What is time?

[Ulysses]

I spent a good hour or two trying to figure this one out while staring at the night sky from my backyard last night. Part of it was curiosity, but the idea of using our knowledge of time to make it work for us rather than against was also very interesting. I was pretty upset when I couldn't come up with a theory of my own, so I decided to Google it.

There are a couple of commonly accepted theories on this, but none of them really get to the bottom of it. Also, did you know that according to one theory, our future may already exist? How very disturbing.

Discuss plz.

 

[Latro]

Spend about a decade studying physics and you'll get a fairly exact answer to this question, believe it or not...relativistic physics has pretty much covered this as I recall.

 

[merzbau]

alright, i'll have a go.

chronology:
the arbitrary measurement and separation of moments that can be placed in linear sequence?

change:
a method of charting alterations in state of temporal materials and forms?

causality:
an artificially delimited yet contiguous segementation of existence that allows a chain of events to be linked together?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

I have been trying to come to terms with the fact that time is flexible. It's passes at a different rate on earth, in orbit, and when your traveling the speed of light. I don't know, it confuses me. I should probably some physics classes to remedy this. On that note is anyone here well-studied in quantum physics?

 

[Latro]

I have been trying to come to terms with the fact that time is flexible. It's passes at a different rate on earth, in orbit, and when your traveling the speed of light. I don't know, it confuses me. I should probably some physics classes to remedy this. On that note is anyone here well-studied in quantum physics?

You would study relativistic physics for this, not quantum physics. And no. About all I know is that relativistic physics does cover this, and I know the basic conclusions. I have no idea about the explanations behind those conclusions.

 

[Razare]

Time is a wave that radiates throughout the fabric of the universe.

The frequency of that wave is the speed of light.

The faster you move, the more in-sync with the wave you become, and the less you age.

Light surfs on the wave of time and thus, is timeless. (From its point of view.)

 

[Deleted member 1424]

@latro
I know they are two separate fields. That was just my mind being rather ADD; since I have been wanting to study quantum physics as well.

@Razare
With that logic wouldn't time need to slow down when it travels through a medium; since already light does.

 

[Ulysses]

I have been trying to come to terms with the fact that time is flexible. It's passes at a different rate on earth, in orbit, and when your traveling the speed of light.

True (sort of). What you're describing there is the Shapiro delay.

 

[Razare]

Adair - No. Time is part of the fabric of the universe, not a particle like light. You could think of light as being the train on a railroad track. The wave of time is the track... light, energy, and matter are the trains on the track.

I'm not an expert on psychics either, so if a knowledgeable person who knows what time is wants to correct me, go ahead. However, I did read about the first 50 pages of "A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking and understood it.

My explanation seems flawless if you consider observations of existence up to this point. Yet it's just a generalization of what happens and doesn't explain what this fabric is in any specific way.

It also wouldn't surprise me that the reason light seems to travel in a wave pattern is precisely because the fabric of time is a wave and it's just conforming, going where ever the track leads it.

Think about it... why would a particle travel in a wave form... wouldn't it just go straight? Doesn't the fact that it moves in a wave tell you something about the medium across which it is moving?

 

[Latro]

It also wouldn't surprise me that the reason light seems to travel in a wave pattern is precisely because the fabric of time is a wave and it's just conforming, going where ever the track leads it.

Think about it... why would a particle travel in a wave form... wouldn't it just go straight? Doesn't the fact that it moves in a wave tell you something about the medium across which it is moving?

...

Yeah, I don't plan to even try to touch this stuff until I grasp the nitty-gritty meaning of Schrodinger's equations at the very least. I would suggest you do the same. I can tell you from even what little I know that it is far, far more complicated than what you're describing.

 

[merzbau]

time... heals all wounds?

 

[del]

As someone who has taken one quarter of special relativity and two quarters of quantum mechanics, and I honestly have no idea.

As someone noted earlier, general relativity says more on this topic than quantum mechanics, but QM probably has much more to do with time than we realize.

