[thedoc (OP)]

Will.B asked the Naked Scientists:
   I was reading a discussion about being able to see while stopping time, while reading this it got me thinking, if you could stop time and retain conscious if you moved you would theoritacaly create an area with nothing inside of it so if time started again it would pull you back so forcefully to fill in that empty space it could kill you. Just an idea...
What do you think?

[TyroJack]

If Time passing is the accumulation of change (given that in a totally inert environment in which nothing changed even at the sub-atomic level), then one could not stop time if one remained conscious, unless it were a disembodied consciousness(?) and time would still be passing.

Time can only be measured by comparing accumulated change in the subject with change accumulating in a reference system.
Time is always a comparison of the accumulation of change, whether it be a repetitive process, such as a ticking clock (orbit of a planet, or sub-atomic process) or a continuing change (the ageing of a planet or the expansion of the Universe). But time can only ever be detected or determined by change.

If one could stop time in a system, then all change must cease and the system must remain inert; whether it be time on a planet, time in the universe, or a simple clock!

So, following this thread of thought, it would be impossible to stop time, and be where the time was stopped, as one's very presence would mean that time was continuing...

[alancalverd]

If we define time as the dimension that separates sequential events, then an absence of time would mean either that there were no sequential events, i.e. no change, or that everything happened at once. Since life is a series of sequential events, in either case you would end up dead.

[culley721]

There really would be no advantage to stopping time (if it happened). You could not retain eye sight or any of your other senses. If time stops so does light. Therefore your retinas can not attain new information, you lose vision because the light that is being interpreted by your brain is now freeze frame. Which leads me to my next point: even though you retain conscious, your body would be theoretically frozen because the light portraying your body is freeze frame and is not able to experience or portray change; therefore moving itself in frozen time is improbable.


(excuse me if this was a "what if" question and not scientifically accurate)

[Bill S]

  …everything happened at once…

That’s an interesting concept, Alan, but surely nothing can “happen” without time.  Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say “everything is”?  It does get strange from there, but that’s timelessness!  Even Barbour runs into some real oddities with Platonia.

[arcmetal]

  …everything happened at once…

That’s an interesting concept, Alan, but surely nothing can “happen” without time.  Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say “everything is”?  It does get strange from there, but that’s timelessness!  Even Barbour runs into some real oddities with Platonia.

I've had this thought lately that maybe there is no time, its just an illusion that our brain creates for us to help us navigate this material world.  And that the only thing that is really changing is the entropy of things.

If you open up a spring wound clock and watch it tick away you can see that its starting energy is contained in the wound spring. And that the increasing entropy of its mechanism is allowing the energy contained in the spring to filter out and keep the mechanism going....

So time travel will never happen since there is nothing to go to.  There is no past or future, only this one present moment.

Just a thought.

[PmbPhy]

Will.B asked the Naked Scientists:
   I was reading a discussion about being able to see while stopping time, while reading this it got me thinking, if you could stop time and retain conscious if you moved you would theoritacaly create an area with nothing inside of it so if time started again it would pull you back so forcefully to fill in that empty space it could kill you. Just an idea...
What do you think?

Being conscience is a process which takes place in time. No time, no conscience.

[puppypower]

The brain has a special class of cells called pacers cells. The pacers cells are a group of neurons that fire at a fixed rate. They as act as a metronome for the brain, much in the same say as a metronome does for a musician. A metronome ticks at a fixed tempo, and is used by a musician as the standard by which they process all the timing in the music; quarter, half, whole notes, pauses, etc.

Our human concept of time is based on how the brain relates changes of state, which enter the brain through our sensory systems, to the pacers cells. For example, it is no coincidence that our basic unit of time; second, is at the pace of the human heart; at rest. The brain feeds the heart, pulses of energy, which are timed to the pacer cells. We as humans might then project the second as a universal standard.

That being said, your question amounts to what would happen to consciousness and our perception of time and reality, if we lost total function in the pacers cells; neural metronome stops. More than likely, the brain would reassign the role of the pacer cell hardware, with a software equivalent. In other words, the brain would try to use a none physical, or software based replacement. It may try to use a set of memories, which had been previous synchronized to the pacers cells. This becomes the new standard.

An analogy is a symphony orchestra is playing. The metronome stops, but the music must to go on. The members of the band will begin to use other members, such as a drummer, as the new pacer. The drummer, who was also using the metronome, may try to use the violins, etc. There will be some process control adjustment going on. Consciousness would depart from the collective human time projection, since the pacer cells of the human brain are defined by human DNA. That person would step out of collective human time and walk to the beat of their own drum, which is not physical per se, but is more based on ethereal information. This could explain spiritual projections, which are not physical, but nevertheless have similar consciousness properties not connected to earth time.  For example, the wandering soul synchronizes time to a tragic event that repeats; metronome.

I prefer the concept of time potential, instead of time, because it allows one to define the nature of time in a way that is not an unconscious projection of the pacer cells, and how brain unconscious relates all changes in what we call time. If you compare time to distance, distance can be measured with a passive device like a ruler. Time, on the other hand, needs a dynamic device; clock, with the dynamics requiring energy.

I am not aware that the brain has any potential energy pacer standards, which are projected as time potential. But it does have a time standard based on projection of the pacer cells. The concept of time tends to keep physics more unconscious. I sort of personify what happens when you don't use the pacer cell projection, although, I still have full function in my pacers cells. The result is I can see collective human time, but I am not constrained to this by default.

There is no rule in science about the calibration of the mind, to a universal standard instead of a projection standard. I try to do it anyway, since it is good science practice. Time is a mental abstract, not a physical thing one can save in a bottle. Time potential is different.