• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Time Does Not Exist

TriflinThomas

Bitch, don't kill my vibe...
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
637
---
Location
Southern California

PhoenixRising

nyctophiliac
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
723
---
I think time is our perception of the movement and subsequent change of the universe as it expands outward at light speed. Space is the existence of matter, and perhaps the existence of the "fabric" that underlies everything in the universe. Therefore, we have space-time as two aspects of the same thing.

Have you ever studied the Lorentz equation? Very interesting in light of time and how it relates to speed.
 

A22

occasional poster
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
601
---
Location
Brazil
Lorentz transformations is for wackos.
 

PhoenixRising

nyctophiliac
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
723
---
Lorentz transformations is for wackos.
Why do you say that? I wasn't referencing time dilation specifically, but the zero-time aspect of the speed of light.
 

BigApplePi

Banned
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
8,984
---
Location
New York City (The Big Apple) & State
“If you try to get your hands on time, it’s always slipping through your fingers,” says Barbour. “People are sure time is there, but they can’t get hold of it. My feeling is that they can’t get hold of it because it isn’t there at all.”
Dip your fingers in a stream and it keeps flowing. "Time waits for no man." You want it should stop just for you?

Barbour speaks with a disarming English charm that belies an iron resolve and confidence in his science. His extreme perspective comes from years of looking into the heart of both classical and quantum physics. Isaac Newton thought of time as a river flowing at the same rate everywhere. Einstein changed this picture by unifying space and time into a single 4-D entity. But even Einstein failed to challenge the concept of time as a measure of change.
I understand Einstein got stuck in his thinking. Maybe he didn't believe in change.

In Barbour’s view, the question must be turned on its head. It is change that provides the illusion of time. Channeling the ghost of Parmenides, Barbour sees each individual moment as a whole, complete and existing in its own right. He calls these moments “Nows.”
“As we live, we seem to move through a succession of Nows,” says Barbour, “and the question is, what are they?” For Barbour each Now is an arrangement of everything in the universe. “We have the strong impression that things have definite positions relative to each other. I aim to abstract away everything we cannot see (directly or indirectly) and simply keep this idea of many different things coexisting at once. There are simply the Nows, nothing more, nothing less.”
Now. Now. That's really funny.

Barbour’s Nows can be imagined as pages of a novel ripped from the book’s spine and tossed randomly onto the floor. Each page is a separate entity existing without time, existing outside of time. Arranging the pages in some special order and moving through them in a step-by-step fashion makes a story unfold. Still, no matter how we arrange the sheets, each page is complete and independent.
This guy is a separatist. Doesn't believe in context. I'll bet his novels have trouble selling.

As Barbour says, “The cat that jumps is not the same cat that lands.” The physics of reality for Barbour is the physics of these Nows taken together as a whole. There is no past moment that flows into a future moment. Instead all the different possible configurations of the universe, every possible location of every atom throughout all of creation, exist simultaneously. Barbour’s Nows all exist at once in a vast Platonic realm that stands completely and absolutely without time.
If that were true, wouldn't it be about time we break up those packages and observe some order?


“What really intrigues me,” says Barbour, “is that the totality of all possible Nows has a very special structure. You can think of it as a landscape or country. Each point in this country is a Now and I call the country Platonia, because it is timeless and created by perfect mathematical
rules.” The question of “before” the Big Bang never arises for Barbour because his cosmology has no time. All that exists is a landscape of configurations, the landscape of Nows. “Platonia is the true arena of the universe,” he says, “and its structure has a deep influence on whatever
physics, classical or quantum, is played out in it.” For Barbour, the Big Bang is not an explosion in the distant past. It’s just a special place in Platonia, his terrain of independent Nows.
It's a special place alright. How does one get to that place?

I can't finish this commentary as I gotta do something in five minutes. Catch ya later.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Local time
Today 9:03 AM
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,691
---
If time doesn't exist you'll have to discover a new theory of electromagnetism, gravity, quantum mechanics and particle physics.

Good luck with that.
 

A22

occasional poster
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
601
---
Location
Brazil
It's like the mathematical part of quantum mechanics - you gotta be crazy to study that.
 

addictedartist

-Ephesians4;20
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
333
---
Location
Canada
thought penetrates time
action penetrates space
 

Etheri

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 5:03 PM
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
1,000
---
It's like the mathematical part of quantum mechanics - you gotta be crazy to study that.

Actually, Most of it is no more than solving a partial differential equation.*

This would be terrorible in most cases, were it not for the fact that we can't solve those analytically (yet) anyways. The maths behind the hydrogen model (or any single electron system for that matter) is complicated, but honestly not all that extreme.

*Stated singular, because we can only solve the limited singular case. We have quite some problems solving a set of partial differential equations.

