physics courses and then we'll be speaking the same language at least.

Take some lessons in philosophy,
Because no one understands language quite like me.

 

[John_Mann]

First thing first: you cannot talk about time without talk about space.

Gravity is related to acceleration of time. Gravity = acceleration (in whatever dimension).

We are stuck to the center of earth only because it's the shortest natural way between today and tomorrow.

If you move fast (near celeratis) in one space dimension your vector of time will be redistributed to that space vector, making time pass slowly (deceleration). That's basically the twin's paradox.

I think a time travel is possible but must be a multiverse travel.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Thanks

I am really am just looking for different thoughts to read. Speaking for myself I am idealist so I am open to philosophical interruptions

You're welcome. I wanted to give you a spectrum. If I had more free time I could probably dig up a lot more.

 

[travelnjones]

First thing first: you cannot talk about time without talk about space.

Gravity is related to acceleration of time. Gravity = acceleration (in whatever dimension).

We are stuck to the center of earth only because it's the shortest natural way between today and tomorrow.

If you move fast (near celeratis) in one space dimension your vector of time will be redistributed to that space vector, making time pass slowly (deceleration). That's basically the twin's paradox.

I think a time travel is possible but must be a multiverse travel.

yeah i am aware of spacetime as it relates to physics. But my experiences have left me with a certain doubt about an outside world and other minds. So I am happy to consider purely philosophical and metaphysical ideas.

I mean I guess the rest of you, people, are real but I can not experience your mind in any really way so I am unable to validate or invalidate. It's beyond me. Mater and "reality" has always been interlaced with feelings of falseness for me. Being Existential crisis or Solipsism, I don't know .

A series and B series seems a good starting point though.

 

[John_Mann]

Time is the empty Palace of Brahma.