Oh, and the reason light propogates as a wave has to do with the uncertainty principles, not with it conforming to the geometry of time as Razare was speculating. So I wouldn't go so far as to say that time behaves according to some kind of wave function, but research in non-local quantum signalling could prove me wrong.

Generally, though, it's pretty well agreed that time and space are interrelated things.

Note that you should take this all with a grain of salt. I switched majors to study biostatistics, biochemistry, epidemiology/public health, and medicine shortly after I took these classes, which is why I'm awake at 1am pretending to study for a molecular biology exam, lol.

 

[Tyria]

It is difficult for me to say what time is, but I can tell you that it is measured by atomic decay (if I am not mistaken). Just wanted to add this for the sake of more complete discussion.

 

[Latro]

It is difficult for me to say what time is, but I can tell you that it is measured by atomic decay (if I am not mistaken). Just wanted to add this for the sake of more complete discussion.

That's one of our methods of measuring it, simply because of the very precise (and by precise, I mean that in the statistical sense of the word, i.e. that an experiment is highly reproducible, not necessarily that it is accurate) nature of the decay process for very pure samples of a given isotope. It isn't really intrinsically tied to time in the sense of time's existence, however, as far as I know.

 

[EloquentBohemian]

Does time exist without memory?
We ascribe subjectively a property to the Universe because we have memory of what we have observed and quantified in our memory as well as possessing the ability to project possibility, but does this human subjective experience and memory storage imply that this exists as a property of the Universe?

 

[Beat Mango]

We ascribe subjectively a property to the Universe because we have memory of what we have observed and quantified in our memory as well as possessing the ability to project possibility, but does this human subjective experience and memory storage imply that this exists as a property of the Universe?

It's a safe bet, yes.

 

[Tyria]

That's one of our methods of measuring it, simply because of the very precise (and by precise, I mean that in the statistical sense of the word, i.e. that an experiment is highly reproducible, not necessarily that it is accurate) nature of the decay process for very pure samples of a given isotope. It isn't really intrinsically tied to time in the sense of time's existence, however, as far as I know.

True. But it is predictable, and science has decided to view this as time's symbol.

I wonder what time actually is though... I haven't thought about it other than a measure of numbers. Is time tied to space or vice versa?

 

[Latro]

True. But it is predictable, and science has decided to view this as time's symbol.

I wonder what time actually is though... I haven't thought about it other than a measure of numbers. Is time tied to space or vice versa?

It is most definitely tied to space, yes. The two are not separable. I wouldn't call it time's "symbol", though...it's more like the most efficient means of measurement that we have. It's still not 100% perfect (the error is somewhere along the lines of a nanosecond/year, I believe) but it's functional for our work. It still doesn't have any intrinsic ties to time itself.

Does time exist without memory?
We ascribe subjectively a property to the Universe because we have memory of what we have observed and quantified in our memory as well as possessing the ability to project possibility, but does this human subjective experience and memory storage imply that this exists as a property of the Universe?

...Current science suggests that time is intrinsically bound to space. If space exists, and our science is correct, then time exists. So yeah...trying to say that our definitions of time based on memory are not necessarily founded in any physical reality is true, but then when we find something that supports time being existent in physical reality (which we have), that argument promptly collapses.

 

[EloquentBohemian]

...Current science suggests that time is intrinsically bound to space. If space exists, and our science is correct, then time exists. So yeah...trying to say that our definitions of time based on memory are not necessarily founded in any physical reality is true, but then when we find something that supports time being existent in physical reality (which we have), that argument promptly collapses.

And what precisely is that which supports time being existent in physical reality?

 

[Latro]

And what precisely is that which supports time being existent in physical reality?

The theory of relativity and the concepts of spacetime implied by that theory.

Technically one could argue that this does in fact mean that "time" per se does not exist, but is rather merely an inseparable component of spacetime, though, I'll concede that.

 

[Beat Mango]

And what precisely is that which supports time being existent in physical reality?

Why don't we just do away with the external world altogether? Can we prove it exists? Can we prove anything exists?

 

[Felan]

Why don't we just do away with the external world altogether? Can we prove it exists? Can we prove anything exists?