The point i'm trying to make is to understand the basics of QM mathematically, you do not need 5 math degrees.


Time exists, just not the way we intuitively perceive it. (Mindgames on so many diffrent levels.)
 

intp.

Redshirt
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
16
---
Does space exist?

Everything is nothing.

In realms of our perception , time exists as does the space!

Does anything exist if we didn't?
No.
 

addictedartist

-Ephesians4;20
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
333
---
Location
Canada
Nothing exists,
everything is a possibility.
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Today 6:03 AM
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,135
---
I think time is our perception of the movement and subsequent change of the universe as it expands outward at light speed. Space is the existence of matter, and perhaps the existence of the "fabric" that underlies everything in the universe. Therefore, we have space-time as two aspects of the same thing.

You read my mind.

Have you ever studied the Lorentz equation? Very interesting in light of time and how it relates to speed.

Something about the Lorentz equations bothers me. I think it's the assumption that the speed of light is a constant; rather if space-time is relative and we aim to measure that relativity, we need a reference point for comparing how things will change relative to one another. Suggesting the speed of light as constant then seems like a necessity to do so, but also a theoretically misleading idea, because then comparing two different frames of reference becomes like comparing apples and oranges.
It almost seems like a big contradictory farce of relativity to suggest that space-time is relative, yet the speed of light (or propagation of change) is constant? It's either relative or it's not. Now I remember why I didn't like learning this stuff all that much, despite that it is interesting.

A better theory will probably find ways to incorporate a variable speed of light. But maybe we don't have enough information to build theories like that yet. Maybe it's way too complex to even begin to consider how such ideas could be measured and take place and maybe for our purposes of utilizing and understanding physics right now, it won't affect our accuracy that much.

Edit: Or is the speed of light supposed to be like the Golden Ratio? I suppose if that's the case, then it would have a lot more explanatory power and would support relativity, but I don't think that's what is it given that it is a theoretically measured upper-limit on speed, rather than a constant derived from all frames of reference.
 

Coolydudey

You could say that.
Local time
Today 6:03 PM
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
1,039
---
Location
Pensive-land.....
The state of the universe changes. This, in our experience, happens in a continuous manner, continuous meaning that it can be broken into infinitely small changes. You rely on your football flying in an approximate parabola and not suddenly (I know suddenly implies time, but just imagine everything changing or not changing in infinitely small amounts) jumping 10 meters to the left.
We say that this continuous change happens because time "moves"/"flows" in a certain direction. Time "causes" this continuous change, so that we can model an infinitely small change in the state of the universe using an infinitely small change in time.
 

Da Blob

Banned
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,926
---
Location
Oklahoma

Attachments

  • INTP-TIME2.jpg
    INTP-TIME2.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 440

walfin

Democrazy
Local time
Tomorrow 12:03 AM
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
2,436
---
Location
/dev/null
Essentially this implies a deterministic universe, doesn't it?

I used to believe that (the uncertainties in quantum physics notwithstanding), but I guess it's more motivating to believe that time exists and that we can change the future. It's not a video of still frames.
 

s0cratus

Banned
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Mar 29, 2012
Messages
366
---
Time, Space and Quantum of Light. / My opinion./
=.
Can Time Exist Without Matter?
1. According to
Newton
the answer is “ Yes”
2. According to Einstein (SRT & GRT ) the answer is “ No”
Who is right? Who is wrong?
What is the resolution of this apparent paradox?
There are four kinds of time:
a) the proper (individual) time
b) the planetary time

c) according to SRT the ( -4D) spacetime
d) and according to GRT relative time.
How can we unite them?
===.
The individual time and planetary time
are so familiar that we rarely give them thought.
Don’t we know, that time
for living being is limited
and the planetary time is absolute for us ? It is.
Maybe therefore
Newton declared that time is absolute
and wrote in 1687 that time “ flows equably without relation
to anything external”. But Einstein had another opinion.
He wanted to know: “ Where does the conception of time
come from?”, “ What is the essence of time?”.
And to explain these questions he created two theories:
SRT and GRT and declared that time is relative, changeable.
1.

SRT explains behavior and the proper time of light
quanta /electron. Why do I think so?
a)

One law (postulate) of SRT says that speed of light quanta
is constant c=1. Second law ( postulate ) says no another particle
can reach this speed. So there are two incommensurable

quantities. Is it possible to bind them together? No. I was
taught at school from the first class that the incommensurable
quantities cannot be compared. The connection between these
incommensurable quantities is similar to the decision of a
problem: “What will be if the whale attacks the elephant?”
We can see whale in a ocean and elephant in a savanna,
but they never meet and fight in the same “ frame of reference”.

