All time already exists

[lightly]

All I know for certain about time is....it's about time for me to get off the couch.    ;0 )

[StarMountainKid]

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:04 PM, sci-nerd said:

One suggestion says, that if you shoot a powerful laser out into space, to a place that is never supposed to receive light, the laser will malfunction.

I remember reading about this some time ago. I don't remember where to search for it, though.

Also of interest,

"The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (TIQM) takes the psi and psi* wave functions of the standard quantum formalism to be retarded (forward in time) and advanced (backward in time) waves that form a quantum interaction as a Wheeler–Feynman handshake or transaction."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation

When you shine your laser at some object, while photons travel forward in time from the laser to the object, photons also travel backward in time from the laser to the object.

This would mean something like, we fire the laser before we fire the laser, temporally. Something like that to think about;

 

[lightly]

On October 12, 2018 at 4:36 PM, sci-nerd said:

We measure time in movement, so you're partly right. But if everything stopped, except our consciousness, we would still experience time, wouldn't we?

But let's stay on topic: Does all time already exist? Is everything determined?

        If  Everything stopped ... Our consciousness/experience would stop as well.     ?

i would think No....all "time" definitely does not exist.   The past does not exist.  The future does not exist.  

I don't even think the present exists presently.   Now?      Now?      Now?   See? Future...Past...Present....where is it now?  ?

 

[lightly]

Danydandan    ?    Would you ,or anyone else so inclined, mind explaining how "time" is "Observable"   and    "Measurable" ?

I know the existence of time is supposed to be rather common knowledge, but it honestly baffles me.

We came up with years and hours by observing the repeating cycles of the motions of the earth etc..    If we had never came up with the concept of time.....would those cycles cease ?  Nope.

[StarMountainKid]

I remember reading Einstein's definition of space and time. "Space is what we measure with a yardstick, time is what we measure with a clock."

Perhaps for the present, these are the most insightful definitions. Sounds too simple, but it's the basis of his theory of relativity.

[Timothy]

1 hour ago, lightly said:

Danydandan    ?    Would you ,or anyone else so inclined, mind explaining how "time" is "Observable"   and    "Measurable" ?

I know the existence of time is supposed to be rather common knowledge, but it honestly baffles me.

We came up with years and hours by observing the repeating cycles of the motions of the earth etc..    If we had never came up with the concept of time.....would those cycles cease ?  Nope.

I’ve heard this, unsure where from, but not me:

Imagine looking at a clock, then moving away at light speed. You will see the clock, not moving, always the same, as the light you see is constantly moving with you. While someone standing next to the clock will still watch it ticking.

Return, and the one standing by the clock will have aged more than you. 

It’s all about relativity.

Probably not the easiest way to do it, as we have no idea of how to travel at the speed of light. 

[danydandan]

5 hours ago, lightly said:

Danydandan    ?    Would you ,or anyone else so inclined, mind explaining how "time" is "Observable"   and    "Measurable" ?

I know the existence of time is supposed to be rather common knowledge, but it honestly baffles me.

We came up with years and hours by observing the repeating cycles of the motions of the earth etc..    If we had never came up with the concept of time.....would those cycles cease ?  Nope.

Time is basically just defined by our measurements if it. So counting to ten your observating time, if that makes sense. If you want to be really screwed up thinking about it, read up on Planck Time.

But being a bit more specific you can observe the effects of time and measure these effects, using the laws of thermodynamics, speed of light, space time, electromagnetism and in quantum mechanics in Schrodinger's equation.

So laws of thermodynamics the second law regarding disorder of a system can be observed and measurable over time. You can extrapolate that this shows time is irreversible. The arrow of time, this can be expanded by observation of the expansion of the universe too I suppose. As an example. I can explain the rest if you'd like too.

[lightly]

2 hours ago, danydandan said:

Time is basically just defined by our measurements if it. So counting to ten your observating time, if that makes sense. If you want to be really screwed up thinking about it, read up on Planck Time.

    I can explain the rest if you'd like too.

Counting to ten, I'm observing time ?...or am I simply observing myself count to ten ? I realize everything is in motion...so we are convinced that motion takes time ?  As I said earlier...there is no past...and there is no future...if there is a now...it must exist in an immeasurably short span of     time ?   I don"t want to burden you danydandan,and others, with trying to explain it all to me...and I really appreciate your responses to what most must think is an incredibly stupid question.  And I don't want to completely derail  Sci-Nerd's thread.

So, I guess I really should take your advice and read up....on Planck Time...etc..  Thanks you guys.

