In Brief
- Time is an especially hot topic right now in physics. The search for a unified theory is forcing physicists to reexamine very basic assumptions, and few things are more basic than time.
- Some physicists argue that there is no such thing as time. Others think time ought to be promoted rather than demoted. In between these two positions is the fascinating idea that time exists but is not fundamental. A static world somehow gives rise to the time we perceive.
- Philosophers have debated such ideas since before the time of Socrates, but physicists are now making them concrete. According to one, time may arise from the way that the universe is partitioned; what we perceive as time reflects the relations among its pieces.
As you read this sentence, you probably think that this moment—right now—is what is happening. The present moment feels special. It is real. However much you may remember the past or anticipate the future, you live in the present. Of course, the moment during which you read that sentence is no longer happening. This one is. In other words, it feels as though time flows, in the sense that the present is constantly updating itself. We have a deep intuition that the future is open until it becomes present and that the past is fixed. As time flows, this structure of fixed past, immediate present and open future gets carried forward in time. This structure is built into our language, thought and behavior. How we live our lives hangs on it.
Yet as natural as this way of thinking is, you will not find it reflected in science. The equations of physics do not tell us which events are occurring right now—they are like a map without the “you are here” symbol. The present moment does not exist in them, and therefore neither does the flow of time. Additionally, Albert Einstein’s theories of relativity suggest not only that there is no single special present but also that all moments are equally real [see “That Mysterious Flow,” by Paul Davies; Scientific American, September 2002]. Fundamentally, the future is no more open than the past.
This article was originally published with the title Is Time an Illusion?.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
152 Comments
Add CommentI have a vivid memory from my youth of a steam locomotive producing a perfect smoke ring. This doughnut shaped cloud of revolving warm air and smoke , rose steadily in the air and kept it's shape till it became invisible as the smoke was gradually diluted. A feature of this phenomena is that although it had no net angular momentum, it had a lot of angular energy. This might be a metaphor for the article's proposition that whilst the whole may be timeless, individual parts would exhibit time like properties. However just because equations can appear to balance and are applicable in some cases, this does not guarantee fundamental truth or universality. The late Werner Heisenberg ( Physics Nobel prize 1932 ) whilst working in Germany during WW 2 derived an elegant formula to predict the amount of fissile material required for an explosive chain reaction. Because he had not considered the effects of using neutron reflecting materials, he concluded that a working A bomb would be heavier than the payload of any existing aircraft, and as a consequence german research efforts in that direction were curtailed. Similarly in the late 1940's the then astronomer royal declared rocket flight to the moon to be impossible, citing the rocket equation as proof that no rocket could lift the weight of fuel it would require. The equation was not wrong, but did not consider the case of staged rockets. Maths are like models and extrapolations have to be done with care.It's a chicken and egg situation where the theories put forward are a product of the mathematics the authors have at their disposal. The analogy to money is a bit weak because for much of human history what was used as currency had intrinsic value, such as precious metal.Rather than being a convenient figment of our imagination, some temporal influences exist in our universe and could have more than one dimension. They may be subject to something like Heisenbergs uncertainty principle where the more accurately you measure one attribute the more indeterminate the other(s) become. Multi dimensional time might reconcile some of the quantum wierdness, but I have no idea how we might verify it, or what mathematics would be required for a successful description.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMusing further about torii, imagine if you will a flexible coil spring and someone has bent the two ends round and joined them together to make a torus. If youzoom in you find that the spring was not made of a single filament but a coil and that the coil was made from a smaller coil and so on as far down as resolution permitted. I know almost nothing about string theory, but the above seems a rather neat way of nesting a lot of dimensions An interesting property of such an arrangement is that as the fundamental filament ( or string ) tends towards becoming infinitly thin, like fractal coastlines, tends towards infinite length. Could this be the fundamental "stuff" of the universe accounting for all types of mass, energy, space and time by the many modes of vibration available to it?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime is actually an interesting topic. I always used to wonder if the concept of time that we feel as human is the same for other animals. They, at least most of them, dont think. So for them, they dont worry about future and probably learn nothing from past. The only thing they may carry forward is adaptations carried over generations, which are probably genetic in nature than "learnings". But for human, it is an entirely different story. We remember and plan our lives. So does that mean that notion of time differs among living beings? Is that then a real thing? Or is it just a measure of the period between the natural clock of mfg date and expiry date? Another aspect is the scale of time that we talk about in this small planet. There are creatures that live only a few minutes or even seconds. Some them live for centuries. Compare this with the Universal scale. Time in billions of years... distance in billions of light years...we aer nothing, are we?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHi vasoo - sheep do not get a reputation for intellectual excellence yet as anyone who works with them can testify they seem capable of learning things that will reward them (usually food ) and things to avoid ( things that have hurt ). They also seem capable of distinguishing between familiar humans and strangers, whereas some humans can not tell one sheep from another. Our own temporal experiences are not fully explained as the apparent passage of time is affected , by what we are doing , age, and familiarity, or otherwise, with our surroundings. Because we require to synchronise with clocks and calendars, it is assumed that this is faulty observation on our part, though it could be that we all inhabit our own time frame and, as naturally as breathing, synchronise with our immediate environment, but set the clock rate according to circumstance. Many report time appearing to slow when in extreme circumstances, such as battle or dangerous sport. I would think that birds such as swallows would see us as lethargic when they are flitting about catching insects. If you have ever driven down an unfamiliar road, it almost always seems shorter on the return journey, or if you repeat the journey. What if time is a quantum thing and each bit of mass comes with it's own quanta of spacetime?. Pure speculaton of course,but that's how a lot of theories get started.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think trying to incorporate time as a fundamental linear projection, or dimension has confused the issue. The earth doesn't travel the fourth dimension from yesterday to tomorrow. Tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. So time is an emergent effect of motion, similar to temperature, rather than the basis for it. During the time we exist, we are part of this changing configuration and so we go from past events to future ones, but as units of time, our lives start in the future and eventually recede into the past. Neither past or future are physically real, because the energy to manifest them is the same energy manifesting the present.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAfter reading the article and learning that some physicists think time may not exist, I was confused. How can theoretical physicists ignore local examples of evidence of time? Using biology and what has been demonstrated about the evolution of species on this planet, we can pretty solidly determine that, over time, species have evolved from prior versions. This kind of example seems to remove the concept of our personal "experience of time" from the equation and still points to "rock solid" ;-) evidence of time as a basic component of understanding our world and therefore of the universe. Don't fossils and "evolved" genes require that time exists, whether one dimensional or 3 dimensional?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt struck me that this may be the wrong question, that it is just possible that physics is the illusion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHi David - musing a little on what is or isn't subjective or objective here are a few questions. When I see something coloured blue, the colour my mind conjours up may be different from what yours invokes. As they are both occasioned by the same particular light frequencies we will both consistently have the same responses in our minds but not be aware that what our minds created was not the same. Only people who have suffered some brain damage and reported a change would be able to tell that the "blue response was individualistic" . If time was subjective then this type of evidence might be all that we have, and would we then believe it? Why should it be any more true that a four dimensional universe is the ultimate reality? The very words dimension and reality set us along trains of thought that may just reinforce our perceptions rather than reveal a deeper truth. Dimension implies measurement and that involves a yardstick ( such as a familiar length ) and numbers. But the heirarchy of comparison may well be something like topology, where other properties of shape are ranked.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe are neither sub atomic particles, nor galaxy clusters, so seem to be well confined to the laws of physics we have so far discovered. We would need to find a pretty large anomoly to exploit to change our temporal progression in any way, and with no prior knowledge of where such an adventure might lead or what consequencies might be whether in what we thought was the past, the fleeting present, or in which of an infinity of futures.
Abolishing time to make the maths "fit" does not mean the maths is true, especially if it ignores discoveries yet to be made.
Since old times, when Aristotle thought time, it was connected with the idea of kinesis or movement. Then there is no moveent at all at the universe!?... Luisa Rodal
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThose of you who are commenting from the standpoint of how humans experience time apparently do not understand my comment above. Ignore human "perception" of time. Fossils and genetics don't have human time perception, yet they seem to require "time" as a progressive sequence in order to paint a picture of evolution, do they not?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI read your article on time and it got me to thinking. Perhaps, time is like a film moving through a projector, but then there must be more than one projector because the world is all around. Perhaps there are east, west, south and north projectors and above and below projectors. And I can hear sounds below me and above me and all around me so there must also be speakers all around. There must also be taste, smell and feel projectors as well and some projectors must project senses into the inside of me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis seems to describe qualia. Each person's qualia "projector" is in sync with everyone else's qualia (or, alternatively, we each exist in our own separate world which are in sync with everyone else's worlds). But qualia (and consciousness) exist in the present and not in the future so a bouncing ball doesn't appear as multiple images but only as one immediate image.
It is possible that time comes down three geometric planes, but it is also possible that time comes from small to big or from dim to bright or is oscillating. On the other hand, time could be a force or a particle. Or we could be living in an ocean of time.
It seems to me that there are a lot of possibilities.
Brodix wrote: " Tomorrow becomes yesterday because the earth rotates. So time is an emergent effect of motion, similar to temperature, rather than the basis for it." That's philosophy, not physics. What Einstein formulated was that the past, present, and future ALL already exist, and are complete as a seamless continuum. But our perception of "the present moment" is a subjective viewpoint. Our personal "now" is just as subjective as our personal "here."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have not yet been to the future, but that does not mean it does not already exist. And just because I cannot return to the past does not mean that it doesn't still exist. In fact, past and future MUST already exist for me to have a personal "now" in the present moment. But there is no universal present moment... there is no "correct" time. It depends on mass and speed relative to the mass and speed of other nearby matter, because gravitation (not simply motion) creates curvature of spacetime, and the more curved your personal bit of spacetime, the greater difference there will be between your personal "now" and the "now" of observers looking on from flatter regions of spacetime. There would be a differential between the actual rate of the passage of time for you and the distant observer. Einstein never posed it this way, but gravitation tends to stretch or compress the length of "now."