And the same is about light quanta and another particles.
We cannot see them together in SRT. We can meet only the
light quanta in SRT and no other particles in it.
b)

SRT was born from Maxwell's theory and it is a continuation
of the electrodynamics’ development . The electron is a main
and single hero in the Maxwell's theory and SRT. There
isn't the Maxwell's theory / SRT without electron.

It is not correct to compare electron/ light quanta with another
particles (protons…etc) and bodies (billiard balls, satellites,
astronauts, “twins”) because they cannot produce electromagnetic
fields. The electron and the another particles are also incommensurable
quantities. They are absolutely different objects.

c)
Every epoch has its own delusion. Maxwell and Boltzmann
tried to explain electromagnetic fields using balls, wheels,
cog-wheels, springs…etc. H. Hertz, who demonstrated the

existence of the electromagnetic waves, wrote that the
electromagnetic waves didn’t have practice use. Etc….
Now we try to compare electron/photon
ability with astronaut’s and “twins’ ” opportunities.
It is mistaken, but what to do? We do it because this is
our way of cognition:
From vague wish to the bright thought”.
2.
So, how SRT explains time from electron/ light quanta point of view.
a)
When light quanta is in state of a rest its time is frozen,
and its own clock shows zero.
b)

When photon moves with constant speed c=1
its time is also frozen, and its own clock still shows zero.
c)
Only when photon moves with speed c>1 its zero time
changes and limited time appears. In this situation we
know photon as an electron. Photon works as an electron
and SRT and Lorentz transformations explain this process.
d)

And when , for example, electron emits from an atom and
interacts with Vacuum all its parameters change. Its limited
time ends and its own clock shows zero again. Now it lives
in infinite/ eternal Vacuum until new incarnation, until its new
work, maybe, in an atom (molecule), or in a cell, maybe, in a blade
of grass or in a tree, maybe, in an animal or in a person.
In another words:” We are living beings until Light quanta/
Electron is present and works in our body.”
Is it true? Yes, it is true. Why?

Because W. Pauli in 1924 wrote:" Each quantum state in the atom
is not limited of two electrons, but only one electron".
It means in the atom can be only one, single electron.
The electron manages the atom. If the atom contains more
than one electron (for example – two), this atom represents
“ Siamese twins”. Save us God of having such atoms and cells.
And the living being begins its life from one, singe cell.
What I am introducing here is what ' thinking photon/ electron'
exist .
I applied the quantum of light/ photon/ electron with a consciousness.
And His own consciousness is not static but can develop.
The development of conscious scale goes
" from vague wishes up to a clear thought ".
This evolution proceeds during hundred millions (billion) years.
e)
Trying
to understand “ the electrodynamics of moving bodies”
Einstein wrote that it is the result of time and space changes.
It is not exactly correct , because these changes are secondary
in SRT. And the first point of SRT is that Quantum of light changes
its spin. The former Planck/ Einstein’s spin (h) changes in Goudsmit /
Uhlenbeck's spin (h = h / 2pi), and as a result of this act all its parameters
change and the time and new space appear.
3.
GRT explains the conditions of gravitation and the secret of
planetary time. Why do I think so?
a)
When Einstein worked on GRT, he asked astronomers:
“ What is the average mass of matter in the Universe?”
The result was lamentable. The quantity of mass was
insignificantly small. It was impossible to keep gravitation
law with such insignificantly little mass and so, the Universe
must be “open”, endless. But what to do with the infinite

space, Einstein didn’t know. Therefore he took (from the
heaven) “ the cosmological constant” in order to “close”
the Universe. The taken mass was enough for creating the
condition of gravitation. Without “ the cosmological constant”
the Universe is endless.
b)

In 1922 Friedman wrote, that we could not take “ the
cosmological constant” in calculation. Instead of it, it is
enough to take “time” and the Universe will be “closed”.
Friedman was correct, but why? Because “time”, by its
nature, is a limited physical quantity and, be taken in
mathematical calculation, automatically gives “closed” result.
c)

So, the detected material mass of the
matter in the Universe is so small (the average density
of all substance in the Universe is approximately
p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that the gravitation law doesn't work.
Astronomers and astrophysicists know about this fact and
therefore (to save the gravitation law) invented new matter
a "dark matter", a new energy a “dark energy” and another
abstract objects. This “ invention” is only a result of our
mentality , which says: ” If in a theory you meet infinity it
means the theory is nonsense”. It is very hard to take that
the Universe is infinite. It is no easy matter to give up
a lifetime of habit .