[danydandan]

7 minutes ago, lightly said:

Counting to ten, I'm observing time ?...or am I simply observing myself count to ten ? I realize everything is in motion...so we are convinced that motion takes time ?  As I said earlier...there is no past...and there is no future...if there is a now...it must exist in an immeasurably short span of     time ?   I don"t want to burden you danydandan,and others, with trying to explain it all to me...and I really appreciate your responses to what most must think is an incredibly stupid question.  And I don't want to completely derail  Sci-Nerd's thread.

So, I guess I really should take your advice and read up....on Planck Time...etc..  Thanks you guys.

Good place to start, dude.

http://www.exactlywhatistime.com/

Hold off on the Planck Time for a bit lol.

[zep73]

On 22/10/2018 at 3:41 PM, Emma_Acid said:

What does this even mean though?

I am hunting the source of this hypothesis, but please be patient. It could take a while.

[Emma_Acid]

33 minutes ago, sci-nerd said:

I am hunting the source of this hypothesis, but please be patient. It could take a while.

It's not a hypothesis if the sentence is utterly meaningless though.

[zep73]

3 minutes ago, Emma_Acid said:

It's not a hypothesis if the sentence is utterly meaningless though.

I cited it from memory, so excuse me for being human, ma'am! The real stuff is coming as soon as I locate it.

[Emma_Acid]

17 hours ago, sci-nerd said:

I cited it from memory, so excuse me for being human, ma'am! The real stuff is coming as soon as I locate it.

You're excused. The sooner you become a cyborg like the rest of us, the better. I have 1.44mb of memory installed and can hold the equivalent of 6 emails in my head all at the same time.

[lightly]

May I take a little time to say...Thanks danydandan, for the "exactlywhatistime" link.   I read nearly all of it and was pleased to find that I actually was at least slightly familiar with much of the info within....and even more pleased to find that my ideas on time were nearly identical to Aristotle's  !   ....from the good old days before philosophy and "science" diverged.  I noticed many other philosophers and scientists also held questioning views on the nature ,and even existence, of time. 

It seems to me that our conciousness and perceptions play a crucial role in bridging the instantaneous "gap" between past and future.  Sort of blurring it together so it makes sence to us ?  It's obvious that neither the past or the future Exist in the present...which leaves us with the age old questions about the nature of Now. ....anywayyyy, Thanks again.

i'll hush now sci-nerd , thanks for letting me spout.  ;0 )    

[lightly]

  Didn't Enstein say ? ...... Past ,Present, and Future, are but persistent illusions.      ?

where did everybody go ?   I think your thread is interesting sci-nerd.   I hope you haven't given up on it for lack of agreement or     over abundant side trips.....like mine.   ;0 )

[StarMountainKid]

20 minutes ago, lightly said:

  Didn't Enstein say ? ...... Past ,Present, and Future, are but persistent illusions.      ?

where did everybody go ?   I think your thread is interesting sci-nerd.   I hope you haven't given up on it for lack of agreement or     over abundant side trips.....like mine.   ;0 )

"In physics, the relativity of simultaneity is the concept that distant simultaneity – whether two spatially separated events occur at the same time – is not absolute, but depends on the observer's reference frame. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

So, an event in someone else's past may not happen until your future. This is due to the finite speed of light. Can we separate time from the speed of light? 

[lightly]

Phew !  Thanks Star....I guess I can't really wrap my head around all that !  

(the  fact that 6 months of Chemotherapy have transformed much of my brain to oatmeal hasn't increased my previously limited thinking processes either)

[danydandan]

6 minutes ago, lightly said:

Phew !  Thanks Star....I guess I can't really wrap my head around all that !  

(the  fact that 6 months of Chemotherapy have transformed much of my brain to oatmeal hasn't increased my previously limited thinking processes either)

Man I only did 5 weeks of radiotherapy and chemotherapy and my brain is shot to shyt. Can't imagine what 6 months would do to me. 

How are holding up so far?

[StarMountainKid]

Relativity of simultaneity simply means that if light from an event reaches you sooner than it reaches someone else farther away, neither of you can agree when the event happened. 

The light from the event may have reached you at 12:00, but hadn't reached the other person until 1:00. So there is no absolute determination when the event happened. 

You know the event is going to happen to the other person in one hour, in his future, but you cannot tell him about it, as all communication is dependent on the speed of light.

So, are past, present and future real but relative.

[lightly]

I've resisted talking about it much.... But thanks for asking danydandan .  I'm not sure ! Hehe.   It's been rough...it was apparently a very aggressive treatment regime ... Just what the doctor ordered for a very serious diagnosis.