If time is an illusion then all physics in which time is a factor, such as velocity = distance / time, is invalidated, along with all that follows. If time is an illusion then all physics quickly breaks down.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlternatively, if time is an aspect of the relative velocity of motion, to the extent that the entire universe is in synchronous motion (as in the expansion produced by an initial energy release), there is a synchronous progression of time throughout the universe.
In this case, while the progression of time may not be homogeneous, as the velocity of motion is subjected to local influences, there is a common source for the universal progression of time.
What a shame that this article failed to mention Kurt Godel's founding contribution to the development of understanding that time may not exist. He believed that he had proved that this was so, and perhaps he did. In any case he was the founder of the study of closed timelike curves and deserved a mention.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime and Space are both inter-related and inter-woven, they cannot exist without a cause. Therefore according to ancient thinkers they are not real, so the universe is not real - it's hard to accept that concept but we'll eventually get there. How do you define space? You can recognize space only when it is occupied by a cause (object) in a particular state otherwise human mind cannot interpret what space is. If space is nothing, why do we talk about travelling through it? Why travel through something that's nothing? Because in reality, there is no such thing, universe is a delusive manifestation of human mind trying to define what space is.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDr. Scott - Newton formulated gravitation an affect of and attractive force. While his equations are useful, that doesn't prove that an attractive force exists. Successful formulation of the motion of planets in the sky did not prove that they orbit the Earth. The successful formulation of a concurrent past, present and future does not prove its physical existence. That's mathematics, not physics.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore so Time is a unit of measure. Much like the unit of measure of the " foot" for length is here in the United States. These units have no reality but are conceptual constructs. Though purely conceptual these units are extremely useful. One would find it difficult to built a house without a tape measure but the tape measure is not a " foot" rather a close approximation of our ideal " foot"; This is true with clocks and time. Like time one can not go negative distance. Example, I measure up from the ground 3 ft then decide to subtract one foot from my measurement. This requires me to go in the opposite direction 1 ft not -1 ft. I feel many theorist have mistakenly got caught up in the mathematics of their work and in turn feel that we can manipulate a idea or concept as if it were a physical. "Negative time on my paper must mean we can travel back in time." So though I loath to admit it I can't imagine time travel. Yes, I include relativistic time dilation in this statement. I would not also consider bacterium that have been locked away inanimate under ice for thousands of years to have traveled through time when we unearth them; their processes have just slowed down locally while they ride forward in time at the same rate we do.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAgain, it is NOT motion, but gravitation that curves spacetime. Motion through different curvatures changes one's relative present moment relative to other observers taking different paths through different curvatures. The greater the gravitational curvature, and the faster your speed through it, the more displacement.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd Kurt Godel (Thanks, voiceofreason) is certainly worth a mention. He suggested that not only could spacetime be distorted by curvature, but bent into a continuous loop relative to other local curvature, so that some parts of time could become inaccessible relative to the surrouding universe. (well, he and others said things to that effect.)
The title of the article is misleading... it's not that time is "an illusion" or that time doesn't exist. It's that there is no universal constant of time, no real "present moment". Anything that doesn't have a constant universal relationship to matter, in physics, does not physically exist, and that is the terminology we should be using here. Matter warps time like a stone falling into a pond warps the surface into waves. But the water itself does not change.
Time can exist as an epiphenominon, but from a quantum perspective, past, present, and future are merely points and directions on an existing plane of dimensional extension. All points on that plane already exist. You say, "oh, but that would mean that everything is predetermined, and there is no such thing as randomness, free will, or fundamental complexity." Well essentially, that's true. These phenomena are products of the way we experience time, as a flow. But from a perspective OUTSIDE time, everything has happened that ever will happen, and our perception of "flow" is like reading a book. Just because we're only on page 3 doesn't mean that the ending doesn't already exist, and also doesn't mean that there's no point in reading the book.
It's not that time "does not exist." Nobody is seriously arguing that. But it is certainly true that time is not at all as we generally percieve it, or believe it to be. It is instead, just another dimension we can percieve, but our perception is limited to one point along the axis, facing in one particular direction (which happens to be backward from our apparent vector of travel; funny, isn't it?)
jtdwyer wrote: "Newton formulated gravitation an affect of and attractive force. While his equations are useful, that doesn't prove that an attractive force exists. Successful formulation of the motion of planets in the sky did not prove that they orbit the Earth. "
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFirst let me point out that the planets do not orbit the Earth, they orbit the Sun. Mathematics IS physics. You're making a distinction between observational, experimental, and theorhetical science. Theorhetical physics, as in the case of Einstein's mathematics, is a perfectly valid means of asking and answering questions which are beyond the precision of our experimental technologies.
If you're going to argue that physics doesn't acknowledge the existence and "reality" of gravity, simply because we have not been able to directly observe a gravitational wave yet, then I submit that you are incorrect on that point. The maths of Newton described the relationships of falling bodies under mutual attraction. The apple falling on his head was the physical proof.
The past may not actually exist once the present passes. Everything we see, hear, touch, taste and feel is in the present. We remember the past in the present. We read about the past in the present. We see old movies in the present. All activity happens in the present. As far as I know all changes that ever happened, happened in the present and their effects were forever locked in place until something in a new present changed them again. The past does not need to exist once it passes because all the changes that ever were are reflected in the present.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom this perspective the present is a function of the most recent past and the changes that occur in the present. It is not necessary for the second to the last past to still exist because the last past contains the memory of the second to the last past. It is also not necessary for the second to the last change to still exist because that change is reflected in the most recent past.
On page 65 you say "But it, too, is a convenient fiction....The key word is "convenient". It measures the ratio of one movement to another without having to do all those inconvenient calculations. mhupy
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf time does NOT exist I want all the interest returned that I have paid to financial institutions that "compounded over time" ... ;)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeriously though, time cannot be completely individually subjective, events happen and people die for everyone at the same time. We all look at the same astronomical/physical events - some that occurred millions or billions of years ago, or micro events like a change in position of an electron in an atom.
It seems to me that the concept is fine, the difficulties come when we try to measure or express time mathematically.
Even if time is just a way of measuring movement it is still close to universal if not actually universal. Instead of the “you are here” symbol mentioned above think of a continuous line and a discontinuous endpoint and "You are there now..."
this is an inconsequential endeavor, viewed as physics. one cannot find time in the laws of physics for the same reason that one cannot find the clock speed of a CPU in the software code for rotating, projecting or transforming a virtual object. the directionality of electromagnetic or thermodynamic processes is not expressed in the laws of physics because they can go either up hill or down hill depending on the specific physical context -- time by itself won't dictate if something will get hotter or colder, collapse or expand!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistime is a consequence of the fact that the universe is not mechanistic. the "laws" of physics have a probabilistic horizon, like the fractal landscape of Newtonian three body equations; the only way to specify the "future" values deeper into the landscape (make them visible or subject to physical laws) is to iterate the current state through a process external to it. you cannot deduce the iterated algorithms or find the CPU process by looking at the fractal (physical reality) itself.
spacetime is conceptually static, and there is "no movement in the universe" only because time is always right here, right now, and we are always at the cartesian zero point in a spacetime diagram.
in plain terms: "the present is continually computing its presence."
Dr. Scott - I presume most of your comments were in response to mine, although you did not address me while you did address others. By the way, I have just as much freedom to express my own thoughts on this subject as you have to proclaim your understanding of the teachings of physics.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI made no mention of spacetime curvature. I was not referring to any particular theory but attempting to best describe physical reality. As I understand, SR specifies that spacetime is contracted by high velocity motion and GR specifies equivalence of velocity and gravitation, although it also describes the effect of gravitation as the curvature of spacetime. I suggest that gravitation of spherical masses is best described as the radial contraction of spacetime and that curvature describes its affect on independent linear motion.
The title is "Is Time an Illusion", and the second bullet under 'Key Concepts' states: "Some physicists argue that there is no such thing as time..." So, while you may no be arguing either point, allow me to address the article on those points.
Frankly, I'm less interested in your lectures than integrating available information to arrive at my own conclusions. I do think that this article my best be limited to physics, philosophy or perception, as each discipline has its own conflicting dogma. While the discussion of all three is very interesting, arguing one textbook against another is rather pointless.
Dr. Scott - Gosh, you dismissed my statements so quickly that you lectured me on my own point.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI not only realize that planets don't orbit the Earth (jeesh!), but that was my point! I think it was Ptolemy of Alexandria who was able to mathematically predict the motions of the planets in the sky as if they orbited the Earth. For hundreds of years, his successful formulas were regarded of proof that the planets orbited the Earth.
Just because Einstein's GR formulas can be used to correctly predict the motions the motions of objects using an adjustable system of dimensional coordinates doesn't prove the physical processes producing the effect of gravitation.
IMHO, the correct application of appropriate formulas to predict physical behavior does not prove the physical process producing that behavior. That is the distinction between physics and mathematics.
Demonstration of the gravitational effect does not prove its physical cause. Is there some physical proof of an attractive force? I'm not aware of any.
Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes by Godel. (Not sure it's exactly right, as I read it about a quarter of a century ago.)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The illusion of the passage of time arises from the confusion of the given with the real. We think of occupying different realities, when in fact we only occupy different givens. There is only one reality."
Of course we all know that time (for humans) is in the eye of the beholder. Time as a kid goes forever, levels off and also changes again in old age. Perhaps a new equation involving t-squared or some power needs happening. Only scientists of grown age are presently defining it from empirical data.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is an interesting point. If we can just slow down the perception of time, then life can seem to be a lot longer (perhaps forever).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisjayjacobus - The population of Stringtown, Oklahoma, for example, may be able to provide some insight on this phenomena...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree that biological processes are part of the clue to the asymmetrical nature of time. See Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.amazon.com/End-Certainty-Ilya-Prigogine/dp/0684837056/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1274730825&sr=8-1
for those like myself who pondered the article, I extend the neat sign on the mirror behind my favorite bar: "Free Beer Tomorrow!"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe universe and all things in it are constantly changing, the cup of coffee I poured is cooling, its temperature is changing. Time is just a way to measure how fast this happens.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe most accurate (and thus the most valid) scientific theory ever is quantum theory (QT), and there are four phenomena of QT which have been shown to originate outside of spacetime: the wavefunction of QT [1], quantum nonlocal entanglement [2], entanglement sudden death [3] and the poorly named but recent and important "Strong Free Will Theorem" [4] of two famous Princeton mathematicians.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis last theorem proves that not everything within physical reality is random nor physically predetermined, thus proving that there cannot be a final and complete theory of physics.
