A thought about time

[JSSheridan]

I'll start off with an analogy as a kind of thought experiment. I'm sitting in my home typing this post. Yesterday I was at my office 30 miles away, but I came back home at 5 yesterday. I only exist in one place at a time, so I am only here and not at my office.

That's trivial, but I've never heard an object described that way in terms of time. Five minutes ago, I was sitting here thinking about how to start this post. Right now, I'm still here, but I've moved 300 seconds forward on the timeline. I don't exist at two points on the timeline at once, I only exist right now. If I were to travel back in time five minutes to this same spot, I wouldn't find anything. Everything would have moved forward in time and would no longer exist except. Even things affected by time dilation would have moved forward, just at a slower rate. The universe only exist right now.

I think many people assume that they exist for the past N years on the timeline and the the universe exist on the timeline back to the beginning of existence. I think that's wrong. Thoughts?

 

[C1]

You've got lots & lots of homework to do. Ideas such as "I", "I exist", "everything would no longer exist" are loosely defined notions or constructs within your own mind.

When you look up at the stars, the light exists yet you are seeing the universe as it was in the past millions (or billions) of years ago.

People who undergo a near death experience, report being more conscious/lucid. So much so that after the experience they consider this physical life to be the dream and that past, present & future co-exist.


http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627596.800-quantum-wonders-nobody-understands.html

http://www.nderf.org/GeorgeRodonaia%27s_nde.htm

 

[JSSheridan]

You've got lots & lots of homework to do. Ideas such as "I", "I exist", "everything would no longer exist" are loosely defined notions or constructs within your own mind.

When you look up at the stars, the light exists yet you are seeing the universe as it was in the past millions (or billions) of years ago.

People who undergo a near death experience, report being more conscious/lucid. So much so that after the experience they consider this physical life to be the dream and that past, present & future co-exist.


http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627596.800-quantum-wonders-nobody-understands.html

I'm not really interested in the metaphysical aspects of this or looking for flaws in my definition of what "exist" means. I'm asking about a tangible fact, and it applies to the bowl I ate my parfait out of as much as the next person or object.

And light propagates through space over time.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I'll start off with an analogy as a kind of thought experiment. I'm sitting in my home typing this post. Yesterday I was at my office 30 miles away, but I came back home at 5 yesterday. I only exist in one place at a time, so I am only here and not at my office.

That's trivial, but I've never heard an object described that way in terms of time. Five minutes ago, I was sitting here thinking about how to start this post. Right now, I'm still here, but I've moved 300 seconds forward on the timeline. I don't exist at two points on the timeline at once, I only exist right now. If I were to travel back in time five minutes to this same spot, I wouldn't find anything. Everything would have moved forward in time and would no longer exist except. Even things affected by time dilation would have moved forward, just at a slower rate. The universe only exist right now.

I think many people assume that they exist for the past N years on the timeline and the the universe exist on the timeline back to the beginning of existence. I think that's wrong. Thoughts?

I can share this with you :
The first thing you have to let go off is that time is a constant for various reasons.

A reason is that the perception of time is defined by the brain. And this perception can be altered when needed by the brain. In certain situation like pumped up with adrenaline, everything seems to slow down. It is just that the "clockspeed" of your brain is higher. And therefor your perception of the world around you faster. The brain only can do this for a short while because the brain will overheat. The brain even has a throttle section that makes sure that the amount of waste removed and nutrients arriving stay at an optimum level. Neurons die of very easily. I do not have the links right now but research seem to indicate that the brain has it's very own analog when compared to cool and quite or speedstep.

Time is a what we define as a forward continuation of processes.
Einstein was very good at understanding time. He realized a most important thing. The point of reference. To come back to the past, the present and the future. The universe with everything in it is an ending change. It means that change after change is happening until there is no more energy for changes. Then there is no more change and thus no more time in the universe when you are still inside the universe( you would be dead as well, no energy left to sustain you).

When thinking about time travel and gong back in time.
The only way to go back in time is to reverse every change in the universe. And that is impossible. And even if it was possible you would be going back in time as well to the point you where because you are part of that very same universe. Now if you would exist seperate from the universe( in another universe for example), you would have another point of reference. But the changes in the universe would then no longer afflict you... And thus you still cannot go back or forward in time.

 

[C1]

I'm not really interested in the metaphysical aspects of this or looking for flaws in my definition of what "exist" means. I'm asking about a tangible fact, and it applies to the bowl I ate my parfait out of as much as the next person or object.

And light propagates through space over time.

But it is real. If you stare at a bowl of bananas that is in front of you, it is because you see the light. The bowl is accessible to your touch. But if you SEE a star, you cannot be sure that it still exists (as it could have super nova-ed or been absorbed into a black hole billions of years ago). A photon traveling at full light speed does not experience time (as it has an interval of zero from one x,y,z point to ANY OTHER!) and an electron travels from one location to another in spacetime without traversing in between. None of these are metaphysics.

http://www.thebigview.com/spacetime/quantumtheory.html

Note: I think that both Deutsch & Wolf have suggested that perhaps these electrons are taking detours thru one or more parallel or alternate universes.

Also,

"Mass submits to being measured, interpreted and understood as length - and as surely as does time. Only after 1905 and Einstein's special relativity did mankind fully appreciate that a time is a length, that the phrase "second of time" is an antique way to speak of 3 X 10**8 meters of light-travel time.
- John Archibald Wheeler, "A Journey into Gravity and Spacetime"

 

[looseratlife]

My tables still here, Its been here for almost half a year now. It hasn't moved a bit. But if you take earth's rotation into consideration, the table has moved.. and some chinese stuff replaced it. SO its like, my tables at the same position after a interval of 365 days.
Even though I have traversed the time line.