d)
In my opinion it is impossible to use GRT to Universe as
a whole. The
Newton / Einstein's gravitation laws are correct
only in the local parts of Vacuum. The Universe / Vacuum
as a whole is endless.
e)
So, how does GRT explain time?
According to GRT the time depends on the mass
and speed it means, of moving matter.
It means that different masses and speeds can create
different time. For example, our planet Earth has its
own time but for us it is absolute.
The other planets have another mass and speed and
therefore they have their own time. This time according
to GRT is relative. But their habitants will think that their
time is absolute. But if they know GRT they will
not make this mistake.
=============
According to SRT and GRT time is relative.
SRT says about proper/ individual time of an
electron/ light quanta.
GRT says about planetary time of a Planet..
The time cannot exist without matter and speed,
in another words, without moving matter. But
different reasons and different moving of a matter
create the proper and planetary time.
=================..
Is it possible to see the different manifestation of
time in a human being?
Here is an article “ Even the time is pressed from fear”
by Dr. Vadim Chernobrov (collaborator of MAI -
- Moscow Aviation Institute).
He wrote, that we usually think time is a constant quality.
But Einstein’s relative theory says time is relative.
Question. Is it possible to check it in our life?
Answer. Russian and foreign researches say it is
possible. The documents (secret in the past) testify
that “cataclysm of time”, “ phenomenon of time’s
perversion “,” the changes (its deceleration) of time”
often is observed by people whose profession connected
with risk: astronauts, pilots, drivers, soldiers.
1.
The test pilot Mark Gallay wrote in his book
“The test in the sky” when his airplane was caught
with fire “ the time began to go in another scale. The time
almost stopped. Every second took ability of expansion,
and in this situation it was possible to do many things.”
He confirms that tested such feeling many times.
2.
The test pilot Marina L. Popovich said the same,
in the dangerous, catastrophic situations “ the time
is stretches”.
3.
In June 1989 the soviet airplane MIG-29 crashed near
Paris, in Le Bourget airport , in the time of its air show.
The notes of “the black box” showed that during the
four (4)seconds the test pilot Anatoly Kvochur made as
many operations as in normal situation it would take some
minutes. The test pilot later said: ” the time was stretched”.
4.
The captain N.Z.(fought in
Afghanistan ) remembers:
“the fly of the bullet was so beautiful that I didn’t guess
to evade from it, although I have enough
time to do it”.
5.
The sergeant V. Ch (fought in
Afghanistan) told:
“ The black barrel of gun seems very big, even enormous.
Time is stopped and full silence came. And I moved slowly
a step a side and the bullet passed close to me.”
6.
Etc…
His conclusions.
The people in a critical situation, on the border of death,
suddenly for themselves begin to see everything as in the
slow down film and in this time their speed reaction and
power increase in tens and hundreds times. And this explains:
a) why a man who escaped from wolves, can quickly reach
up the top of the naked tree,
b) an old woman took out a big trunk from her burned house,
which later two strong firemen couldn’t rise.
c) etc…
=============..
My experience.
The speed on the curve was so fast that to keep the balance of
the car I went on other road line and flew straight at the
“forehead’ of a green mercedes. The driver of the mercedes
was in panic, in horror. He threw the wheel and closed his face
with his hands. Suddenly the time stopped and the sound disappeared
for me and I made many actions before my car kicked only the side
back door of the mercedes. It was long time ago, but writing this article
I understood better what happened.
Our computer-brain works on a dualistic basis (on two different neurons
systems): 1) usually under logic program,
2) sometimes on intuition ( subconscious).
Brain of a man approximately consists of sixteen milliards neurons.
All of them form the system that manages human body.
That is why that with the work of all the sixteen milliards neurons
of brain, a man cannot catch a single impulse of his Electron, of his
Quantum of light, of his Soul:
(mass of electron is equal 10^-31 kg., charge of electron is equal 10^-19 k.)
But in that time ( critical time ) most neurons of my brain stopped
their electric pulse (time almost stopped) and my Light Quanta/Electron
in this new condition (superconductivity) had possibility to increase
my speed reaction and power on a short period of time . So, as SRT says,
the Light Quanta in different systems ( even in the brain) can show us
a different Time. The Light Quanta plays major role in the Nature,
in the Physics, in our Life.
==========.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
=======================.
 

Da Blob

Banned
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,926
---
Location
Oklahoma
Well Done, Socrates!
What we have labeled time is most likely a multi-dimensional phenomena that exists as the boundary of our perception and for many the boundary of cognition. We could be intuiting any number of overlapping event horizons as a singularity.

Is the time barrier the speed of light?
Is there also galactic time, as well as planetary time?

What is a better Cosmological Constant than the one Einstein was forced to assume, to make his numbers turn out right?



Essentially this implies a deterministic universe, doesn't it?

I used to believe that (the uncertainties in quantum physics notwithstanding), but I guess it's more motivating to believe that time exists and that we can change the future. It's not a video of still frames.