[1] S. Dolev and A.C. Elitzur, “Non-sequential Behavior of the Wave Function”,
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0102109
[2] N. Gisin, “Quantum Nonlocality: How Does Nature Do It?”, Science v326(5958), pp.1357-1358 (2009).
[3] T. Yu and J.H. Eberly, “Sudden Death of Entanglement”, Science v323(5914), pp.598-601 (2009).
[4] J.H. Conway and S. Kochen, “The Strong Free Will Theorem”, Notices of the AMS
v56(2), pp.226-232 (2009).:
http://www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf
I posted a mathematical definition of time on the forum at advancedphysics.org.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.advancedphysics.org/forum/showthread.php?t=14628
cstromeyer - Outstanding comment and references - thank you! My now expired one year subscription to Science (coincidentally) included the two articles on entanglement... As a mathematically impeded non-scholar, "Strong Free Will Theorem" seems to be the most accessible (although complex) mathematical research I've seen... Extremely appropriate!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDr. Scott,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"But there is no universal present moment... there is no "correct" time."
These two statements are not synonymous. The present is what physically exists, ie. is present. The idea of "correct" time would seem to be the possibility of a universal clock. Time as a consequence of motion means that every measure of motion constitutes a unit of time. Even the same clock will record different rates of change in different physical contexts. You cannot even have an absolutely precise unit of subjective time, as a dimensionless point of time against which to measure would require freezing the very motion being measured and since so much, if not all the energy of which reality consists is in this motion, freezing it wouldn't produce a configuration/snapshot of reality, but that reality would vanish. Which is also to say a particle cannot have a precise location, as that would require freezing the momentum that is its external energy. We like to think in terms of objects, but reality is more a function of effects.
When you think of time as the linear narrative of that book which has already been written, you are the particular point of reference, moving along and against your own narrative context, but when you view yourself as just one of many points moving about and constantly creating and recreating the configurations, then you are integral to these events, as they go from being in the future to being in the past. As long as we live, we are part of that changing configuration, but our lives are units of time which begin in the future and eventually recede into the past.
This is a test to see if mathematical symbols can appear here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thist = dm / (2e)
If time would be static at the root, a paradox should appear: Like Einstein did by holding his universe static through the cosmological constant. Fundamentally any system must fall into motion, thus also time. Threfore it is more likely that time exists of more components, which is the case in the new cosmological model, called the "Twin-Tori Model". This is a model of a double torus, a torus of dark energy enclosing and intertwining a dark amtter torus, with time in 3-dimensions as the face of dark energy. Publications are to be found in the viXra archive. Contact: dan.visser@planet.nl
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is my view that time is the measurement of speed of electrons activity around the nucleus of its atom.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDerec3 - A constant value for the progression rate of time does not account for time dilation, as demonstrated at altitude and in Earth orbit. It confirms the relationship between effective velocity and the progression rate of time established in special relativity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisClocks are measuring systems derived from light speed. Clocks run in space only and not in time. Space itself is timeless. With clocks we measure numerical order of material change running in timeless space. We publish an article about the subject in Physics Essays: Amrit S. Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, Dusan Klinar, Time is a measuring System derived from Light Speed, Physics Essays, Vol 23. Num 2. (2010) http://www.physicsessays.com/
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, universe is timeless. With clocks we measure numerical order of material change running in a timeless space. We publish recently an article about the subject in Physics Essays:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAmrit S. Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, Dusan Klinar, Time is a measuring System derived from Light Speed, Physics Essays, Vol 23. Num 2. (2010) http://www.physicsessays.com/
There is no time in the universe. We edxperience motion of timeless universe through the mind model "past-present-future".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismotion - perception - processing in time (mind) - experience
Velovity is not derived from time, velocity is derived from "ticking" of clock":
v = d/tn where tn is a "tick" of clock. Clocks run in space only and not in time.
Amrit - Doesn't that infer that all physics that references time or velocity is also an imaginary construct?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you suggesting that our perceived 'current time frame' is an index maintained by each individual's mind?
Is Professor Callender saying that time is money?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've thinking about time a lot lately and here are some questions I have:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1.How long does the present last?
The present does not last long enough to be quantified; therefore can we prove that the world actually exists?
2.Are we recreated every moment anew? Am I the same person I was yesterday? Or am I a new person today and therefore I will be a different person tomorrow? If that is the case then what I am now does not matter because tomorrow I will be a different being, but that doesnt matter either because by the next day I will be a completely new person again!
3.Today is merely a vehicle to get to tomorrow and tomorrow is a way to the next day so which day really matters?
4.Since everything in our past seems no more tangible than a dream, when a person dies there is truly nothing tangible left of his existence ! Just a thought.
Yehuda
I've been thinking about theses ideas for a while now. Here are some questions I have:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1. How long does the present last?
The present does not last long enough to be quantified; therefore can we prove that the world actually exists?
2. Are we recreated every moment anew? Am I the same person I was yesterday? Or am I a new person today and therefore I will be a different person tomorrow? If that is the case then what I am now does not matter because tomorrow I will be a different being, but that doesn’t matter either because by the next day I will be a completely new person again!
3. Today is merely a vehicle to get to tomorrow and tomorrow is a way to the next day so which day really matters?
4. Since everything in our past seems no more tangible than a dream, when a person dies there is truly nothing tangible left of his existence.
Why cant I stop thinking about these weird ideas and get on with my life?
Thanks for reading!
velocity is real....v = d/tn - tn is numerical order of material change i.e. motion, see my article "Block Universe":
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Block_Universe.pdf
Amrit - Thanks. As a pedestrian observer I could only attempt to get some conception of your argument. Sorry in advance if I misrepresent it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom an earlier comment: "With clocks we measure numerical order of material change running in timeless space."
An integral constant value for the progression rate of time does not account for time dilation, as demonstrated at altitude and in Earth orbit. As I understand, time dilation confirms the relationship between effective velocity and the progression rate or duration of time units established in special relativity.
If I would say;
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this'The present is the future of the past and the past of the future'
is that time related?
If I would say;
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this'The present is the future of the past and the past of the future'
could the essence thereof be understood as being time related?
Henk
Hi, time dilatation means that velocity of clocks diminish. It is not that "time" shrinks and so clocks run slower. Clocks run in space only and not in time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee more in my last article
http://vixra.org/pdf/1005.0073v3.pdf
Henk, universe is timeless. Time "past-present-future" exist in the mind. We experience motion in timeless universe through psychological time that has its basis in the neuronal activity of the brain.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPS
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime is not an illusion. Time is a basic psychological frame into which our mind process motion in the universe. Past, present and future belongs to the mind. Universe is timeless as predicted by Einstein and Godel.
With clocks we measure numerical order of material change that run in space. We start measurement with t0 and finish with tn. Velocity is v = d/tn. Nothing happen in time as time do not exist. We live in a timeless reality which Einstein calls NOW. Universe is ageless. In the universe “before” and “after” exist only in a sense of numerical order. This approach tunes deeply with QM where particles move only in space not in time. Truth is also galaxies move only in space and not in time. Concept of time will be replaced with numerical order of material change in a few years.
Amrit - I see now. Seems interesting - I'll take a look, thanks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPsychological time »past-present-future« is not an illusion, it is real. Illusion is that universe exists in time. Universe is timeless, we experience motion in the universe through psychological time, although motion runs in timeless space. Jump from the conviction that with clocks we measure time into the acknowledgment that with clocks we measure numeric order of material change that run in a timeless space is huge. Physics will manage that. Real power of science is uncompromised search for truth.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSee more on: http://www.fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Block_Universe.pdf
There are so many different things that you have to consider in such a topic like this. I think theres many great answers you all have provided and i think theres some extremely dumb ones. But before i critize any one let me state my thoughts on the matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswell honestly i havent read einsteins theory of evoultion. but i know about the concept and i have enough common sense and general knowledge to at least to infer some stuff.(please excuse spelling and lack of scientific terms)
The universe is timeless. Do you understand? Not timeless as in forever but timeless as having no time. or at least the human concept of time.
Time's only existence is in measurement. Thats the only way. Aging is not a product of time. aging is a biological process. time isnt a illusion because its real as any thought in your brain. Time is not nonexistent because theres simply no such thing as nonexistence.
Now heres the real crap. everything that ever has and will exist..exist. thats a hard concept to grasp.
To truly grasp. the past present and future has all ready happen. so as your reading this line right now thirty years from now you are waking up in your bed somewhere. (hopefully) you can not change you future. because the future has allready happen. like in the old greek stories about people told there fate by the oracle. whatever they did after that cause their fate to happen.
but if you take einsteins theory and say that its true. that past present and future has allready happen then that means there has to be a end. how can something happen if it never starts or ends. how can there be a past if the future never starts because the past never ends. the future of the past is the present.. that mean past present and future cannot apply to the universe.it must mean that existence is forever. but forever is just a another measurement of time. and if you accept that time cannot be applied to the universe ther cannot be a forever.
but maybe i dont know what im talkin about i got to study more. ill get back to this. just some questions tho. what is the purspose of the universe? why are we? why is there existence? what is the purpose of existence?
Jayjacobus: thats stupid. as soon as you finish reading this your in the "future" from the time you began to read this. If what you said was true that past doesnt need to exist once the present happens then that means the moment you started reading the paragraph you ceast to exist. so every word that you are reading now your past self who read it ceasts to exist. thats impossible. Your future has all ready happen ten minutes after you read this reponse has already happe. yet your still hear steady reading this comment. with out the "past" there is no "future" and vice versa.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTimeless is not for ever. Timeless means NOW. Eternity is now.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe experience timelessness of the universe as present moment.
We are not aware that this present moment is eternity itself.
vasoo,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMost animals do learn. From the earthworm to lobsters and pigeons to chimps and dolphins, most animals are not automata. You need to read more biology if you're unaware of the past few decades of studies.