 

[C1]

Its actually better than that. There is no particular physical point of origin for the start of the universe. It is expanding outward in every direction at all points/locations. Anyone therefore just sitting in their armchair could say that the point of origin (ie, for the "big bang") is right where they are sitting & they would be correct!

 

[William Gaatjes]

My tables still here, Its been here for almost half a year now. It hasn't moved a bit. But if you take earth's rotation into consideration, the table has moved.. and some chinese stuff replaced it. SO its like, my tables at the same position after a interval of 365 days.
Even though I have traversed the time line.

You look at it the other way around.
The table has moved but not from your point of reference...
When floating in space for all that time (365 days) you can see the table moving. But the movement is a change after change. And thus time progresses forward. I can make it more exiting, let's turn the earth in reverse. The earth moves counterclockwise normally around the sun. Now lets move it clockwise. The direction is different. But it is still change after change after change. Time is still moving forward. I feel bad for al who hope to become timetravelers one day. It is not going to happen. But those people can hope for a way to enter another universe...
Even if you would be able to do a lab experiment where you can stop something 100 % in movement. It would still be moving.

 

[KIAman]

If you assume time (as we know it) is a physical dimension, your thought process is correct. Now you can apply conservation of mass and energy (law) to assert that you cannot exist in 2 places simultaneously so it would stand to reason that if you were to go back to where you were before, you would no longer exist because you have physically moved. It makes sense!

All that rambling based on a faulty initial condition and assumption = fail. Time is a human construct. The perception time is even questionable depending on what reference frame you are measuring from. Now you must answer the question of what is the true frame of reference and keep in mind everything is relative.

 

[JTsyo]

So what you're trying to say is that time travel is not possible. Did you happen to read/watch The Langoliers recently?

Bob declares that the world they are in is the past, a world that doesn't allow time travelers to see past events, but a deserted world that "time" has left behind. To get back, Bob theorizes, they must fly back through the aurora.

 

[William Gaatjes]

If you assume time (as we know it) is a physical dimension, your thought process is correct. Now you can apply conservation of mass and energy (law) to assert that you cannot exist in 2 places simultaneously so it would stand to reason that if you were to go back to where you were before, you would no longer exist because you have physically moved. It makes sense!

All that rambling based on a faulty initial condition and assumption = fail. Time is a human construct. The perception time is even questionable depending on what reference frame you are measuring from. Now you must answer the question of what is the true frame of reference and keep in mind everything is relative.

Sigh..

Afcourse time is just a means to quantify a series of changes happening one after the other. But that does not mean those series of changes are not happening... You really think that if man did not come up with the idea of time, the universe would have not existed ? You must embrace a very broad view of your surroundings to be able to see what i mean. Time is not a physical dimension nor is it in my point of view. It goes a bit further then conservation of energy. I think it is not even a law at all, that is once you dig deep enough. But i have to do a lot more research to be able to explain that. On certain scales that law is violated permanently, that is it just makes sense to me.

 

[William Gaatjes]

So what you're trying to say is that time travel is not possible. Did you happen to read/watch The Langoliers recently?

When there is time to relax [ ] i enjoy the stories of Stephen King very much. I saw that movie once, though. Langoliers, those little pacmans with teeth.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

I want to have a metaphysics conversation without getting all metaphysical.

Is that what you mean?

 

[KIAman]

Sigh..

Afcourse time is just a means to quantify a series of changes happening one after the other. But that does not mean those series of changes are not happening... You really think that if man did not come up with the idea of time, the universe would have not existed ? You must embrace a very broad view of your surroundings to be able to see what i mean. Time is not a physical dimension nor is it in my point of view. It goes a bit further then conservation of energy. I think it is not even a law at all, that is once you dig deep enough. But i have to do a lot more research to be able to explain that. On certain scales that law is violated permanently, that is it just makes sense to me.

My post was to answer the OP but you bring up a good point, which I bolded above. You have a double negative in there so let me clarify your question. Did you mean to ask "If the universe exists because of some special relationship with time, which is a construct of humans, then, if humans did not come up with time, would the universe no longer exist?"

My question back is what special place does time have for existence? Time is a measurement. Time is not movement of every existing thing.

 

[William Gaatjes]

My post was to answer the OP but you bring up a good point, which I bolded above. You have a double negative in there so let me clarify your question. Did you mean to ask "If the universe exists because of some special relationship with time, which is a construct of humans, then, if humans did not come up with time, would the universe no longer exist?"

My question back is what special place does time have for existence? Time is a measurement. Time is not movement of every existing thing.

You are right, i meant to say :

You really think that if man did not come up with the idea of time, the universe would have existed ?

But i agree with you. Time is a quantification of a series of changes.
I have sometimes wondered about the following hypothetical situation :
What if the oscillation of the universe slows down, then all atomic processes would slow down as well. We would never know it, because our measurement of time is based on atoms from the same universe. And thus because our reference of time slows down as well, we would never know any changes.

EDIT: Forgot to apologize : Sorry, my mistake, i thought you where replying to me.

 

[KIAman]

You are right, i meant to say :

You really think that if man did not come up with the idea of time, the universe would have existed ?

But i agree with you. Time is a quantification of a series of changes.
I have sometimes wondered about the following hypothetical situation :
What if the oscillation of the universe slows down, then all atomic processes would slow down as well. We would never know it, because our measurement of time is based on atoms from the same universe. And thus because our reference of time slows down as well, we would never know any changes.

EDIT: Forgot to apologize : Sorry, my mistake, i thought you where replying to me.

We could possibly measure it because there are some phenomenal that are outside of atomic processes, such as the expansion of vacuum space.

 

[William Gaatjes]

We could possibly measure it because there are some phenomenal that are outside of atomic processes, such as the expansion of vacuum space.

I would like to more about that subject. Do you have more information ?