Personally, I am an advocate of the Many Worlds hypothesis with a universe composed of multiple timelines. The assumption that the Past is determined is most likely an illusion for there are as many Pasts as there are Futures. The idea that all of the possibilities of the future must all funnel down into a single possible Past is without merit IMO.
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Today 6:03 AM
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,135
---
Oh, I think I finally figured it out (if anyone cares). Light, being massless, is a measurement of objects (different mass) interacting with each other. Their propagation of energy interaction is constant, as evinced in different areas of physics, reaching the same conclusion and constant for the speed of light.

It then is inherently tied to time -> space-time. That took way too long to figure out. :(

Didn't anyone want to correct me or set my ignorance straight?
 

Da Blob

Banned
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,926
---
Location
Oklahoma
Oh, I think I finally figured it out (if anyone cares). Light, being massless, is a measurement of objects (different mass) interacting with each other. Their propagation of energy interaction is constant, as evinced in different areas of physics, reaching the same conclusion and constant for the speed of light.

It then is inherently tied to time -> space-time. That took way too long to figure out. :(

Didn't anyone want to correct me or set my ignorance straight?

I think that one is thinking on the right track. If one inverts the phenomena of velocity, so that the speed of light is zero on a ratio scale, then time begins to make sense.

However, the question is raised whether the conversion of mass to light, e = mc squared, allows for time as a variable (?) and not just a constant...
 

DrSketchpad

Active Member
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
217
---
Location
in my head
My thought is;
Time is essentially a concept made up by man to measure and explain in a kind of way the constantly moving, creating and destroying universe around us. It does exist to a certain extent, its kind of hard to explain what I'm thinking, but I'm sure you get the main point.
Its more of a point of view kind of question in my opinion.
 

Da Blob

Banned
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,926
---
Location
Oklahoma
A short essay, oddly enough my own views don't seem to fit within existing categories (?)


There are really some intriguing possibilities concerning the true nature of time. As been mentioned if a new conception of time proves to exist then many of the existing theories would have to thrown out the window and new ones created to replace them.

Wouldn't that be fun! Matter of fact, it could be a dream come true for some, an opportunity to rewrite all of the physics...

:dinnerinthesky:
 

Orson

Redshirt
Local time
Tomorrow 3:03 AM
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
12
---
If time exists, does it exist in the same way throughout the universe? We measure time in seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years... However on any other planet than Earth, these measurements will be unsuitable for monitoring your position in orbit around our sun.

Sure, you could adjust the length of a day, a week, a month, a year, keeping minutes and seconds unchanged, but by doing this are we not altering time? What if there are other intelligent civilizations in the universe who perceive time using their own measurements? Measurements that can perfectly predict the seasons and rise and fall of their own sun(s) and own moon(s). Is their measurement of time any more correct than ours?

Colours, sounds, tastes, smells; all things that are perceived very differently from person to person. There is no constant colour, nor sound nor taste nor smell. Time works in very much the same way. A person's Saturday generally runs at a much quicker pace than their Monday. How can this be?

In all honesty, this sort of question is one I can't yet answer confidently, as I do not understand the underlying concepts, and consequences, of the mathematics and physics involved in 'time'. :confused:

I just thought I would voice some of the things that cross my mind when thinking about the topic, so that I might receive some feedback, or help someone else have an epiphany...

Regards from the past ( the past being relative to the amount of time between this being posted and the point at which each individual reader reads this ;)),

Orson.
 

TheScornedReflex

(Per) Version of a truth.
Local time
Tomorrow 5:03 AM
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
1,946
---
An acquaintance of mine said the same thing about time, only he was on acid. What's this guys excuse?
 

EyeSeeCold

lust for life
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
7,828
---
Location
California, USA
Time isn't really a thing, it's a concept isn't it? Concepts are allowed to exist. :confused:

The state of the universe changes. This, in our experience, happens in a continuous manner

Time is a dimension in which events 'can be ordered' from the past through the present into the future

My thought is;
Time is essentially a concept made up by man to measure and explain in a kind of way the constantly moving, creating and destroying universe around us.

I think these quotes approximate time.

Time exists indirectly, like negative space.
SDZMs.png



It quantifies the instant between two or more states, events, or positions. As long as there is change or movement, time exists as a perceptible experience.
 

Da Blob

Banned
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,926
---
Location
Oklahoma
We se the concept of Time to explain change in the environment/universe. The problem is that most reductive 'scientific' models do not explain change or movement of any kind, but rather are based in artificial scenarios where nothing moves and relationships are static. Dynamic Systems Theory could be the exception to that rule, but academicians are as resistant to change as the worst of humans and so obsolete theories are still being taught to the new generations.
 

The Introvert

Goose! (Duck, Duck)
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,044
---
Location
L'eau
I don't agree with this:
Time isn't really a thing, it's a concept isn't it?

I also don't agree with this:
Time is essentially a concept made up by man to measure and explain in a kind of way the constantly moving, creating and destroying universe around us.