Doc says that the disease is "possibly" in remission...the PET scan I had yesterday will tell the story...as will Doc when I see him next Thursday .    He stressed that remission is not Cure, especially in disease as widespread as mine was, but that it could last years.  !  I'll believe that..  :0 )    He expects that I can take a break from treatment and " see if it comes back"  (or possibly undergo some much easier management or treatment)

so I am hopefullll as we prepare to travel to the S. California desert for the fifth winter in a row !   I told doc "I'm too weak to shovel snow but I'm not too weak to camp in the desert ! "   Tell us your tale?  Or pm me if you'd rather ?

[lightly]

13 minutes ago, StarMountainKid said:

Relativity of simultaneity simply means that if light from an event reaches you sooner than it reaches someone else farther away, neither of you can agree when the event happened. 

The light from the event may have reached you at 12:00, but hadn't reached the other person until 1:00. So there is no absolute determination when the event happened. 

You know the event is going to happen to the other person in one hour, in his future, but you cannot tell him about it, as all communication is dependent on the speed of light.

So, are past, present and future real but relative.

Ah,    That helps a little Star.    ( I still don't really get it completely,  but I don't want to let on )   :0 )

[danydandan]

37 minutes ago, lightly said:

I've resisted talking about it much.... But thanks for asking danydandan .  I'm not sure ! Hehe.   It's been rough...it was apparently a very aggressive treatment regime ... Just what the doctor ordered for a very serious diagnosis.

Doc says that the disease is "possibly" in remission...the PET scan I had yesterday will tell the story...as will Doc when I see him next Thursday .    He stressed that remission is not Cure, especially in disease as widespread as mine was, but that it could last years.  !  I'll believe that..  :0 )    He expects that I can take a break from treatment and " see if it comes back"  (or possibly undergo some much easier management or treatment)

so I am hopefullll as we prepare to travel to the S. California desert for the fifth winter in a row !   I told doc "I'm too weak to shovel snow but I'm not too weak to camp in the desert ! "   Tell us your tale?  Or pm me if you'd rather ?

At least your able to live your life and do things which is a blessing!

Long story short, went for routine OCG scope test, a 22cm tumour was found in my esophagus. Stage 4!. Luckily it didn't spread, so I got five weeks of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Chemo once a week, radio everyday, I was told it was very aggressive treatment, but it actually didn't effect me. Then had very very very big surgery 14-18 hours in operation table. Died for a few minutes, all good now. 

Still recovering from the surgery, obviously won't be able to do the same stuff as I was before. Only have half a stomach, vomited straight for about 6 months, kicked the crap out of me. Now I'm starting to do good, one year after the surgery. 

But thankfully they got all the cancer out and I can see my two girls grow. Buts things into perspective, only thing that matters to me now is my family and spending as much time with them as possible. 

So from my story you can see the effects of time on my body, before diagnoses I was a good fit 14stone with very little fat. Now I'm 8-9 stone with hardly any fat. Entropy man, that's how you can measure and observe time! 

[StarMountainKid]

The farther you are away from an event the longer it takes light to travel to you. If I am closer to the event, the light will reach me sooner than it will reach you. So, the event happens for me sooner than for you. Therefore, we cannot agree when the event happened. 

So, Einstein thinks there can be no universal "now" when events happen that we can agree on. Everyone's "now" is different because of their relative distances from events. 

The fundamentally strange thing is, light travels at a constant speed in all circumstances. If you are traveling in a car at 100mph you cannot add 100mph to the speed of light shining out of your headlight. 

A person on the sidewalk will measure the speed of light shining out of your moving headlight at exactly c, the same as the light shining out of his stationary flashlight. 

For this to make sense, speed = distance x time, if the moving headlight travels a greater distance and its light is measured at the same speed, the time component must be flexible to compensate for the speed of light to remain constant for both of you. 

[lightly]

Hmmmm, Thanks Star...that helps more.  That is fundamentally strange about the speed of light from a fast moving source and a stationary source being equal.   But the rest is becoming more understandable.

  Thanks danydandan,   Sounds like you've had a very hard time , Glad you are doing  ,relatively,  well...and the disease is Gone. Very best wishes for continued recovery and progress.  We'll both get stronger.

[zep73]

On 26/10/2018 at 9:02 PM, lightly said:

  Didn't Enstein say ? ...... Past ,Present, and Future, are but persistent illusions.      ?

where did everybody go ?   I think your thread is interesting sci-nerd.   I hope you haven't given up on it for lack of agreement or     over abundant side trips.....like mine.   ;0 )

Don't worry. I only give up when things turn spiritual or emotional. As long as it's science, I am incapable of giving up (Literally! I can't let go!).

Einstein said that reality was a persistent illusion. But I doubt he really truly believed it.