Dear Dr. Scott,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI find your reasoning and arguments are pointing in the right direction. And I'm reminded of a XIX century book --''Flatland'', by Edwin Abbot-- that Isaac Asimov described as "the best introduction one can find into the manner of perceiving dimensions". Basically, it describes the ''psychology'' of a one-point creature, then of a line, later on of a plane, still later of a solid (a three-dimensional --or four,
depending on how you evaluate it-- creature) and keeps going beyond that, showing that, whilst the three-dimensional being can very easily perceive the point, line and plane, the latter will be able to perceive the solid in just a paradoxical way, since they will intersect with the ''greater reality'' only at certain angles and the nature of this intersection will perforce be quite weird and paradoxical to the perceptual capacity of the ''lesser entities''.
As regards our problem with Time, perhaps it'd be a good idea to read those who in different cultures and epochs have investigated it more deeply, namely the mystics of all persuasions. They all seem to agree that ''higher dimensions'' do exist, and that their (to us) paradoxical nature can be experienced but not be put into words. ''Mysticism'', by the late F.C. Happold, covers this subject in one of its chapters, quite appropriately called ''The Timeless Moment''.
(J.B. Priestley dealt with the same subject in his ''Time Plays'' and also wrote a monograph, ''Man and Time'' exploring this issue).
Kind regards.
There are so many different things that you have to consider in such a topic like this. I think theres many great answers you all have provided and i think theres some extremely dumb ones. But before i critize any one let me state my thoughts on the matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswell honestly i havent read einsteins theory of evoultion. but i know about the concept and i have enough common sense and general knowledge to at least to infer some stuff.(please excuse spelling and lack of scientific terms)
The universe is timeless. Do you understand? Not timeless as in forever but timeless as having no time. or at least the human concept of time.
Time's only existence is in measurement. Thats the only way. Aging is not a product of time. aging is a biological process. time isnt a illusion because its real as any thought in your brain. Time is not nonexistent because theres simply no such thing as nonexistence.
Now heres the real crap. everything that ever has and will exist..exist. thats a hard concept to grasp.
To truly grasp. the past present and future has all ready happen. so as your reading this line right now thirty years from now you are waking up in your bed somewhere. (hopefully) you can not change you future. because the future has allready happen. like in the old greek stories about people told there fate by the oracle. whatever they did after that cause their fate to happen.
but if you take einsteins theory and say that its true. that past present and future has allready happen then that means there has to be a end. how can something happen if it never starts or ends. how can there be a past if the future never starts because the past never ends. the future of the past is the present.. that mean past present and future cannot apply to the universe.it must mean that existence is forever. but forever is just a another measurement of time. and if you accept that time cannot be applied to the universe ther cannot be a forever.
but maybe i dont know what im talkin about i got to study more. ill get back to this. just some questions tho. what is the purspose of the universe? why are we? why is there existence? what is the purpose of existence?
Dear Quotes,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think you have perfectly described the really important issues (the ones that we will have at some point in our lives to face, if we are lucky to be reminded of them just as you have reminded us now):
''what is the purpose of the universe? why are we? why is there existence? what is the purpose of existence?''
Kind regards.
Yes they learn in space only and not in time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn a new theory dark energy is a combination of "time-energy with dark matter", called: "The Twin-Tori cosmological Model". In this model the shape of the universe is a torus of dark energy, which embeds a torus of dark matter. In the dark matter torus also the visible matter is located. From the inside of the dark matter torus we experience the universe, showing us a "deceptive appearance" of the big bang. In fact the big bang is a expansion-dynamic, which belongs to a "double torus universe".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis subject has been published in a few "papers" in the viXra archive on Sptember 1 2009. The appropriate weblinks could be found on Dan Visser's website (independent cosmologist), who is the promotor of the "Twin-Tori cosmological Model" (www.darkfieldnavigator.com).
This comment is meant to explain dark energy is processing
dark matter in "three time-dimensions". So, dark energy will not change over time. Dark energy is time itself in 3D-time, instead of the one time-dimension relating to the big bang. Dark energy exchanges its energy with dark matter by an interactive "force of dark energy". It is this force, which is derivated in a "formula" for dark energy force",
lauched on April 4 2004, by and on Dan's website. He is also the discoverer of "time-torus" (December 1 2008), which was a pre-model for the double torus. As well as the "formula for dark energy force" as the "time-torus", were recognized on the internet by two English mathematicians and physicists, Christopher Forbes and colleaque, who mathematically transformed Dan's idea in a double torus of dark energy and dark matter torus". Dan pointed out there is already evidence in astronomical observations of several galaxies from which is detected that for 1/4 of the density of dark matter (near the centre of a galaxy), the dark energy's fingerprint for gravity is equal to the fingerprint for visible matter. Dan produced a "handwritten-derivation" as a follow up from his "dark energy force formula", which predicted these observations (reference information on Dan's website). He announces the attention for a double torus universe of dark energy and dark matter will soon change cosmology, because the mathematical machinery of a "complete new Twin-Tori-quantumgravity" is almost ready to be published.
Dan Visser, Almere, the Netherlands.
(Support me and send this comment to science-journalists in your network. Thank you).
What about time viewing! The images of everything that occurs on Earth is streaming outward from us every second. If you were able to reach that point further out and capture the images as they reach you, you could see what actually happened. When we look up at the night sky are we not viewing millions and billions of years into the past? There must be a way to capture the images selectively of what extends from here. I think we will need to accomplish this before we can ever imagine actually sending some machine to the past.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA comforting point of view is that we have
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismetaphoric static woods, stones, houses, zen gardens
that are not really static in space-time.
I guess that the more static the physics equations are
the more close to unified theory they may be.
They get cohesive.
But I fear that complete randomness is utterly static too.
(Perfect randomness of atoms of space-time
is called Nothing-that-exists, isn't it ?)
We don't perceive really static things but only lasting things.
All we can perceive is analysable so we can survive (Darwin).
But if the other partitions of the universe
are completely hazardeous we need to survive
because our real static part is in pain
from our human point of view.
(That was the buddha-comment Lol)
Physics equations are partially static
and are part of our perception
so by physics means we are still part
of the really static universe.
We still have a chance to understand all the universe.
but as we're going we must understand to survive, bah !
I guess we may be gifted the chaotic quadrant
of a perfectly noisy universe.
And we must maintain order there.
Yeah I like SciFiAm ...
If time doesn't exist why is my boss bugged when I'm late?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFlatland was an awsome book. I highly reccommend it.
No spell check on this forum....
Time may exist only as a foam
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thison the "decoherent" boudaries
between the static partititions
and the random partitions of the universe.
the phenomenon is
movement-of-previously-static-beings :
our point of view.
Yeah I like SciFiAm ...
JRivas: thank you for being the first and only one to reply. and yes those are the only questions we should worry ourselves about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEveryone else: Think about it. If we found out the meaning of existence or why. or how. or the purpose. we would unlock the knowledge of literally EVERYTHING. Please understand what i mean when i say everything. EVERY SINGLE THING. EVER. also note when i say the meaning of existence it is not the same as the meaning of life. (by the way the meaning of life is to reproduce) I mean the existence of everything including the universe. if we had the purpose of existence and the universe we could in theory control it. now before you go crazy and say im wrong think about it.knowledge of something can be dominence over something.example :). if i told a 12 year old to make a rainbow he would look at me like im crazy. but if i told any type of creditable scientist he ( or she) would know exactly what to do. we know so little about the universe. whos to say there isnt a way. but heres the bad thing about this. if einsteins theory is correct than there is no meaning of existence. or purpose. it would simply just be. lol but thats the good outcome. the other out come (in theory) is if both were true then if we did find out the meaning of existence it would change the outcome of the universe just by having the knowledge of why. which would mean the universe could rip itself apart. but i dont know i might not know what im talkin about. hmmmm i have some thoughts on this. ill get back to it. sorry i know i mispelled a lot
reese.greer@hotmail.com (facebook)
jay: that makes no sense. whos perception would you be slowing down?yours? how? perception is in the mind not the body. if you actually slowed down you perception to were it would seem like you live forever. you would still die. at the same time if you did not slow down your perception. example. if u saw me get sucked into a black hole i would stretch and stretch and then it would seem like i would be stuck forever streching into the black hole. but in reality i was ripped apart by the gravity and then crushed into a singularity the moment i was sucked in. So basically if u could conscienously perceive your slowed down perception it would seem to you that you are living forever but to the universe your body is aging at the same rate.Meaning : you would be dead the moment it happens.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisreese.greer@hotmail.com (facebook)
Isn't sensing the passage of time related to our consciousness? Can you think of examples when you are not conscious, but indeed sense passage of time? This brings to my next question...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow can I study the problem of consciousness in a systematic way? What series of steps should I take, however hard they are, that if I did follow them, at the end of it, I will understand what consciousness is and even possibly build a synthetic conscious system?
I do not need to know the answer to consciousness itself, just what steps I should follow if I want to attempt this problem, with some guarantees in the end? Do we even know this?
Time can not be energy.....not even dark energy....time is of the mind, motion is of the universe
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistime is a mind form
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisconsciousness is not of the mind
consciousness can watch (observe) the mind time including
go for few weeks za-zen and you will experience timelessness of the universe
Im a still a high student but I have enough common sense and general knowledge to at least infer some stuff.(please excuse spelling and lack of scientific terms)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe universe is timeless. Do you understand? Not timeless as in forever but timeless as having no time. Or at least the human concept of time.a better way to say it is time doesnt apply to the universe.
Time's only existence is in measurement. Thats the only way. Aging is not a product of time. Aging is a biological process. Time isnt an illusion because its real as any thought in your brain. Time is not nonexistent because theres simply no such thing as nonexistence for something to not exist it must..well&exist as not existing( interesting concept, could that be where the problem is? I mean how can we truly know what existence is if we no nothing else but existence? Could we be blind. Could there be anti existence? Ridiculous I know. But think of it in this way. A man born blind doesnt see black. Theres no black because thats the only thing he has ever known. So try to explain to him the color red. You can not. But that doesnt make the color any less real. Black=existence. We=blind men.)
