Does time exist?

Status
Not open for further replies.
river said:
What wave , made of what ?

True . But more specifically
Click to expand...
The De Broglie - Bohm Pilot wave hypothesis is also called Bohmian Mechanics and solves the inherent problems contained in the Copenhagen Interpretation.
Bohmian mechanics was worked out by Louis de Broglie in 1927 and again, independently, by David Bohm in 1952, who developed it further until his death in 1992. (It’s also sometimes called the de Broglie–Bohm theory.) As with the Copenhagen view, there’s a wave function governed by the Schrödinger equation. In addition, every particle has an actual, definite location, even when it’s not being observed. Changes in the positions of the particles are given by another equation, known as the “pilot wave” equation (or “guiding equation”). The theory is fully deterministic; if you know the initial state of a system, and you’ve got the wave function, you can calculate where each particle will end up.
Click to expand...
https://www.quantamagazine.org/pilot-wave-theory-gains-experimental-support-20160516/
 
Write4U , here's the thing ;

Eliminate all matter and plasma energy in the Universe , hence there is no internal energy in space , where does this fabric of space come from ?
 
river said:
The point Dave was to understand what the " fabric of space " actually is . Not mathematically but physically .
Click to expand...
Well, this may explain;
The Higgs boson does not technically give other particles mass. More precisely, the particle is a quantized manifestation of a field (the Higgs field) that generates mass through its interaction with other particles. But why couldn’t mass just be assumed as a given?
Click to expand...
The solution formulated by Higgs, Englert, and Robert Brout (who worked with Englert at ULB but is now deceased) proposes that all of space is filled with a field that interacts with the weak force particles to give them mass. It does so because the field is assumed not to be zero in empty space. This nonzero ground state violates a symmetry that is considered fundamental to quantum field theory.
Click to expand...
Subsequent work showed that the Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism (or “Higgs mechanism,” for short) could give mass not only to weak particles, but also to electrons, quarks, and other fundamental particles. The more strongly a particle interacts with the Higgs field, the more massive it is. It’s important to note, however, that most of the mass in composite particles, like protons, nuclei, and atoms, does not come from the Higgs mechanism, but from the binding energy that holds these particles together.
Click to expand...
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/111

Thus the fabric of space is a "field", the Higgs field.
 
Last edited:
river said:
It does not explain the fabric of space .
The so called " fabric of space " always has an object in space .
Click to expand...
Why must that be so?
Is a field an object or is "all of space is filled with a field that interacts with (massless) weak force (virtual) particles to give them mass" ?
 
Last edited:
river said: ↑
It does not explain the fabric of space .
The so called " fabric of space " always has an object in space .
Click to expand...

Write4U said:
Why must that be so?
Is a field an object or is "all of space is filled with a field that interacts with (massless) weak force particles to give them mass" ?
Click to expand...

Because space is from the object and the object is space . Both manifest simultaneously .

The field is from the object . The field is the consequence of the object itself .
 
river said:
Because space is from the object and the object is space . Both manifest simultaneously .

The field is from the object . The field is the consequence of the object itself .
Click to expand...
What if the object (and thus the field) is massless?
 
Write4U said:
What if the object (and thus the field) is massless?
Click to expand...

Then that is the same as nothing . Which then means it does not exist and never will .

Of course there is energy , light energy .

And of course light comes from an object(s) IN space .
 
Last edited:
Can someone define what space is?
Is the place where bodies are found?
Is the set of bodies and energy in the universe?
Is the space infinite?
 
For Philochrony, time is the relation between two sequential states in becoming.
Becoming flows, time cuts it. For example, 12 midnight is a cut.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
Well, this may explain;
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/111

Thus the fabric of space is a "field", the Higgs field.
Click to expand...
if i recall correctly higgs was determined by averaging the values of hundreds or dozens of lhc collision events.
Somewhat sketchy looking possibly. Eventually the mass was assumed to be 125 gev.

this whole idea that higgs give things mass is beyond me actually and doesn't make sense from a rational perspective.

are you saying that without higgs, molecules structures would simply be ghosts and travel through each other without collisions?

it is understandable to say that higgs somehow causes gravity.
but mass is more than gravity,
mass is the very collisions themselves, the shape and structure itself, the density itself.

If something has no density then it does not exist, light goes through it, etc, cannot be detected by anything, it does not exist.
surely it is easier to say that higgs is first cause, giving birth to matter itself. why use wordage calling it "giving mass" when it might as well be what is creating everything in totus.
 
gamelord said:
if i recall correctly higgs was determined by averaging the values of hundreds or dozens of lhc collision events.
Somewhat sketchy looking possibly. Eventually the mass was assumed to be 125 gev.

this whole idea that higgs give things mass is beyond me actually and doesn't make sense from a rational perspective.

are you saying that without higgs, molecules structures would simply be ghosts and travel through each other without collisions?

it is understandable to say that higgs somehow causes gravity.
but mass is more than gravity,
mass is the very collisions themselves, the shape and structure itself, the density itself.

If something has no density then it does not exist, light goes through it, etc, cannot be detected by anything, it does not exist.
surely it is easier to say that higgs is first cause, giving birth to matter itself. why use wordage calling it "giving mass" when it might as well be what is creating everything in totus.
Click to expand...
A photon has no mass but it carries energy. Gravitational lensing shows that it interacts with gravity as well.

Atoms would still be massive even without the Higgs. Most of the mass in an atom is due to the strong force binding the protons (and their kinetic energy) together. Even if quarks and electrons were without mass, an atom would still have most of its mass. Only about 2% of an atom's mass comes from the Higgs.
 
Last edited:
gamelord said:
are you saying that without higgs, molecules structures would simply be ghosts and travel through each other without collisions?
Click to expand...
As I understand it (in a very limited way), one could compare it to a particle traveling in a sticky medium and picking up some of the sticky stuff as it passes. A kind of snowball effect?
 
Getting back to the original question for a second, let me ask...does time exist if there is no change possible?

Supposedly our Universe is expanding and eventually there will not be enough mass for stars to form so once all stars "die" there won't be a whole lot going on. If there is nothing going on (no change) in what sense can one say that time exists?
 
Seattle said:
Getting back to the original question for a second, let me ask...does time exist if there is no change possible?

Supposedly our Universe is expanding and eventually there will not be enough mass for stars to form so once all stars "die" there won't be a whole lot going on. If there is nothing going on (no change) in what sense can one say that time exists?
Click to expand...
Did Einstein not address that in his "riding a beam of light" thought experiment, where passage of time becomes meaningless?

IMO, time is a result of change. Thus, no change, no aging....time becomes a meaningless property.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top