I read about one theory of the universe that said reality was two dimensional and that the third dimension is merely a illusion or projection. Mathematically such is apparently possible but I couldn't wrap my head around it, at least in the abbreviated form I read.

Time is merely the aspect of our place beyond our control or perception. Without the markers of the world around us: day, night, clocks, moon, seasons, and so on; we have almost no perception of time at all. Long experience with said markers would allow us only with tremendous constant conscious effort to estimate with some truth the passing of time in their absence.

For time to be subjective it would have to something different from one person to another. An hour is an hour, a day is a day. To me the only subjectivity in an hour is how we pass it, and its markerless passing unnoticed.

 

[EloquentBohemian]

The theory of relativity and the concepts of spacetime implied by that theory.

Technically one could argue that this does in fact mean that "time" per se does not exist, but is rather merely an inseparable component of spacetime, though, I'll concede that.

Yes, I'll agree with this. This is what lead me to wonder whether time was an experience of memory and that only the present moment could viable enough to be approached to be proven to exist or not.

Why don't we just do away with the external world altogether? Can we prove it exists? Can we prove anything exists?

The only validity which can be proven is that one exists - the 'I am', imho, for it seems reasonable that something cannot create itself. To what extent one exists, such as whether one's corporeal form exists or is an extention of the consciousness which one is, is left up to debate.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

time... heals all wounds?

Time wounds all heels.

 

[Tyria]

So space cannot exist without time?

Is time an illusion then? Are we conscious of time that has 'passed' only when we have a reference to mark its passing? Is time simply an artificial thing used to express what is happening in a given space?

 

[Latro]

So space cannot exist without time?

Correct, and vice versa.

Is time an illusion then? Are we conscious of time that has 'passed' only when we have a reference to mark its passing? Is time simply an artificial thing used to express what is happening in a given space?

Again, it depends on whether or not you're arguing that time is simply an inseparable constituent of spacetime or not.

Why so much interest in our own consciousness in looking at the existence and physical principles of "time", though? Serious question.

 

[Agent Intellect]

time is the direction in which entropy increases. its "easier" for things to break down into chaos then it is for them to become more ordered. it could also be, as someone suggested, the progression of the wave functions of each constituent particle. but it could also be purely psychological. we see time going in the direction it does, when in fact time is completely static. if we were able to step outside of time, we'd see it as a line, unchanging and all of it happening at once. the question that raises, though, is why we are aware of this particular time and not some other time.

 

[merzbau]

Time wounds all heels.

time flies like an arrow... fruit flies like a banana.

*oh god make it stop*

 

[dbell92]

Time and anti-time are part of duration (the 4th dimention). A magnificant book called Imagining the Tenth Dimention by Rob Bryanton goes into great detail about what he believes to be all ten dimentions (set aside by other theories by his outlook of time). But for those of us who are simply to lazy to go out and buy the book there is a wonderously thought provocing cartoon that breifly outlines Rob's theory. here's the link: http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

 

[dbell92]

time is the direction in which entropy increases. its "easier" for things to break down into chaos then it is for them to become more ordered. it could also be, as someone suggested, the progression of the wave functions of each constituent particle. but it could also be purely psychological. we see time going in the direction it does, when in fact time is completely static. if we were able to step outside of time, we'd see it as a line, unchanging and all of it happening at once. the question that raises, though, is why we are aware of this particular time and not some other time.

That question is one of a list that will not let me rest at night. It also leads into "what does the part of my brain I don't use do? can it manipulate time?!" and then I fall asleep during my chem test the next morning...

 

[dbell92]

Time is a part or duration. Rob Bryanton's book Imagining the Tenth Dimention goes into great detail about all dimentions and is set aside from other silimar theories by his oppinion of what time is. He views time and ati-time as two directons (like left and right) and a part of duration (the fourth dimention). For those who are to lazy to buy his book there happens to be a convenient cartoon outlining with theory: http://www.tenthdimension.com/medialinks.php

 

[EloquentBohemian]

time flies like an arrow... fruit flies like a banana.

*oh god make it stop*

LOL. No, please don't.