Here's why. Firstly, I would like to give my OWN opinion of what time is: The perception of events that exist in our universe. In a way, time is everything... without something to perceive it, time cannot exist, and furthermore, for something to perform an action that can be perceived, SOMETHING has to exist. Therefore, time and the existence of SOMETHING require each other to exist. I say SOMETHING because I do not want to say matter; this excludes things such as anti-matter, energy, heat, etc.

For time to be purely a concept, it could not be altered through physical or chemical interactions, no? Surely one cannot deny that a person's perception of time can be altered! This is not to say that time itself is being altered... simply the perception of it is so. For instance, let's say that someone is undergoing an experience that alters their perception of time (let's just say they are on some sort of drug). What may feel like hours to the person on the drug is actually only 20 minutes. Although this person's perception of time has changed drastically, it has not changed for another person in the room, watching the person on drugs trip out. With this said, it is my thought that time is linear; it moves forward in one direction, at a constant pre-determined speed. Although our perception of this speed can be changed, the actual progress of time is not changed.

I argue that time can only be relative (and surely it IS) if it is not a concept. More simply put; one cannot experience an alteration of perception if whatever is perceived is not a (personally) malleable object. You can't change something that doesn't exist.

Let it be said that this bears no significance on what time actually IS, though. The aforementioned existence of time as a perception of changing events does not imply in any way the components of time, or even why it exists.

Thoughts? :smoker:
 

EyeSeeCold

lust for life
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
7,828
---
Location
California, USA
Thoughts? :smoker:
I understand what you meant about altering perception and agree though I'd still say time is conceptual, similar to the likes of gravity. Not conceptual meaning made-up or hypothetical, but conceptual meaning existing indirectly and understood abstractly.


I'd say to alter time itself and not just perception, you have to be able to increase-decrease the rate of change / movement, or be able to increase-decrease (spatial) distance(isn't this what wormholes do?). In that sense, most forms of transport equate to time travel as you can get to a destination faster than you would on foot.

I also think time is linear, I'm not sure how going backwards in time would work. Going forward seems theoretically feasible though, the real trouble is finding a way to isolate or preserve the body so that it doesn't rapidly age and deteriorate due to the acceleration.

Some interesting pages:
http://www.spacetimetravel.org/wurmlochflug/wurmlochflug.html
http://www.vis.uni-stuttgart.de/~muelleta/MTvis/
 

The Introvert

Goose! (Duck, Duck)
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,044
---
Location
L'eau
I understand what you meant about altering perception and agree though I'd still say time is conceptual, similar to the likes of gravity. Not conceptual meaning made-up or hypothetical, but conceptual meaning existing indirectly and understood abstractly.


I'd say to alter time itself and not just perception, you have to be able to increase-decrease the rate of change / movement, or be able to increase-decrease (spatial) distance(isn't this what wormholes do?). In that sense, most forms of transport equate to time travel as you can get to a destination faster than you would on foot.

I also think time is linear, I'm not sure how going backwards in time would work. Going forward seems theoretically feasible though, the real trouble is finding a way to isolate or preserve the body so that it doesn't rapidly age and deteriorate.

I guess I misunderstood. By conceptual I was implying exactly that; hypothetical. So, we agree :p

I'm not sure about increasing/ decreasing the rate of change/ movement. I mean, think about it; you can increase the rate at which reactions occur by simply adding more energy into the system via heat, swirling the test tube, etc. Surely you're not implying that quicker reactions equate to alteration of time? Well, now that I put it that way...

I suppose if you were defining time as the event of a reaction occuring, then technically, increasing the rate of reaction would be increasing the perception of time of the system, perhaps? :eek: Not sure, to be honest. It's difficult to obtain information on perception of time vs. size of object/ speed of reaction, because, well, we can only perceive events through our own senses. Tricky stuff indeed.

As for your wormhole... From my understanding, a wormhole is the equivalent of creating a bridge "over" the time frame being skipped, essentially traveling forward in time. The way I understand it, imagine you have a string. You want to get to one end of the string from the other. Normally, you would just travel along the string and arive at your destination. However, a wormhole would allow you to travel directly from one end to the ehter by crossing a "bridge". The way I see it is like this: if you were to take either end of the string and fold it up so that both ends touch each other, that would be the equivalence of a wormhole. If this is difficult to visualize, I honestly recommend taking a string and just doing it. It's pretty simple conceptually once you get it. However, keep in mind that I'm not a theoretical physicist, so I might be COMPLETELY wrong. That might not even be a wormhole (although I'm fairly certain).

