Does time exist?

Status
Not open for further replies.
river said:
Your insults don't detract me from the stupidity of this thinking.
Click to expand...
What insults??? :?
Have you changed your mind about the stupidity of belief in UFO's of Alien origins, ghosts, goblins, giants and such...If so good for you.
And on my Ocamm's razor approach to space and time being real, I suggest you try and refute it scientifically but as per usual your posts and discussions on science are scant at best.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler
Time is nature's way to keep everything from happening all at once. ... Golden Atom, Ch. V: " 'Time,' he said, 'is what keeps everything from happening at once.


http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/10/18/is-time-real/
 
PROPERTIES OF THE PHILOCHRON LINE

1- The present moves away (becoming) continuously with respect to a reference point (RM) in the past (duration).

2- The reference moment (RM) is always in the past. The RM may be a periodic event, such as midnight and the January first.

3. The Big Bang was the first RM.

4- The observer can only be in the present.

5- It has just one dimension with sequential direction and sense from the past to the future.
 
THE PHILOCHRON LINE

Visualization of time

Philochron%2Bline.png
 
That is a good graphic, and easily understood, given a reference moment. Sense and fluidity seem to represent a duration of time as the present moves away from the RM.

Have you also included the concept of location relative to the reference moment, meaning that there is a relativity of simulataneity when two locations are chosen with the same reference moment. The starting assumption would be that that from reference location 3, the RM for reference point 1 and point 2 are simulataneous. However, if there is relative motion between location 1 and location 2, then the S and F line of duration would not be identical for the two locations. Time would be measured to pass at different rates given the relative motion. Are you familiar with that thinking?
 
quantum_wave said:
However, if there is relative motion between location 1 and location 2, then the S and F line of duration would not be identical for the two locations. Time would be measured to pass at different rates given the relative motion.
Click to expand...

I do not understand well your question. If you could explain in other way.
 
The question centers around time as it is dealt with in general relativity, and Lorentz transformations where the invariant speed of light causes mathematical equations to be solved by time dilation and length contraction, in my layman explanation:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

That said, then a time line from from two locations with a simultaneous RM, would be different in regard to duration if those two locations were in relative motion. I'm imagining not only the concept of RM, but also of RL, reference loction.
 
quantum_wave said:
The question centers around time as it is dealt with in general relativity, and Lorentz transformations where the invariant speed of light causes mathematical equations to be solved by time dilation and length contraction, in my layman explanation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

That said, then a time line from from two locations with a simultaneous RM, would be different in regard to duration if those two locations were in relative motion. I'm imagining not only the concept of RM, but also of RL, reference loction.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I do not have knowledge of higher mathematics.
 
I find that the math accompanying a theory is generally correct, being peer reviewed and all of that. The good thing about the math is that it quantifies the concepts. But the concepts are often first understood, and then quantified mathematically. So one can grasp the concepts without knowledge of higher mathematics, and then compare theories by comparing the concepts, in place of the math.
 
some excellent comments. glad I read them. my take: the past, a feature of time is stationary, unchanging, so time must be stationary, but we are moving, at different rates through time, living in the present, but seeing only the past. The future is empty time.There must have been empty time before we started moving.
 
Sibilia said:
SURVAY

What is your opinion about time?

1. It is objective (real)
2. It is subjective (ilussion)
3. It is subjective (a priori)
4. It is a duality (real)
5. Other
Click to expand...
there are many elements of time.
 
paddoboy said:
Ten Things Everyone Should Know About Time:
By Sean Carroll
1. Time exists.
2. The past and future are equally real.
3. Everyone experiences time differently.
4. You live in the past.
5. Your memory isn’t as good as you think.
6. Consciousness depends on manipulating time.
7. Disorder increases as time passes.
8. Complexity comes and goes.
9. Aging can be reversed.
10. A lifespan is a billion heartbeats.

Some important extracts from Carroll's extended explanations:
[1]The real question is whether or not time is fundamental, or perhaps emergent.
Click to expand...
actually, the real question is what element of time is being referred to--you cannot take all elements of time and say it is only one(especially when comments like this are made"Everyone experiences time differently.") it does not work like this. what i referrer to as overall time is time of existence(universe and everything in it). there is also biological time, consciousness time and physical existence time(physical objects in general).
once this is understood--then things can be ironed out for others understanding.


[9] Reversing the arrow of time for living organisms is a technological challenge, not a physical impossibility.
Click to expand...
exactly--the only arrow of time is consciousness time--nothing else. an example can be shown of this by simply locations of galaxies and such around our earth. a galaxy positioned north of earth(i know this is not the best explanation) is approximately 13 billion lights years away in that specific direction which this specific time is moving with your direction. now there is another galaxy position southwest of earth. i am moving to that galaxy. and yet time is still moving with me. now what if there are two travelers-- one travel north and i travel southwest-- our times are moving in different directions and on top of that we both are traveling to the past in this specific element of time.
 
Last edited:
NEW PHILOCHRON TABLE

ELEMENT ........... PROPERTY ......... MAGNITUDE
space ...................... extension ............. length, area and volume
matter .................... mass ..................... weight
matter .................... energy .................. work and power
becoming ............... duration ............... time (before)
time .................. becoming ......... duration (now)

Charasteristics of the becoming-duration duality:

BECOMING --------- DURATION
tangible ..................... intangible
changes ...................... intelligible
flows .......................... mathematical
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Time might be another word for the inability (well, extreme difficulty in many cases) to completely undo history.

It might be that time is not a thing of it's own, but an effect. But even then, it still exists.
 
Edont Knoff said:
Time might be another word for the inability (well, extreme difficulty in many cases) to completely undo history.

It might be that time is not a thing of it's own, but an effect. But even then, it still exists.
Click to expand...

I have a problem with the assumption that Time exists at all, except as a byproduct of the existence of something else. Time is an arbitrary measurement of *duration*. When there is nothing to measure, there is no time.
IMO, before the *beginning* there was only an immeasurable timeless permittive condition.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top