Now heres the real crap.Einsteins theory. The past,present, and future has already happen. With that information you can infer that everthing that ever has and will exist..exists.(Which brings me to a mega theory I have. I tell you it later). You can not change your future.(My theory disproves this which might disprove einsteins theory or it might mean something way worse/good.)Because the future has already happen. Like in the old Greek stories about people told there fate by the oracle. Whatever they did after that causes their fate to happen.(cool thought: that also means that the future and past are interchangeable. Meaning; the future effects the past.( which brings me to another mega theory J ).
But if you take Einsteins theory and say that its true. Then that means there has to be an end. How can something happen if it never starts or ends. How can there be a past if the future never starts because the past never ends. The future of the past is the present: meaning: past present and future cannot apply to the universe. Meaning: existence is forever. But forever is just another measurement of time, not a lack of . So if you accept that time cannot be applied to the universe there cannot be a forever. What is and the purpose of the universe? What is and the purpose of existence? Why are we? Why is there existence? reese.greer@hotmail.com
mega theory in parenthsis 1
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThink about it. If we found out the meaning of existence or why. or how. or the purpose. we would unlock the knowledge of literally EVERYTHING. Please understand what i mean when i say everything. EVERY SINGLE THING. EVER. also note when i say the meaning of existence it is not the same as the meaning of life. (by the way the meaning of life is to reproduce) I mean the existence of everything including the universe. if we had the purpose of existence and the universe we could in theory control it. now before you go crazy and say im wrong think about it.knowledge of something can be dominence over something.example :). if i told a 12 year old to make a rainbow he would look at me like im crazy. but if i told any type of creditable scientist he ( or she) would know exactly what to do. we know so little about the universe. whos to say there isnt a way. but heres the bad thing about this. if einsteins theory is correct than there is no meaning of existence. or purpose. it would simply just be. lol but thats the good outcome. the other out come (in theory) is if both were true then if we did find out the meaning of existence it would change the outcome of the universe just by having the knowledge of why. which would mean the universe could rip itself apart.
Mega theory in parenthsis 2
cool thought: that also means that the future and past are interchangeable. Meaning; the future effects the past.( which brings me to another mega theory. If Einstein is correct and the future has already happen then we can find out what happen in the past by looking at the future and vice versa. Meaning: for the future to set itself up it most go by the rules of the past. But that can also be applied to the past . Since the future has already happen the past has to set itself up for the future . Now apply this to the present which is actually the past but we dont know that yet because we cant actually experience the past otherwise it would be the present . In point, if we knew the what the universe has at the end we can predict our concept of the future. On a cosmic scale. Which we could scale down). These are my basic outline of my theories. I have much more detail stored. And I also can be wrong about stuff. Ill get back to this
reese.greer@hotmail.com (facebook) also
I think my point is that you cannot be unconscious and yet feel the passage of time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe whole mind and its relation to consciousness are too vague philosophical concepts. What is a procedure to identify and distinguish the two? Something concrete, especially if I want build synthetic conscious system?
The problem is that even rememberings
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisare present thoughts.
You need a lifelong bush memex, at least,
(or a lifelong google search history ?)
to check if there is a free will vs a static reality.
Spacetime continuum is bent by present movements.
Question : do these present movements exist
in a static state in the continuum ?
Is is equivalent to wonder if the universe is static
and if present movements (or will) are deterministic vs free.
As time can be defined as a measure of movement
Ignorance can be defined as measure of new events.
The more we are ignorant the more there is events.
So in a static continuum we are
embodiments of static ignorance
with some singularities able to call time our illusion pair.
(in technoCore UI metaphor
we are the shrike reaper function static equivalent)
Yeah I know ...
It sounds like a mix theory of Johnny Mnemonic,
Neo and Adam's apple with
an Yggdrasil impression...
Reality without time is what theologians call eternity. Eternity is an attribute of God, who has no past or future but always is, but not an attribute of the material cosmos, which was created out of nothing and as such includes time, cause and effect. It is interesting to read that a convergence of ideas may be under way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhat is your definition of "free will" if there is such a thing its extremely limited. to the point of almost no free will. example. your present or the "now" will later on be your past. so look at it like this. i give you two days and on the third day tell me how you showed free will. ok now two days have passed. i ask you what did you do in those two days that demostrated free will. you begin to tell me a long list of choices you made and choices you could of made but didnt. this is where i give a video where i recorded everything you did for two days. now we watch the video and go back to where i told you, you have two days to show me free will. The choices u made where predetermined to end up the ones you told me. as in if we could go back in the past you would make the same choice everytime because it has o end up as your future. "future" kills all concept of free will.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisand thats if you dont accept einstiens theory
(bad spelling i know)
I have an sketchy example of free will.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou have 3 days and you are angry the first day.
The second day you woke up from unconcious sleep
and you are still angry, there gonna be continuous will.
But the second day after sleep you may have forgotten
or pardoned yerterday's anger, you'd have a new will.
It may be the second day good weather
that has changed your mood and your actions
on the second day or something in your breakfast
but it has unnoticed influence,
so the conscious part is a free will day
at least as an illusion.
Question : is illusion an event too ?
it may be the measure of an ignorant state.
Something separate from the static spacetime continuum
is ignorant.
So in the static universe ignorance is just there
and when it crosses spacetime continuum
there are measures of ignorance :
the present and the events.
Of course it is hypothetical natural philosophy speculation.
We are Lebesgue measured from beyond Lol.
It is funny that we may exist for non-sentient beings :
ignorant spermatozoids and ova.
And the third day you look at your 2 days record
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisand you can't track why you were angry the first day
and then happy the second day because
it has endogenic or diffuse causes.
Something in the air or in the spacetime ?
"Happiness
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore or less
It's just a change in me
Something in my liberty"
- The verve Lucky Man
Having read,and struggled to understand, some of the comments, it seems to me that there are two "ugly sisters" to time's Cinderella. These being free will and infinities. For every possible event to be contained in some elaborate matrix and our time illusion is a thread through that matrix, then that matrix would require to be truly infinite. Infinity has always been a bit scary. Is it not more elegant to have the properties of infinity from the iterations of a much smaller number of generators- but that would give validity to time?. The other sister, free will ,is just as hard to handle because to deny it is to eliminate probability. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle has not, as far as I am aware, been experimentally disproved. To the more religious who claim free will , and therefor guilt and responsibility for themselves, it is inconsistent not to allow that God will have free will also and is therefor not bound to act according to our expectations of him/her/ it/ them. The many worlds theory, as I understand it, allows for alternate realities to branch from one another every time there is a choice. We observe only one reality because we see only the results of our and others choices. In some realities where we missed a road accident by fractions of a second, there might be others where we were not so lucky. This again breeds infinities and our natural discomfort comes into play. It could be said that the big bang theory is a rebellion against infinities - as the true centre of the universe ( if there is such a thing ) is so far away that the light from the stars near it can never reach us as spatial expansion accumulates to more than light speed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime's only existence is in measurement.......good insight,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbetter to say: Time's only existence is measurement of numerical oder of material change with clocks.
Craig starts with: "The concepts of time and change may emerge from a universe that, at root, is utterly static".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUniverse is not static; we all observe change is intrinsic property of the universe. We relate change with time. We think if there is no time there is no change. This is wrong reasoning. There is no time in the universe, yet universe change. We measure numerical order of change of the universe with clocks. Fundamental unit of numerical order is Planck time.
PS
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe puzzle with time is that time we can not observe. We can observe only material change i.e. motion. Already Einstein and Gödel discuss the there is no time in the universe. Their idea is fully developed here. Clocks run in space only and not in time. Space itself is timeless. According to the formalism X4 = i x c x t fourth coordinate is spatial too. Time is not 4-th of space. Space-time is not 3D + T, space-time is 4D. Time “t” is a tick of clock and is only a component of X4. This is missing comprehension of SR. In SR space-time is timeless. Physical time is run of clock in space. There is no physical time behind run of clocks. Time dilatation means that clocks run slower; not because time shrinks, there is no time in the universe, universe is timeless.
With clocks we measure numerical order of material change i.e. motion. Fundamental unit of numerical order is Planck time. Planck time tp is derived from velocity of light that is as fundamental constancy of the universe: tp = pd /c, where pd is Planck distance. The smallest distance photon can move between two points A and B of space is Planck distance. Distance between A and B is a sum of Planck distances: d AB = sum dp1+ dp2 + dp3…….+ dpn. Numerical order of photon motion is tp1, tp2, tp3….tpn.
In the space “before” and “after” exist only in a sense of numerical order to, t1, t2, t3…tn of material change that we measure with clocks. In the same way as t2 is after t1, number 2 is after number 1. t0 presents beginning of the measurement, tn end of the measurement.
There is no travel into past as one can travel in space only. Some physical phenomena are immediate as EPR. For them tn is zero. Zeno problem of motion and time is resolved. Archile and turtle move in space only and not in time.
Velocity is derived from numerical order: v = d /tn.
Frequency is derived from numerical order: frequency = 1/tn.
View of physical time as a run of clocks in timeless space was published recently: - Amrit S. Sorli, Davide Fiscaletti, Dusan Klinar, Time is a measuring System derived from Light Speed, Physics Essays, Vol 23. Num 2. (2010)
We experience material change i.e. motion in the universe through the psychological time “past-present-future” that has its basis in neuronal activity of the brain. Recent research confirms that: - Catalin V. Buhusi, Warren H. Meck, What makes us thick?, Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing, Nature reviews, Volume 6, October 2005
Universe is without time as predicted by Einstein and Gödel: -Yourgrau P, World without time: The forgotten legacy of Gödel and Einstein, Amazon (2006)
Understanding of timeless nature of the universe requires awareness of inner psychological time through which one experiences material change i.e. motion. Observer has ability to watch, to witness how scientific mind creates scientific theories. By developing this ability of watchfulness one discovers that inner psychological time is his/her basic frame of experience. He/she becomes aware of timeless nature of the universe.
