Does time exist?
- Thread starter Asexperia
- Start date
- Status
Explain.
It may be said a fundamental particle is a disturbance in a field. That disturbance exists, the field may also be said to exist. To use your words...movement/change are secondary to existing.
What does existing suggest to you?
Where did I say that ; movement/change are secondary to existing ? To begin with .
Sorry, I should of said to use your style.
So, are you going to explain this...
My post below...
What does ''exist'' suggest to you?
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Please don't put words in my mouth.
"Secondary" is an ambiguous term here.
Someone show me an example of a change event that does not involve a time reference.
How so ?
The interaction of matter , in and of its self , does not need a time reference ; at all .
The interaction of matter is purely based on the nature of the matter involved.
That matter exists, or it wouldn't be interacting. As I said before...the field exists, the particle/disturbance exists. Then the particle/disturbance can interact with other fields.
What does ''existing'' suggest to you?
Last edited:
Are you saying you don't need duration for something like a particle to exist? You seem to suggest 'existing' has nothing to do with a duration of time.
Duration to the particle is irrelevant .
Bingo!
If space didn't exist, we would all still be confined to the singularity that the BB arose from.
If time did not exist, nothing would have happened, and likewise, we would still be confined to the singularity from whence the BB, and space and time evolved.
Spacetime:
"The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality"
Hermann Minkowski
Bingo!
If space didn't exist, we would all still be confined to the singularity that the BB arose from.
If time did not exist, nothing would have happened, and likewise, we would still be confined to the singularity from whence the BB, and space and time evolved.
Spacetime:
"The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality"
Hermann Minkowski
Yet did not explain how time ; alone ; could influence matter .
I don't need to.
Time and space [spacetime] evolved from the BB: Matter came later.
You need to
So, the particle doesn't exist.
Not existing means it cannot interact, move or change. And, other particles cannot interact with a particle of no duration. Because it's not there.
No, wrong river.
Again space and time evolved from the BB: Matter was not present at the beginning.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
An interaction is an event. An event requires time. There is a before, a during and an after.
If we had two particles and no passage of time, then the two particles could never interact.
Just as if we had one particle and no passage of time, that particle could not move.
And the time over which it occurs.
How did you extrapolate , duration is irrelevant to the particle , to particle doesn't exist ?
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
If duration is zero, then particle does not exist. That is the definition of zero duration.
So, yes it is elementary that duration is relevant.
- Status