Does time exist?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You were insisting time did not exist, cuz it couldn't be directly detected.
By the same logic, gravity does not exist.

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/does-time-exist.152720/page-73#post-3502922

Gravity detected via its effects

TIME does not produce any effects because it does not exist

*****

2.4 The Problem Situation
The physical issue of time and the physical issue of space remain unexplored. Does
time have some kind of constitutive element which activates phenomena such as
aging? Does the Universe produce time? Are clocks activated by time? Do they
generate time?

A clock is a device whose functioning is correlated with the configuration of the
Sun and Earth (Fig. 3.1). When used as clocks, the rhythms of nature do not
generate time. A clock does not produce time and it does not consume time; the timed displayed is subject to strict international conventions. The idea (concept) of measuring changes (phenomena) is made concrete by the invention of the clock (artifact): this is conception or design, i.e., the materialization of a concept through
the gnomon, sundial, clepsydra, and clock. Consider what Petronius (?–65 AD)
said: … a clock near which a “bucinator” (latin word for a “trumpet player”) warns
us of the flight of the days, and time gone by ([11]: XXV)

Days and hours cannot be measured; it is changes that are measured.

In 2011, a British clock reached an accuracy of 2.3 10−16 s, which is an error of 1 s/138 million years. It illustrates the considerable role of high technology and state-of-the- physics.
The leap second between solar time and atomic time requires periodic resyn-
chronization: if time was a physical component of nature, such questions wouldo bviously not arise. The accuracy of measurements is determined by the accuracy of clocks; but the accuracy also depends on the rigor of the definition of the second.
Terrestrial rotations, terrestrial revolutions, and the cesium oscillations, produce observable and measurable cycles, but they do not produce time; even if a mis-leading field effect suggests the idea of an arrow of time.

The Invention of Time and Space by Patrice F. Dassonville

*****

There is more but that's enough before i post the whole book

:)
 
Days and hours cannot be measured; it is changes that are measured.
Just like gravity cannot be measured; it is the movement of masses that is measured.

And yet, that doesn't mean gravity is "just a concept".
Same applies to time.
Nothing you've said changes that.
 
Just like gravity cannot be measured; it is the movement of masses that is measured.

And yet, that doesn't mean gravity is "just a concept".
Same applies to time.
Nothing you've said changes that.

:) Going back in shell to regroup with Huey Dewey and Louie

Back soon

:)
 
Space-time relation

Length is visual.

Time is MAGNITIVE (objective and thought mathematically).
 
Last edited:
Blue is the colour of my true loves hair
Yellow is the colour of the buttercups she walks on
Yellow is the colour of the Sun
She has never walked on the sun

:)
 
I have read many (not all) Posts to this Thread.

My Post 109 describes Einstein's view.

I have seen nothing better on this issue.
 
I have seen nothing better on this issue

Try to obtain a copy of

The Invention of Time and Space by
Patrice F. Dassonville

Technical and very detailed in places but good explanations as to why time does not exist

:)
 
Does time exist? well, take it out of all equations, bring all durations to zero, halt your movement through the 4th dimension and see what happens.
 
BB? You have not taken that out of the equations.
please give details how? when? where? ?
having time in equations is important, take e=mc^2 , time is in there squared, (as part of c). had me scared! now about
the BB, my take is it happened at a point in time, so you have to have time to have that point, make that point even. since in alternate theories ALMA, lookback time,

I consider the BB the switch from timespace to spacetime from energytime to mattertime, how did I take time out of the BB? or the BB out of the equations?
 
Last edited:
For Aristotle, time is not a movement, but it would not exist without it, since it only exists when movement involves a number. Aristotle conceived, without knowing it, the becoming-time duality, the fundamental law of Philochrony.
 
Last edited:
For Aristotle, time is not a movement, but it would not exist without it, since it only exists when movement involves a number. Aristotle conceived, without knowing it, the becoming-time duality, the fundamental law of Philochrony.
He probably did know what he was on about and I'm certain it was not crap "when movement involves a number....Philochrony"

:)
 
nebel said:
Time is not moving, we are. Without time and our movement through it, we would not exist without it. or? is that better? fixed that for you?


Time is the direction (dimension) of becoming (changes). If there is movement there is time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top