Hi Amrit - "time's only existence is in measurement" - not so fast. Measurement isn't some bad habit we happen to have picked up ,like smoking. Measurements are all comparisons with some standard, be it the length of somebody's right forearm or how long it takes for the shadow on a sundial to move a given distance. Knowing the safe distance or time between safety and a dangerous predator would be crucial to the survival of our ancestors when they only had the crudest of weapons. Some comments have talked about motion but not differentiated between linear and circular motion. Mathematically velocity is described by vectors which have both magnitude and direction. Acceleration is defined as the rate of change of velocity, and thereby all circular motions are accelerations and have units of time squared. Depending on how large you set your frame of reference, few motions can be truly linear, so most events will have at least some time squared property.( We rotate along with the earth's surface, and it rotates round the sun, which rotates with respect to the centre of the milky way galaxy - so determining a linear velocity is only approximate ) This alone might suggest that there is more to time than an inconvenient mathematical fudge
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTime is an illusion created by the processing and accumulation of perception onto reflections within the subjective mind, and is defined by the frequency of the interactions of thought process, where distance, space, is the reciprocal. Accordingly, "space" separated from "time" is a manifestation of structured consciousness, wherein experience exists as feedback of the mind projecting onto consciousness the illusion of separate entities.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.scribd.com/doc/17001171/23-ERA-The-Oscillating-Universe-of-Consciousness-
You don't cease to exist if you walk from one room to another, why would you cease to exist if you move from one time to the next time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAll past changes are contained in the present. If you wrote a paper 10 days ago, the paper exists in the present and your memory of writing the paper also exists.
Can you walk backwards into the past? Can you do anything to get back to the past? If the past still exists, why can't we see it?
Everything that happens, happens in the present. No one can change the past by actually going into the past.
Light dims over a distance. If the past exists, wouldn't light dim? Sound fades over a distance. If the past exists, wouldn't sound fade. Matter doesn't project across a room. Why would matter project into the past? If the past exists, what would I find? Dimming light? Fading sound? And no physical matter?
Consciouness exists in the present. If consciousness existed in the past wouldn't the present be every changing as new ideas entered the past?
Perhaps we live in an ocean time. After we get out of the ocean we can see if it still exists. But if it does it exists in the present like everything else in the universe.
And finally, don't be rude.
TO: PDAV
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI understand what you are saying. I feel that you as many do confuse event passing and intervals as "time". The difference being no seconds or minutes or hours as measurement. Just events and durations. Its all different depending where you are in the universe. It makes no diffference where it happens because you cant be in many places at the same moment. Not time moment but event happening between durations.
actually amrit was quoting me. he just said iit was a good insight. and your whole paragraph was irrelevant.it did not disprove or prove or even relate to time. the point is time's only existence is in measurement. nothing else. so basically time is a human concept that cannot be applied to the universe. read all my comments to better understand.( i think to fast and i sometimes forget to include stuff)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissorry if i come off rude
Scots: that is a badass concept. i mean i didnt even think of that way. but its so obvious (bad spelling) .im still not believer of free will but if i was that would be a really cool thing to think about.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisvelocity and acceleration are derived from numerical order....we are just not aware of that fact.....more you search for time more you see universe is timeless
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRabe: im sorry but its really hard to understand whatt you are tying to say. idk why but its reallly confusing , can you say it in a different way? and keep in mine that im only 18 so i dont know as much as i want to
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you could change your perception (in your mind) about hunger, you could diet effortlessly. If you could change your perception about boredom, you could study longer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoes time seem to fly by when you are having fun? If you could change your perception about time, fun would SEEM to last longer. It wouldn't realy last longer. It would still end.
But perception of time passage is subjective and not controlled. If it were controled, would you speed up your perception so that your life seemed to end quickly, keep the same perception or slow your perception down?
Perhaps, changing perceptions is not possible, but perhaps it is.
i think the word , time is a man made idea and nothing more.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi was watchin this rap video with lil wayne and then boom this thought hit me. ok look i think the law of conservation proves the theory that the past present and future has already happen.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismatter can not be created or destroyed. (law of conservation)
therefore everthing that will ever exist...exists.that means there cannot be such a linear concept as past present and future when applied to such a big ass scale. (excuse cursing and bad spelling)
Do you understnd? Everything is already in existence.
no this is mindblowing i dnt think you get it.
your offspring from a thousand years later exist now. they always have. matter cannot be created so therefore for them to exist they must exist now. or better yet since the begining(even before u were born. before humanity itself was born) now heres the most disturbing thought. if matter can not be created or destroyed. then wht is the origin of matter. there has to beginning or how else could it be if it never began?
hmm i got to think about this more. ill get bck to it.
Time is not “an idea”; time is a mind frame into which we experience change of the universe, of life of ourselves. A belief today in physics is that time is part of physical world, a “container” in which change run. FQXI is giving grant of 2 million dollars to clear what really time is and how influences our scientific experience. I’m convinced in next to years physics will recognize that universe is timeless, that time is of the mind. A big jump for the whole humanity: “the only time is present moment”, "eternity is now".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPS
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur research group works on time for 25 years. We have developed Einstein and Gödel vision to perfection. As we are small research group, it will be difficult for us to be accepted. Discovery of what time really is belongs to MIT, PRINCETON or OXFORD. However we done our job good, see
http://vixra.org/abs/1005.0098
Hi Dr Scott - as the author of some of the more lucid comments could you respond to the following. My very limited knowledge of relativity effects suggests that variations in the percieved time from two different observers occurs when one is accelerated relative to the other.As I have noted in another post, acceleration can be from changing direction instead of speed, and so an orbiting satellite would exhibit a small amount of time dilation relative to someone on the surface. Notable also is that the units of acceleration are time squared, which might be interpreted to mean that time had more than one dimension. As you have indicated what may be an illusion is the idea of a universal"now". How does this relate to quantum entanglement where the change in the quantum state of two entangled entities happens at the same instant regardless of their spatial separation?. For them and on that occasion time does not appear to exist, at least in the dimensions we readily observe. I have believed for a while now , though with no proof, that time has more than than one property which might be loosely described as a dimension , and that other forms of matter and energy and space may have differing temporal properties. The left hand rule of electromagnetic induction may be a property of spacetime rather than the charges themselves, and there may be locations where a right hand rule pertains. Please comment
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDR Scott, Universe is NOW. “Time dilatation” means that clocks run slower, it is not that time is influencing clocks velocity. Universe is timeless. Timelessness of the universe we experience as present moment, as NOW. Clocks run into NOW. It is not that present moments follow each other, what happens is that material change follow each other into the same identical present moment, which is eternity itself.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf time can be broken down into three parts, past, present, and future...it the present really time or a timeless point?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBreaking time down to three parts past, present, and future. Is the present really a part of time or a timeless period.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe do not brake time down, we just show that time “past-present-future” is a mind construct through which we experience motion into timeless universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThrough psychological time we experience timelessness of the universe as “present moment”.
Once we are aware of psychological time we experience timelessness of the universe as “eternal present moment”.
If reality was based on mind perception and perspective that would be true, but if the perception of mind is based on reality then Einstein's theory is true. I personally prefer Einstein's theory because of my philosophical belief that mind's perception IS based on physical aspects of the universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf reality is truly based on our conscience perception of reality then this article could be true, but if perception itself is based on physical concepts then what Einstein says is true. I personally prefer Einstein's theory in my philosophical belief that mind is based on matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for which time should we use, David, I can give a simple some what smart alic answer like common era but I definetely hear what your saying, we do however need some event to base our standard time system on for the sake of schedualing or keeping track of time. As for diveding by zero I have accomplished a set of mathematics involving zero and infinity. when you divide 9 by 0 for example what you get is 9(infinity) or 9 times infinity. If I post anything about that it will be on google images as "0 & infinity mathematics". You can check this out for details on my mathematics theories and proof of such.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat's pretty deep so let me try to paraphrase... by singularity I'm guessing you're talking about a frame in time and by supporting every state simotaniously supporting every other state I understand it the frames of time are so thin there connected and supporting each other. By N dimensional fractal you're referring to our range of memory whose endpoints are our birth and present. If by that last statement you mean that you can determine the future and past based on one frame of time witnessed then I have to testify that mathematically it takes at least two adjacent frames of time to determine the past and future outside those frames.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyep :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIm a still a high student but I have enough common sense and general knowledge to at least infer some stuff.(please excuse spelling and lack of scientific terms)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe universe is timeless. Do you understand? Not timeless as in forever but timeless as having no time. Or at least the human concept of time.a better way to say it is time doesnt apply to the universe. Time's only existence is in measurement. Thats the only way. Aging is not a product of time. Aging is a biological process. Time isnt an illusion because its real as any thought in your brain. Time is not nonexistent because theres simply no such thing as nonexistence for something to not exist it must..well..exist as not existing(paradox)( interesting concept, could that be where the problem is? I mean how can we truly know what existence is if we no nothing else but existence? Could we be blind. Could there be anti existence? Ridiculous I know. But think of it in this way. A man born blind doesnt see black. Theres no black because thats the only thing he has ever known. So try to explain to him the color red. You can not. But that doesnt make the color any less real. Black=existence. We=blind men.)
Alright now according to Einsteins theory. The past,present, and future has already happen. With that information you can infer that everthing that ever has and will exist..exists.(Which brings me to a theory I have.). You can not change your future.Because the future has already happen. Like in the old Greek stories about people told there fate by the oracle. Whatever they did after that causes their fate to happen.(cool thought: that also means that the future and past are interchangeable. Meaning; the future effects the past.( which brings me to another theory ). But if you take Einsteins theory and say that its true. Then that means there has to be an end. How can something happen if it never starts or ends. How can there be a past if the future never starts because the past never ends. The future of the past is the present: meaning: past present and future cannot apply to the universe. Meaning: existence is forever. But forever is just another measurement of time, not a lack of . So if you accept that time cannot be applied to the universe there cannot be a forever. What is and the purpose of the universe? What is and the purpose of existence? Why are we? Why is there existence?
im going to kepp reposting this until i get a good answer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn part we seem to be here to find meaning in the universe. We observe, analyze, speculate, test, conclude, record and utilize. Before humans existed the universe had meaning but the meaning was of limited use.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe create new meaning in our inventions, constructions and social systems. Is there an end result or is the result in the ongoing activities?