In conclusion to your wormhole, it would make more sense to me that the definition be changed from time travel to space travel. The way I see it, you're not altering time so much as you're altering the space in which time acts... which to me is different. To alter time, the only thing I could think of would be a black hole... where time is slowed, or even stopped, as it cannot overcome the intense gravity of the black hole. Again, these are just my thoughts :D

As for time travel; I tend to agree with you. It just doesn't make sense to me to be able to travel backwards in time. Then again, I'm no genius, especially when it comes to space-time continuums and that jazz ;)
 

EyeSeeCold

lust for life
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
7,828
---
Location
California, USA
I guess I misunderstood. By conceptual I was implying exactly that; hypothetical. So, we agree :p

I'm not sure about increasing/ decreasing the rate of change/ movement. I mean, think about it; you can increase the rate at which reactions occur by simply adding more energy into the system via heat, swirling the test tube, etc. Surely you're not implying that quicker reactions equate to alteration of time? Well, now that I put it that way...

I suppose if you were defining time as the event of a reaction occuring, then technically, increasing the rate of reaction would be increasing the perception of time of the system, perhaps? :eek: Not sure, to be honest. It's difficult to obtain information on perception of time vs. size of object/ speed of reaction, because, well, we can only perceive events through our own senses. Tricky stuff indeed.

As for your wormhole... From my understanding, a wormhole is the equivalent of creating a bridge "over" the time frame being skipped, essentially traveling forward in time. The way I understand it, imagine you have a string. You want to get to one end of the string from the other. Normally, you would just travel along the string and arive at your destination. However, a wormhole would allow you to travel directly from one end to the ehter by crossing a "bridge". The way I see it is like this: if you were to take either end of the string and fold it up so that both ends touch each other, that would be the equivalence of a wormhole. If this is difficult to visualize, I honestly recommend taking a string and just doing it. It's pretty simple conceptually once you get it. However, keep in mind that I'm not a theoretical physicist, so I might be COMPLETELY wrong. That might not even be a wormhole (although I'm fairly certain).

In conclusion to your wormhole, it would make more sense to me that the definition be changed from time travel to space travel. The way I see it, you're not altering time so much as you're altering the space in which time acts... which to me is different. To alter time, the only thing I could think of would be a black hole... where time is slowed, or even stopped, as it cannot overcome the intense gravity of the black hole. Again, these are just my thoughts :D

As for time travel; I tend to agree with you. It just doesn't make sense to me to be able to travel backwards in time. Then again, I'm no genius, especially when it comes to space-time continuums and that jazz ;)


If you simply sped up the rate at which a seed blossoms, grows into a plant, and then dies that's affecting objective time, rather than your perception of time because it's something external. If it was internal then only you could perceive the seed rapidly growing and dying, while others would perceive the seed growing normally. In other words, you'd be prophetic relative to others.

Not a genius physicist either, but yeah I understand wormholes, at least visually, and I do think it leans more toward space travel. But because if person A traveled through the wormhole, it would make time for person A accelerate relative to person B who takes the long way outside the wormhole. Maybe it's not directly time travel, but some form of time is affected nonetheless.



An interesting question, what is time without experience of movement? Without thought?
 

crippli

disturbed
Local time
Today 5:03 PM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,779
---
I believe I experience time as movement, that would be the fourth dimension of a regular 3 axis cartesian coordinate system. Time would be the movement from one position to another. And that one can do with energy.

And this here becomes messy, as I don't understand it very well. An atom get the energy from gravity+ other stuff, heat also. Creates energy levels, as creates motion we perceive as time. So it's energy from sun+gravity.

Then there is dimension upon dimension of movement, time. This insane speed we travel the universe with. We experience barely above zero of what is moving. To reverse time should be possible, if this is a simulation, and one could get to the input panel, and do it instantly.. But one would have to reverse the movement at beyond the Local Group(that is a huge group of planetary matter, like hydra). This would in turn reverse the orbit of our solar system and what is relevant to us, our path around the sun, and rotation.

I should have to get a hold of the simulation, and figure out how to bring up the command line. A different time would have to exist where I am to make input to reverse the movement of this universe to reverse time. Or else I should not be able to make any input. The electrons would stop orbiting my atoms, and they will disintegrate I suppose, and not to be resurrected, at least as I know it, at the moment of reversing... perhaps it would be okay, as I would already be in another system that would keep me going. I would probably want to stay away from the room where time does not exist.
 

gilliatt

Active Member
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
425
---
Location
usa
We really don't understand what time is, we don't understand what gravity is. We just know they are there. Time is a measurement of motion, a relationship. 'I am 90 years old, I have made 90 revolutions around the sun'. On Neburu one year is 3600 yrs. I would be just a bab.
 

The Introvert

Goose! (Duck, Duck)
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,044
---
Location
L'eau
If you simply sped up the rate at which a seed blossoms, grows into a plant, and then dies that's affecting objective time, rather than your perception of time because it's something external. If it was internal then only you could perceive the seed rapidly growing and dying, while others would perceive the seed growing normally. In other words, you'd be prophetic relative to others.

