Does time exist?

[Michael 345]

I'm often amazed at the many posters who come here, saying with certainty that BH's do not exist, or that this or that experiment was a hoax, or that GR is wrong, or the BB did not bang etc.
These people must have incredible contacts with those at the coal face of the LHC, the HST, Spitzer, Planck, or any of the myriad of other probes that are constantly searching for knowledge, or they themselves have that magical pass that lets them observe, research these findings themselves!
We are really so lucky that they chose to inhabit science forums such as this!

Didn't you go with them to the CERN picnic?

Daniel Radcliffe was there as well as a blast from the past The Seekers performing Puff the Magic Dragon.

We all were given a keyring TARDIS so we could go anywhere.

Terms and conditions apply.
No changing the past.
No obtaining information from the future to use now.
Not valid public holidays.
Remains the property of Pixar.

Humpty Dumpty going for breakfast.
Sets TARDIS on auto.

 

[paddoboy]

Didn't you go with them to the CERN picnic?

Daniel Radcliffe was there as well as a blast from the past The Seekers performing Puff the Magic Dragon.

An old fartarse layperson like me?
ps: Have met Judith Durham, and Keith Podgter.

 

[sweetpea]

These people must have incredible contacts with those at the coal face of the LHC, the HST, Spitzer, Planck, or any of the myriad of other probes that are constantly searching for knowledge, or they themselves have that magical pass that lets them observe, research these findings themselves!
We are really so lucky that they chose to inhabit science forums such as this!

I know the ones I like to follow on scifroms, but they seem to be 'put off' by those that think they know all because they have a B.Tech. or similar, and so think it gives them the right to be an authority on all physics matters.

 

[sweetpea]

This from the web

Before 1 Planck Time
Before a time classified as a Planck time, 10-43 seconds, all of the four fundamental forces are presumed to have been unified into one force. All matter, energy, space and time are presumed to have exploded outward from the original singularity. Nothing is known of this period.

The Planck era or epoch ended about 10^-43 sec after start, that era is what your Hyperphysics quote is describing. I thought you meant speculation about space and time before that era. That's the reason I spoke of units of space and units of time as in loop quantum gravity. My mistake.
This is what I meant about no singularity in loop quantum gravity...
http://www.einstein-online.info/elementary/quantum/loops

Thus, space acquires a grainy, discrete structure – and so does time. In simplified models used for cosmological explorations, it turns out that within loop quantum gravity, there is no big bang singularity; instead, the universe´s history can be traced infinitely far into the past, step by step.

 

[DaveC426913]

All matter, energy, space and time are presumed to have exploded outward from the original singularity.

Not to mention the fact that it's a mis-informative description - a common newbie mistake. Which means, whomever the author was, they don't know what they're talking about.

The Big Bang did not explode. It inflated.
There is a universe of difference.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

The Big Bang did not explode. It inflated.

Yes indeed.
An explosion is way slow in comparison.
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

My mistake.

I don't consider misunderstanding as mistake.

Humpty Dumpty with Poe who have only made half a mistake between them.

 

[DaveC426913]

Yes indeed.
An explosion is way slow in comparison.
Alex

Right, but the key is that an explosion is ballistic. All the velocity it is going to have is imparted at the moment of the explosion, and thereafter, there is no further acceleration. Inflation has no such limitation.

In fact, it is generally understood that inflation started at one speed, then hugely accerelated for a brief time (definitely in excess of R17) before settling back to a steady increase. None of which is limited by such trivialities as the speed of light.

Also, explosions are, by their nature, the ejection of things, not the formation of space.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Right, but the key is that an explosion is ballistic. All the velocity it is going to have is imparted at the moment of the explosion, and thereafter, there is no further acceleration. Inflation has no such limitation.

Yes very good point.
Alex

 

[hansda]

Anyone ever watched the TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation? I never really watched the show but I've seen a few episodes. There were a few episodes where they would be in what was called the holodeck if I remember the name correctly. But it was a virtual reality environment where they could interact with the characters and surroundings. They could actually see, touch, hear, taste, and smell everything in this simulation. But it can't be an illusion. The environment and the characters within the simulation must be real and must exist because like time they can experience it, right?