Time is exsistant, perceaved and defined by mind so the definition of time varies with the mind and it's angle of view but the explination expresses the same concept. Meaning is something that varies with the mind as well. In my understanding life and the universe dosn't have to have meaning because it exsists anyway. If there should be a perpouse or meaning it's to apply the core drives of life, pain and pleasure. This is the drive to everything we do so it can be said to be the meaning.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlthough I am certainly not an expert on the nature of time, I find it a fascinating topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI recently wondered if there could be a correlation between the flow of time and the expansion of space.
Consider at time t1 a point-like observer A at position (x,y,z) and another point-like observer B at a different position (x',y',z'). Consider the same point-like observers A and B at time t2>t1. Consider that the distance between A and B as measured with a measuring stick is the same at t1 and t2.
Then intuitively it seems that what A experiences as the flow of time while observing B from t1 to t2 is related to the expansion of space, i.e. the unidirectional stretching of the fabric of space. In a way the distance between A and B is not constant from t1 to t2 but increases due to the expansion of space causing B to move at an (intrinsic) speed v relative to A. A and B do not share the same (intrinsic) frame of reference.
The increase in distance between A and B from t1 to t2 cannot be measured experimentally by the measuring stick, since the space between the particles making up the measuring stick is expanding at the same rate.
If now B moves with an additional speed relative to A, special relativity predicts that from the point of view of A, the flow of time of B slows down. This seems to be correlated with the situation that from the point of view of A, B somehow "keeps up" with the expansion of space.
It follows that a point-like observer A does not experience the flow of time as long as he reflects on himself. However, while observing another point-like observer B, the flow of time for B from the point of view of A seems inevitable and unidirectional, i.e. from the past to the future. In the hypothetical case where B moves at the speed of light relative to A, general relativity predicts that the flow of time for B from the point of view of A stops.
Hi,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis new summary in the journal "Nature Physics" discusses a recent quantum experiment which violates macroscopic reality:
http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v6/n6/full/nphys1698.html
---------------------------------------------
Is Time an Illusion? , Scientific American, June 2010, by Craig Callender. The last sentence is In this picture, physical time emerges by virtue of our thinking ourselves as separate from everything else.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince we must be conscious to think we are separate this seems an excellent definition of consciousness. We must be conscious in order to find relationships between the changes we experience around us and we use physical time as the glue to hold them together and to make a story about them. As Dr. Callender states, time makes contradictions tolerable.
History books are examples of physical time. We use years to tie one historical period to another and make up wonderful stories.
The existence of change seems to be fundamental to explaining time and space and probability. We endure change by using the concept of time.
As I think more about this subject I realize, that at a single point, space time is now. Relative to that point are concentric spheres that decrease into now-1, now-2, now-3.....now-n.....now-infinity such that some stars are at now-millions of light years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe single point is the origin and every space point has its own origin and its own concentric spheres. It seems likely that any observer is at now and can never goto now-n because he takes his origin with him wherever he goes such that he is always at his own local now.
Moreover, the sphere at now-n is the nth sphere and will always be the nth sphere relative to the origin unless the observer moves the origin.
Perhaps, as the universe expands new points are created or old points are stretched.
Nature of time in one sentence: Time “past-present-future” is the basic mind frame into which we experience material change i.e. motion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am not sure about that. Without a human mind would all change that ever was and ever would be go by in a zero second flash? Or would change ever begin?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt seems that time has a purpose outside the human mind. But maybe I am wrong about that.
If time is like a flowing river (where a vector and force are felt), what is the flow of the river felt, but earth's gravity pulling in a certain direction. A body of water at rest continues to feel that force of gravity without the feeling of flow. Like the river's flow, what is the flow of time, but the sun's gravity pulling the earth in revolution. Therefore, time is just a manifestation of gravity. Time = Gravity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthat is a extremely narrow look. i mean really really narrow. humans arre not the center of the universe. it does not exist to serve our meaning. that makes no sense. we are made from the universe not the other way around.im not even gonna argue with that statement
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthis is massively irrelevant.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissomething like jabberwokkey.
- rather than denying or insulting the thing, why not answer this: Time has no beginning.
absolutely.
I'd like to see Anything originate outside of spacetime.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhat kind of nut says something that perverse?
are we talking God?
Time has waves. At the peak of the wave, there is the speed of light, where past and future lose meaning; where there is only here and now. Time doesn't stop at the speed of light, it expands into a higher dimension. At the speed of light, space has only two dimensions. The background of our universe is two dimensions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot exactly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisnot waves, just force.
not speed, just presence.
Not just two, light spreads in All directions equally usually.
Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.---Marx
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVerdi: then that would mean time does not exist. because it never was. because it never began. if you see it differently please explain. things can not simply be. no matter hard we want to believe. everything has a beginning. and that im sure of.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisalso it depends on your definiton of time. or what time means to you. like everybody has been saying time is subjective. look at it in a universal perspective.
Please see http://sites.google.com/site/smithjcn/time for what I believe is a useful discussion of this topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRethink A Basic Physics Tenet
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA. Neutrino quick-change artist caught in the act
A transformation from one ‘flavor’ to another confirms the elusive elementary particles have mass and suggests a need for new physics.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/59825/title/Neutrino_quick-change_artist_caught_in_the_act
B.Each and every particle has mass.
Dark energy and matter YOK.
Higgs particle YOK.
If you are not afraid of embarrassingly obvious answers, rethink a basic tenet, adopt space-distance in lieu of space-time.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887
EOTOE.Embarrassingly obvious expanding horizons beyond Darwin And Einstein.
http://www.molecularfossils.com/2010/05/formal-test-of-theory-of-universal.html
Since when did scientific american publish articles on philosophy?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the example showing slicing Spacetime, you show that the ball appears in two places on the left with the space slice approach. It seems to me that you would actually have to represent all past and future positions of the ball for your slice to be accurate. In this simple example, that is possible to do and the Ball reduces to a >.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn any real analysis, would you not have to provide all past, present and future states. If so, then a unified theory is a long distant in the future (or past).
Probably since it recognized the vitally important link between what you apparently think of as "philosophy" (or should I say "mere" philosophy?) and physics.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJune 21, 2010
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs Time an Illusion? The concepts of time and change may emerge from a universe that, at root, is utterly static By Craig Callender
I read the above article in the Scientific America, June 2010 Issue
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciammag/?contents=2010-06
Following are my comments:
I wholly concur with the concept of a timeless or “zero” time-universe”. I always perceive the changing world around me as a part of a dynamically-static universe. This perception of the universe, can be described like viewing an infinitely sized aquarium in which its frame, (the universe’s inner to its outer edge) are “fixed” and stilled, while all the objects within it are moving around dynamically. Obviously, if we insert “zero” in the equations of physic, or any other time dependent equations, then all our conventionally constructed frames of mental endeavors will collapse and become “non-sensible”.
In the 1990’s I discussed my ideas on the concept of rewriting the equations of physics without the use of “time as a physical parameter, with a friend of mine who at the time was the Chair of the Physics Dept. at a College in Southern California. My mental research in this area led me further in tow directions of thought,
a) To understand better the behavior of the Cesium atom, and definition of a new unit of measurement to be called “Hiz” or Hizh” which would describe a unit of Change. This formula would be simplified as c=h/m where “c” is unit change, “h” is hizh, the cause of change, and m, the unit mass. Further description of Hizh, can logically and simply, satisfy Einstein’s general theory of relativity as “Hizh” is what gives birth to presence of “Gravity” in the first place. Furthermore, the concept of Hizh, can be demonstrated to also satisfy Einstein’s theory of “Special Relativity”.
b) My second direction of thought was to gain consciousness of the belief and the teachings of the known philosophers and their wisdom. This line of though led me to the thought process of the Magi of the ancient Medes, and their concept of “Zarwanism” the “Father Time” and the questionability of the existence of the “Father Time” by members of a not too well known group known today as the Yaresan who describe the timeless universe in the following POEM (the word POEM, is a coincident choice of word to stand for the Philosophy Of Enlightened Mind).
No time, no space, no matter, no light,
No change no motion, no universe in sight,
Only a Pearl, in a dimensionless shell,
For universal essence of consciousness to dwell.
TBC……..
Ardishir Rashidi-Kalhur
With
RDI Engineering
& Kurdish-American Education Society
(909) 260-2226
June 21, 2010
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs Time an Illusion? The concepts of time and change may emerge from a universe that, at root, is utterly static By Craig Callender
I read the above article in the Scientific America, June 2010 Issue
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciammag/?contents=2010-06
Following are my comments:
I wholly concur with the concept of a timeless or “zero” time-universe”. I always perceive the changing world around me as a part of a dynamically-static universe. This perception of the universe, can be described like viewing an infinitely sized aquarium in which its frame, (the universe’s inner to its outer edge) are “fixed” and stilled, while all the objects within it are moving around dynamically. Obviously, if we insert “zero” in the equations of physic, or any other time dependent equations, then all our conventionally constructed frames of mental endeavors will collapse and become “non-sensible”.
In the 1990’s I discussed my ideas on the concept of rewriting the equations of physics without the use of “time as a physical parameter, with a friend of mine who at the time was the Chair of the Physics Dept. at a College in Southern California. My mental research in this area led me further in tow directions of thought,
a) To understand better the behavior of the Cesium atom, and definition of a new unit of measurement to be called “Hiz” or Hizh” which would describe a unit of Change. This formula would be simplified as c=h/m where “c” is unit change, “h” is hizh, the cause of change, and m, the unit mass. Further description of Hizh, can logically and simply, satisfy Einstein’s general theory of relativity as “Hizh” is what gives birth to presence of “Gravity” in the first place. Furthermore, the concept of Hizh, can be demonstrated to also satisfy Einstein’s theory of “Special Relativity”.
b) My second direction of thought was to gain consciousness of the belief and the teachings of the known philosophers and their wisdom. This line of though led me to the thought process of the Magi of the ancient Medes, and their concept of “Zarwanism” the “Father Time” and the questionability of the existence of the “Father Time” by members of a not too well known group known today as the Yaresan who describe the timeless universe in the following POEM (the word POEM, is a coincident choice of word to stand for the Philosophy Of Enlightened Mind).
No time, no space, no matter, no light,
No change no motion, no universe in sight,
Only a Pearl, in a dimensionless shell,
For universal essence of consciousness to dwell.
TBC……..