An interesting question, what is time without experience of movement? Without thought?

Well, I had an entire answer typed up, then accidentally hit the back button and it all got deleted :slashnew: In short:

You make a good point. However, just to clarify, you're saying that the speed of a reaction is directly related to time? I'll take that as a yes, and ask another question: Does this mean that time can simply be measured objectively as a change in energy in a system? If by adding sunlight (energy) to a plant, and the life cycle of the plant is changed as a direct result of the change of energy, doesn't this mean that in some way, one can measure the objective (or possibly even subjective) correlating change in time?

As for your question, I assume it is rhetorical, and as such I will leave it unanswered :D
 

Nezaros

Highly Irregular
Local time
Today 9:03 AM
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
594
---
Location
Returning some videotapes
I see time as a construct of consciousness. We need a way to differentiate "then" from "later" and "now", so we use measurements of time, but it's not an actual "thing" the way that distance, space, matter, is.
 

The Introvert

Goose! (Duck, Duck)
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,044
---
Location
L'eau
I see time as a construct of consciousness. We need a way to differentiate "then" from "later" and "now", so we use measurements of time, but it's not an actual "thing" the way that distance, space, matter, is.

But surely time has influences on distance, space, and matter, no? As I stated earlier, I would accept this statement, if all that it implies is accurate. Alas, I do not believe it is. If time is simply a construct of consciousness, then how is it that it has real, physical effects on things like matter, and space?

EyeSeeCold stated that he sees time as something similar to gravity; existing indirectly and understood abstractly. Although we do not know WHY gravity exists, we can surely measure it, and it most certainly affects matter.
 

C pT Fox

Redshirt
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
5
---
Time dialation. Saying time doesn't exist seems just as much.a psychological concept as saying it exists; would things really exist if there was no change? I mean, existence itself it a psychological concept, does existence not exist because you can't point to it? Time's existence seems like a silly philosophical argument used to kill time. It's like arguing whether dog exists because we can't point to the abstract representation of dog.
 

The Introvert

Goose! (Duck, Duck)
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 8, 2012
Messages
1,044
---
Location
L'eau
Time dialation. Saying time doesn't exist seems just as much.a psychological concept as saying it exists; would things really exist if there was no change? I mean, existence itself it a psychological concept, does existence not exist because you can't point to it? Time's existence seems like a silly philosophical argument used to kill time. It's like arguing whether dog exists because we can't point to the abstract representation of dog.

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

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

I agree. I can't find the exact articles atm, but there's a good Nietzsche piece on exactly what you're talking about.
 

Nezaros

Highly Irregular
Local time
Today 9:03 AM
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
594
---
Location
Returning some videotapes
But surely time has influences on distance, space, and matter, no? As I stated earlier, I would accept this statement, if all that it implies is accurate. Alas, I do not believe it is. If time is simply a construct of consciousness, then how is it that it has real, physical effects on things like matter, and space?

EyeSeeCold stated that he sees time as something similar to gravity; existing indirectly and understood abstractly. Although we do not know WHY gravity exists, we can surely measure it, and it most certainly affects matter.
Well, when I say time doesn't exist, I refer to the concept of time as a fourth dimension, something that could be manipulated, moved through, objectively measured. But we can only measure "time" through the observations of matter, so it may not be so much time having an effect on matter as matter having an effect on itself, the process of which may be referred to as time passing. In this way I say time doesn't exist, since it is a derived quality, rather than something completely independent from space, at least as far as we can tell.

Gravity, we know what gravity is. It is an attractional force between all objects in the universe. We don't know how, or why it operates, but we do know its effects, and we know how it can be manipulated. But the same cannot be said for time.
 

Roark

Redshirt
Local time
Today 8:03 AM
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
13
---
I want to believe that time is an illusion and can be manipulated, but I really haven't found any significant evidence that makes me to believe this is actually the case.
 

C pT Fox

Redshirt
Local time
Today 11:03 AM
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
5
---

StoicMind

Redshirt
Local time
Today 4:03 PM
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
8
---
I don't feel time exist, a lot of related things don't exist. Time I think is man made used as a tool to quantify something abstract. With that being said Physics in general is man quantifying things that exist in order to understand it; joules necessarily don't exist, watts don't exist, but in a way they do.
 

snafupants

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
May 31, 2010
Messages
5,007
---
In the simplest terms, everything that ever happened happened in the present.
 

MichiganJFrog

Rupert Pupkin's stalker
Local time
Today 10:03 AM
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Messages
440
---
Location
A tunnel
If the foregoing discussion is true, then this man's life and work, his endless days of toil and drudgery, have meant nothing.

Time to Make the Donuts
 
Top Bottom