71 replies to this topic

[Alan McDougall]

               POSSIBLE DEFINITION OF TIME

Time can be defined from many perspectives.  From perception view point time is an emergent concept which our mind creates. Present is the consciousness or awareness of recording of memory into the brain. Past is just a record while future does not exist. From point of view of physics time is presence of motion and forces in the universe.

What is your take on time, is it an illussion or a reality?

Edited by Alan McDougall, 29 February 2012 - 12:35 PM.

[bouncer]

Alan McDougall, on 29 February 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

               POSSIBLE DEFINITION OF TIME


What is your take on time, is it an illussion or a reality?

This is simple...time is a con trick invented by the swiss to sell  their watches

[voidla]

If we didn't have a concept of time, I think life would make more sense. Because we'd live life, even if we were still working in an office, we just wouldn't feel the strain of timed-order we give ourselves.

[PsiSeeker]

I'll post here what I recently posted in another forum.

PsiSeeker, on 29 February 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

There's a light trying to switch on in my head regarding time.

Time is continual but it's absolutely subjective.  It's also universal.  There is only one rate of time that can be subjectively experienced.  Different rates of time can be objectively observed but only when comparing them is it obvious that there is a difference in transition.  The difference in transition would depend on the object's mass.  

Time therefore is rate of change that only exists when there is rate of change.  Assume there is probability of change.  Once there is probability of change then time must exist as those probabilities.  If there is an objective clock to some state then many eternities could pass for the clock before a change occurs for said state however subjectively change would appear to be continual and absolute for the state.  There wouldn't appear to be any hiccoughs.

In other words time is the word we coin to something that has change.  It doesn't actually exist as it's currently understood.  It's only a physical result of there being matter.  And it HAS to exist if there is more than one probability of a state.  It's a consequence of there being matter.  (In my opinion)

Edited by PsiSeeker, 29 February 2012 - 03:25 PM.

[StarMountainKid]

PsiSeeker said:

Time therefore is rate of change that only exists when there is rate of change. Assume there is probability of change. Once there is probability of change then time must exist as those probabilities.

Are you saying time is only change, or that time is the cause of change, or the result of change? If time only exists when there is a rate of change, then what is this time that you say exists in these circumstances?

If time is only change, then time itself doesn't exist as an existing dimension. Is this what you mean?

[Rlyeh]

voidla, on 29 February 2012 - 01:15 PM, said:

If we didn't have a concept of time, I think life would make more sense. Because we'd live life, even if we were still working in an office, we just wouldn't feel the strain of timed-order we give ourselves.

So there would be no concept of past, or causality? That sounds pretty nonsensical actually.

[lightly]

a little after eight

[PsiSeeker]

StarMountainKid, on 29 February 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

Are you saying time is only change, or that time is the cause of change, or the result of change? If time only exists when there is a rate of change, then what is this time that you say exists in these circumstances?

If time is only change, then time itself doesn't exist as an existing dimension. Is this what you mean?

I think time as it has been defined is incorrect.  I think all that time is is rate of change.  Time is just the word we use to describe subjective rate of change.

Change is inevitable, change HAS to occur as that is all that CAN occur.  The curious thing with time is that it doesn't matter how sporadic a state when observed from the outside actually looks.  It will appear continual and at a constant rate from the inside.

Anyway, the reason I still use "time" as the word is because rate of change can be noticeably sporadic where as time can only be noticed as sporadic when comparing different states.

Edit: Maybe I should reword

Quote

Time therefore is rate of change that only exists when there is rate of change.

to

Time therefore is rate of change that only exists when there is probability for change.

Edited by PsiSeeker, 01 March 2012 - 02:04 AM.

[Chaldera]

I see the dimension of time as being divided into subsets, or sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions, named for convenience's sake 'past', 'present' and 'future', are occurring at precisely the same time; that is, any event occurring in the past will also be occurring in the present and the future. This would allow for changes in one to not necessarily affect the other, i.e. a time traveller killing Hitler in the 'past' will be cancelled out due to the fact that in both the 'present' and 'future', Hitler was/is/will be still alive and well. This would all be relative to the observer.
And yes, this is based around insomniac musings late at night and early in the morning.

Edited by Chaldera, 08 March 2012 - 08:45 PM.

[Druidus-Logos]

I like the ball/mattress metaphor.  The mattress is space, or the universe, in totality; the balls are various masses and bend the mattress accordingly.  If you put a bowling ball on a bed, it'll make an impression, and you could "orbit" other balls around it if they get caught in the curve of "space".

When I think about it, I have often imagined time to be a part of the structure of the universe, a part of the mattress.  Imagine if the mattress had a coating of flowing snow/foam over it, meant to represent time in this example.  This is not really snow, it's a hard to visualize concept.  It's always in a constant state of movement, variable based on your location in the universe.  Anything with mass causes a measurable impression in space.  That's gravity.  But you also make a measurable impression in space by moving; your speed can determine the rate at which you move through time.  The faster you move, the faster time will subjectively flow, and the greater your impression on the "snow" will be.  

Time, then, in this thought experiment, is almost a substance of its own (well, as physical in its own way as space is), something which will flow at variable speeds around different objects with different masses and velocities.  Moving fast makes you move through or interact with the snow more rapidly; you create a wake in the waves of time.  

Perhaps flow is not the best way to describe the movement of the snow, but more a background vibration.  When you interact with time you move through it faster, and cause the vibration of the time to increase.

So for the average person, time flows at a steady rate.  Earth and our solar system are moving through space and vibrating time as we move along.  So is everything else.  And the faster mass moves, the more intense time vibrates.  Time is built directly into the universe, tied with space to make space-time.  When you experience the passage of time, you are merely observing changes in the vibrations of space-time.  

If the universe is composed of strings, then its scaffolding is what we experience as space.  These strings generate space for us to move in, through their inherent structure.  Vacuum possesses less strings than non-vacuum; mass is also composed of strings.  When many strings come together, they effect each other merely by existing; and more so through movement.  

I don't know, but it's fun to think about.  I didn't really have time to explain more about this extremely-tentative model of time; but I enjoy it.  Sorry if I didn't describe it well enough, I tried to keep it very simplistic so it would be easier to relate.  Also, sorry if I didn't finish developing all of my ideas here, I was trying to rush...  I'd love to read other metaphors that try to describe time.

[cloudes]

thanks.

[Alan McDougall]

How did time flow out of the singularity big bang?

As we know from physics, astrophysics and astronomy the faster one moves the slower time moves and also moves slower and slower in the vicinity of colossal gravity forces, such as a black hole where time almost stops in its almost infinite gravity force.

Let’s move onto the moment of the emergence of the universe out of the big bang singularity. Here the forces must have been much greater than around a black hole and the gravity field must have been infinite. We know from physics that in an infinite gravity field TIME CAN NOT MOVE, yet somehow, luckily for us it did allowing spacetime and the universe to emerge

So during the creation event of the big bang what we call the physical or fundamental laws of the universe did not apply and it seems the impossible became possible.

What do you guys have to say on the matter of this enigma

[Chrlzs]

Time is simply nature's way of preventing everything from happening at once.

[Leonardo]

Time has multiple meanings.

In an objective sense, time is a perception of change. In a subjective sense, time is how that change is measured.

[Habitat]

If time is an illusion that must mean distance is an illusion too, doesn't it ?