0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

We normally think of time as moving forwards and backwards, as a line, or possibly just a ray...but as we can only experience time in the "now" as a moment, could it be that time is not a line or a ray but only a point - a singularity of some sort, that all the other dimensions of space some move relative to or through and we experience the movement through this point - or perhaps the rotation of this point, as ongoing yet solitary-momentary time?What are all the considerations involved in this possibility or non possibility?Also a possibility - that we are in a "time" black hole, where time is the singularity and all of 3-dimensional space is bound somehow with that singularity as the information spread out over the event horizon?

What are all the considerations involved in this possibility or non possibility?

Though I have read and heard about many conceptions and constructions and speculations of 'Time', I have never had any reason to accept anything other than those five words.

To see the language we associate with time in Science, you could start here

Who are "we"?

To see the language we associate with time in Science, you could start here:

The last and most successful creation of theoretical physics, namely quantum-mechanics differs fundamentallyfrom both the schemes which we will for the sake of brevity call the Newtownian and the Maxwellian. For thequantities which figure in its laws, make no claim to physical reality itself, but only the probabilitiesof the occurence of the physical reality that we have in view.Dirac, to whom, in my opinion we owe the most logically complete exposition of this theory, rightly points out that itwould probably be difficult, for example, to give a theoreticaldespcription of a photon such as would give enough informationto enable one to decide whether it will pass a polarizer placed (obliquely) in its way or not. I am still inclined to the view that physicists will notin the long run content themselves with that sort of indirectdescription of the real, even if the theory can eventually be adapted to the postulate of general relativity in a satisfactory manner. We shall then, I feel sure, have to returnto the attempt to carry out the program which may properly bedescribed as the Maxwellian--nameley, the description of physical reality in terms of fields which satisfy partialdifferential equations without singularities.

could it be that time is not a line or a ray but only a point - a singularity of some sort, that all the other dimensions of space some move relative to or through and we experience the movement through this point - or perhaps the rotation of this point, as ongoing yet solitary-momentary time?

To see the language we associate with time in Science, you could start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time#Physical_definition [nofollow] That's appropriate "non-active"

In a black hole there is no energy so there is no time within a black hole. There is only kinetic energy 100% in a black hole. Energy is extremely dilated by the inverse square law causing mass to stretch when entering a black hole. Out in space between galaxies energy has the greatest density and clocks tick rate is the greatest because the energy particles are closest. Mass dilates energy by causing the energy to move electrons.

We normally think of time as moving forwards and backwards, as a line, or possibly just a ray...but as we can only experience time in the "now" as a moment, could it be that time is not a line or a ray but only a point - a singularity of some sort, that all the other dimensions of space some move relative to or through and we experience the movement through this point - or perhaps the rotation of this point, as ongoing yet solitary-momentary time?What are all the considerations involved in this possibility or non possibility?

I think your consideration has merit. As a singularity, you're saying time "now" could mathematically equate to the value of "1"

Quote from: opportunity on 02/02/2018 11:22:16I think your consideration has merit. As a singularity, you're saying time "now" could mathematically equate to the value of "1".What is the duration of a moment in 'Time'? (Given: the answer will be the decimal-portion of 0.______..., where the unit is Second.) In other words, some fraction of a second.If anyone can answer that, then, well, that person would get the keys to the Kingdom (presuming there be more than one).

... is a continuous variable.

Quote from: scherado on 04/02/2018 13:27:34What is the duration of a moment in 'Time'? (Given: the answer will be the decimal-portion of 0.______..., where the unit is Second.) In other words, some fraction of a second.absolute time t=Δ→0It is a continuous constant

What is the duration of a moment in 'Time'? (Given: the answer will be the decimal-portion of 0.______..., where the unit is Second.) In other words, some fraction of a second.