So, you think time(now/present) is virtual reality. What about past and future? They are also virtual reality?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoetrope

How it is co-related with time? Do you think time is also an illusion like this?

I agree. Which is an aspect of the Universal Law of Cause and Effect.

Can Cause and Effect happen at the same instant of time?

The "rate of change" gives the idea of time. If change is real, rate of change is real; so is the experience of this illusion of time.

Time can not be experienced, because we dont have any sense to experience time. We can only experience/observe change with reference to time. Time only can be co-related with a clock, which we can observe.

Given the nature of this reality, there is no doubt we experience a series of ongoing sequential, linear events that we measure with a tool we created and labeled as time. It's just a label we use to make sense of the reality we are currently experiencing.

Space, Mass and other parameters are also labels which are used to make sense of reality as we experience them.

I am not aware of any invisible force that forcibly pushes us along some timeline.

We are observers. We can only observe movements with relative/reference to time. We are always in the present(now) and time moves from past to present to future. So, the present(now) is moving from past to future; preserving all its energy. If there is any invisible force pushing us along the timeline, it will require some energy. This may violate conservation of energy.

 

[DaveC426913]

Time can not be experienced, because we dont have any sense to experience time. We can only experience/observe change with reference to time.

The same can be said for many aspects of our world, such as gravity and forces.

We have no way of detecting gravity or forces; we can only detect their effect on masses.

 

[hansda]

The same can be said for many aspects of our world, such as gravity and forces.

We have no way of detecting gravity or forces; we can only detect their effect on masses.

At-least gravity or force has some effect on mass. What effect time has on a mass? I don't think if time has any effect on a mass.

 

[paddoboy]

At-least gravity or force has some effect on mass. What effect time has on a mass? I don't think if time has any effect on a mass.

Entropy.

 

[DaveC426913]

At-least gravity or force has some effect on mass. What effect time has on a mass?

Entropy.

Indeed. Time has had a remarkable effect on this particular 90kg mass. Some parts of it are closer to the floor, other parts are covered with hair and blotches that weren't there before.

 

[hansda]

At-least gravity or force has some effect on mass. What effect time has on a mass? I don't think if time has any effect on a mass.

Entropy.

Gravity and Force can be applied to a mass to change its movement or momentum.

Can time be applied to a mass to change its entropy?

 

[DaveC426913]

Can time be applied to a mass to change its entropy?

No. You are comparing time to forces. It is not.

Gravity and Force can be applied to a mass to change its movement or momentum.

And how will gravity or some other force make this change without time as a canvas upon which it can occur?

 

[hansda]

No. You are comparing time to forces. It is not.

Exactly, time can not be compared with forces or energy. So, time can not be applied to a mass. Hence time has no effect on mass.

And how will gravity or some other force make this change without time as a canvas upon which it can occur?

Time is just a reference; with reference to which we can measure changes happening to a mass. This change happens due force or energy being applied to the mass but not time.

 

[DaveC426913]

Exactly, time can not be compared with forces or energy. So, time can not be applied to a mass. Hence time has no effect on mass.

Gravity - or any other force - cannot have any effect on mass without time. Thus, time and force are required.

 

[hansda]

Gravity - or any other force - cannot have any effect on mass without time. Thus, time and force are required.

Is this your own theory or you have a reference for this? Remember Newton's First Law of Motion(Law of Inertia): Unless an external force is applied, motion of a mass remains unchanged. Now, whether force is applied or not to a mass, effect of time is same in both the cases. So, time does not make any change to a mass only force can make a change.

 

[sweetpea]

... So, time does not make any change to a mass only force can make a change.

My bold.
Change without force... With no external force acting on a mass, the mass will remain travelling at a constant speed, but the mass changes position or it wouldn't be in motion.