Ardishir Rashidi-Kalhur
With
RDI Engineering
& Kurdish-American Education Society
(909) 260-2226
Correct me if I am wrong but...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor a particle travelling at the speed of light, time dilation means that time has stopped. Such a particle, generated by the Big Bang, is still in the Big Bang. It has 'travelled' around the universe without time passing. In other words, it is everywhere at one 'time'.
The diificulty I have with General relativity (GTR) as stated in the article, is that simultanaity is relegated to two relativistic observers in a microcosm, and not a universal chracteristic. This interferes seriously with cause and effect and is a high price to pay for any theory.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is possible to get a theory of advanced quantum gravity, which technically agrees exactly with GTR in the low and medium mass density range (where relativity has been widely tested), whilst restoring simultaneity. See, String quintessnece and the formulatiuon of advanced quantum gravity. Physics Essays 22: 364-377.
Perhaps our universe exists in five dimensions: 3 in space and 2 in time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust as gravity represents the attraction of matter through space, suppose there is another force, Ft, which pulls us in one direction through time. As we move with increasing speed through space, Ft is affected as predicted by General Relativity, actually becoming zero when we reach the speed of light, i.e. at that point time goes neither forward nor backward . Maybe the speed of light is an inflexion point and if that speed could be exceeded, we would suddenly find ourselves falling backwards through time. (Of course such a scenario is obviously impossible because it would preclude the existence of Warp Drive!)
or the past is just as open as the future
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisjtdwyer....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry as I am off topic. Were you involved in Hassanuddin's Dominium model discussion that were present before SciAm site was updated. Because I remember a similar name and also remember Ptolemy's analogy.
Nevertheless your points are valid. Because we build models, based on what we see and verify it over the same thing based on which our model is built upon. This is something Something similar to simulations where we define something, we set the boundary conditions, we get the results we expect and we project our simulation result as a model.
I like the comparison of time to money and have myself wondered if time was created by us for the same reasons we created money.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat said I have a hard time getting around the experiment where two atomic clocks were synchronized and then one was flown around the world and when the two were brought together again they showed different times. Yet, in order for the Theory of Relativity to work with Quantum Mechanics their most likely needs to exist extra dimensions beyond X, Y, Z and Time.
However, time is nothing like the first three dimensions (X, Y, and Z) which are merely variable measurements of volume. That said could the different dimensions be things we had not considered. Could matter itself be a dimension? What about gravity; or is gravity simply the energetic expression of the reaction between matter and time (or X, Y, and Z, etc.)? What about dark matter/energy, could it be a dimension? I don’t know if we know enough about dark matter/energy to dismiss it. What about all of the parts of the RF spectrum from invisible/visible light, the RF frequencies themselves, and x-rays? What about magnetism?
I don’t pretend to be a genius, nor do I care for math that much, but that is probably more of a result of having math teachers that simply feed their students problems hoping we would figure it out. I am however alright at theory and the only math teacher that ever taught me math the way I learn it was in Marine Corps Avionics school and he taught us the theory, showed us the theory in action and then proved the theory with math. Come test time I would not remember the math outright, but could always go back to the theory and work my way back through the math. I may never be great at math, but I can submit ideas for the geniuses to ponder and disprove or develop.
I think time is a singular construct of reality within an individual entity. It exists differently for everyone and therefore it is not one but many. To someone it may be real, to another an illusion. Your time is different from my time and so on thus existing at the same time as the unknown. When we look say at a busy road: cars are coming and going, people walking to and fro - visibly at different times in the realm of reality which we deem as "the present." However, time is compounded, it does not exist in one measure, but in infinite layers of sifting and shifting positions and known only to one's individual perception in a field of infinite reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSome keep saaying noone can tell them what time is. I can. Its so simple it is overlooked. Time is distance. If time didn't exist everything would be at the same time and it would then also have to be in the same place. If there is distance then time exists.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn my opinion, the tienpo is relative to the point of view you want, but what must be considered is that there are two types of tienpo and that if we base our knowledge on these two types of time sientif have the answer to all existing formulas we intend to solve without success ... Just take intoaccount that everything is simple and not so complex, the very life we live day to day gives us the answer to everything because we are part of this great universe around us ... My email is gianvaccari08@gmail.com am not a scholar of the subject or just a normal man obserba the environment and read the studies of others almost as a patent clerk archavadora sierto who lived for some time ... I discovered that I want to share!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNew! Click the words above to view alternate translations. Dismiss
DictionaryGoogle Translate for Business:Translator ToolkitWebsite TranslatorGlobal Market FinderTurn off instant translationAbout Google TranslateMobilePrivacyHelpSend feedback►
Click for alternate translations
Drag with shift key to reorder.
Quotes,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am extremely late to this ballgame but thought I would reply none-the-less. You may well be correct that everything that exists exists already, but I believe your reasoning behind using the law of conservation to be flawed. Point in case is your reasoning that your distant offspring (regardless of how many generations)have to already exist because matter cannot be created or destroyed. The latter is true but has no implication on how living things reproduce. Actually, the very word "reproduce" should be keyed in on. New offspring ARE created, but not from new matter, they are reproduced through biological processes. Matter may not be able to be created but all matter has a lifecycle. All matter can be broken down, partciles rearranged and/or combined with others to eventually be used for completely different purposes. Back to biology; offspring are created through replication and cell division. New cells are created by processes that take already existing matter in the form of amino acids, enzymes, and countless vitamins, minerals, etc and replicate cells and all the parts there-in (DNA, mitochondria,...). All of these different parts needed for replication and cell division are taken into an existing life-form, humans for example, through ingesting nutrients that the body breaks down for countless purposes. You stop taking in the proper nutrients and the body has to destroy itself through catabolic processes to recycle needed materials to sustain life or reproduce life. In a matter of speaking, new offspring are created but they consist of exsting of parts matter that are older than the whole. And, as mentioned several times, aging has nothing to do with time, only biological processes. The funny thing is, our cells are constantly being replaced and the older ones broken down and either ejected from the body or their parts recycled, but a good portion of our newly reproduced cells are from matter that is new to our body, meaning recently ingested and broken down into useful parts. We must age not from our parts getting old (with the exception of wear and tear of joints and bones that once damaged are not fully repaired) but we must age from what I can only call the copy machine effect. Meaning, a copy of a copy of a copy contiously degrades. It may take hundreds of thousands of iterations of our cells before this degredation occurs but it is the only explanation I can come up with without actually researching the subject. Sorry, guess that went way off topic!
time is simply a survival based mental construct required in order to allow memory success and failure. Because we can remember we create a past in our minds and then believe in it's reality. In actuality all that is occurring is movement now. Movement of the hands of the clock, movement of caesium atoms and the sequence of movements gives the illusion of a past and a future whereas in fact there is only what is currently happening, nothing remains of what has happened except it's results in this moment. Apparently 'old' objects, have merely had progressive changes made in their appearance. There is nothing old about them as age is again a time construct. We confuse appearance with age. However energy is neither created or destroyed it simple assumes other forms.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisjcw99johnc ,Your statement "If time didn't exist everything would be at the same time"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisis funny. isn't it.
How can everything happen at something that you are considering as non existing?
Time we measure with clocks is merely mathematical dimension, namely numerical order of change. Universe runs in a 3D quantum where time is merely numerical order. This does not mean time is an illusion. Time is not matter or energy in a sense of Einstein formalism E=mc2 time belongs to the mathematical universe. This view reaches beyond binary logic and introduces trivalent logic according to which time is not A (matter), B (energy). time is C.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissee more on www.spacelife.si
I laugh with amusement at the over-complications of all this. I've been arguing since High School (thats circa 1988 for me) with a number of teachers and I have yet to have one prove me wrong on the following:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is no such thing as "time". In and of itself, it does not exist as a dimension or a tangible thing, which is why, sadly, I can't come up with a "Time Machine". I mean, I would love to find the loophole, but...
All the complicated theories... Time is what we call our yardstick to measure 3 general things: Growth, Movement, and Decay.
It could probably be simplified down to one thing actually - Movement.
Why? Because the Growth and Decay parts, when applied to living things are also pretty much movement (and reactions, more movement) of atoms, particles, recombining, eroding (skin, etc). Non living things.. again, movement, atoms move and bind, particles are formed, movement of other things (think of a beach, the sand, the water, the moon) are all affecting each other, so it can look like growth, movement, decay. But in the end, just as the calendar marks movement of the earth, and the atomic clock marks movement of caesium, it all comes down to motion. "Yesterday" is just a revolution already occurred... "Tomorrow" is the revolution coming. It's pretty simple. This applies across the board. "Spacetime"... Perception, location, movement, and how things are perceived are all based, again, on physics and motion. Gravity, etc. ALL of it, comes down to motion. You are measuring ONLY motion, and nothing else. There is no such thing as a "time dimension" any more than there is a "yardstick dimension", hence why you can't "go back in time" or "go back in yardstick". It is a tool, a useful one to be sure, and the fact that we measure rates of motion, etc does not invalidate the formulas as some here have said. You just need to be aware of what you are actually measuring, and with what tool, and what that tool represents. When you say that it took 10 seconds for the ball to move from point A to point B, you are merely the speed of motion (1 foot per second) against another rate of motion (the hands of the clock moving, which represents seconds, which represents the rotation of the earth) the combination of these two things, are what you perceive to be "time". 3 Hours from now is so many movements of the clock hand, the rotation of the earth, the motion of your individual atoms and chemistry moving about, changing you, giving you the concept of "age".
It's really simple when you think about it.
I came up with this notion but have not been credited! My original idée is this. From our back we see nothing, not darkness, nothing at all. Same for time, time does not exist. Both our wristwatch movements and earth movement are mechanical action taking that takes place, time as such does not exist! Many events can interfere but events are just mechanical (will not go into more specifics on mechanics etc now) happenings. Does time stand still? Not really, time does not exist as such at all. This is obvious I thought but no one had thought of this before, but my thinking has not been credited!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat would call a place where all things happen at once, forever??
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFundamental time which is a numerical order of change has only a mathematical existence. Emergent time which is aduration of change enters existence when measurement by the observer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Amrit_Sorli/?ev=hdr_xprf