Does time really exist?

  • 49 Replies
  • 11846 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline GatoNegroPeludo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 10
    • View Profile
Does time really exist?
« on: 04/09/2012 08:41:27 »
I mean sometimes i feel thinking about time as an illusion... like a motionpicture where it looks like movement but there are only stills appearing one after one...

We cant certainly define a specific moment in time, because you can always make it more precise... if i said one second, then some can say a millisecond and so, infinite way down... time maybe does not really exists as we can't say: "hey look here, i have photographed time" (as a particle)... could be there a time particle?

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #1 on: 04/09/2012 10:15:28 »
if "time" exists as "something", then it "has" to be made out of a particle, or wave, etc.

  I believe "time" is merely as "perception" or "observation" using the motions and orbits of bodies out in space, and events here on earth to calculate procession, for example days are measured by the spin and orbit of planet earth as day and night time cycles.   

  if it exists as anything, then it has to be made up out of "something" or else, it is just a word.......
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #2 on: 04/09/2012 12:01:00 »
time is what clocks measure - just like distance is what rulers measure.  We are just more at home with the abstract idea of distance than we are with the idea of time.
There’s no sense in being precise when you don’t even know what you’re talking about.  John Von Neumann

At the surface, we may appear as intellects, helpful people, friendly staff or protectors of the interwebs. Deep down inside, we're all trolls. CaptainPanic @ sf.n

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12350
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #3 on: 04/09/2012 23:23:11 »
Not a bad idea, those 'still photographies' I've been thinking in similar terms, and then I asked myself if it then started to 'move', what would it need?

Time
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline William McCormick

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 153
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #4 on: 05/09/2012 03:20:58 »
time is what clocks measure - just like distance is what rulers measure.  We are just more at home with the abstract idea of distance than we are with the idea of time.

Older clocks measure the hertz, from the power company, technically. Newer clocks, chipped powered clocks, use a set voltage, and the time it takes to fill capacitors and drain them to measure how long it takes to fill and drain capacitors.

All of the above is done in an attempt to break down the 24 our day, or the planets revolution, into usable increments.

A tape measure, is a piece of fiberglass tape, or metal, in most cases, a metal tape, can over twenty feet shrink and expand 1/8" from summer to winter, and winter to summer. A fiberglass tape will stretch a little.

A tape measure is actually a comparator of sorts. You compare an object to a tape measure at some temperature, and then using the same tape measure at a new location on a different material, at the same temperature. you transfer some portion of linear information about some linear dimension of the part you were comparing to the tape measure, to the new location and or new part. I have fifty tape measures, no two are identical to a machinist or fine cabinet maker.

If you want to see how bad off we are as a technical nation. Give 100 people a tape measure and have them measure a few objects and duplicate the measurements on a piece of scrap paper. You will not believe the results. Or the banter. Ha-ha.

Time is what we are wasting. Letting "law makers" set our course.



They keep getting fancier and fancier, but the old cookoo will probably win in the end, which may be sooner then we think.


                      Sincerely,

                            William McCormick
« Last Edit: 05/09/2012 03:22:58 by William McCormick »

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #5 on: 05/09/2012 18:59:56 »
time is what clocks measure - just like distance is what rulers measure.  We are just more at home with the abstract idea of distance than we are with the idea of time.
If there were no clocks would everything cease to move? (No.) I think time is the concept required for movement. We call one rev of our planet a day and one orbit a year, now standardized by very accurate clocks. "Time elapses" as everything moves.
Also, all bodies in space were formed by the laws of physics and distributed in space with distances between them independent of how (or if) they are measured  by "rulers" however sophisticated the measuring device.

This may be the minority opinion here but it is based on realism rather than the opinion that reality depends on measurement.

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #6 on: 05/09/2012 19:25:28 »
You do have to be capable of separating events in space and in time for movement to have any meaning.  This means, in a sense, you have rulers and clocks, even though they might not have the form of a wristwatch or a meter stick. 

Modern physics gave up the idea of some absolute universe that exists outside of all observers and instead formulates rules in terms of what can be measured by experiments.  For distance and time to have any meaning to someone taking measurements, they need some method of separating points in space and events in time, which are broadly rulers and clocks. 

You could still make the argument that time and space exist, even if we somehow eliminated all rulers and clocks from the universe, but a physicist these days would point out that your thought experiment has gone beyond the realm of science as it would be impossible to use science to investigate such a universe.
« Last Edit: 05/09/2012 19:27:24 by JP »

*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #7 on: 05/09/2012 20:20:23 »
Mayb as our perception of the degredation around us. Everything deteriorates eventually.  Entrophy is a direct result of time x distance. Or the speed at which things change

the trippy thing about it is that if ita a result of the big bang then surely as the energy disapates then the distance travelled should be less with time.

It should follow the inverse square law like most other things do

or is it a considered a constant and the distance decreases to make the maths work. In which case we should be contracting. Which we are not. Wtf

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #8 on: 05/09/2012 23:38:43 »
JP:
“You do have to be capable of separating events in space and in time for movement to have any meaning.”

You do. I don’t. Things move around, on all scales, regardless of human capability for “separating events.” Everything in the universe moves. We say that “time elapses” when things move. I agree. But that does not make time an entity of any kind which can “dilate.”
It’s just that clocks run slower after being accelerated to higher speeds. (Probably human bodies “age” more slowly too at higher velocities.)

The coalescence of  “time” and “space” into a supposed unity was Minkowski’s invention, and then Einstein subscribed.
There was no mention of the ontology of what either space or time was supposed to BE when the ‘fabric of spacetime” (both non-entities woven together) was invented.
It was just a coordinate system conceived as a 4-D graph. Now every intro to relativity proclaims as a fact that "mass curves spacetime." Curves what, exactly?

Physics abhors ontology, so there is no conversation about "what it is" in all cases.
How does the coordinate system work? Just fine. Good predictive ability.
Does it require an entity, "spacetime" to work? No.

Just passing by. Back tomorrow.

*

Offline William McCormick

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 153
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #9 on: 06/09/2012 02:24:59 »
Mayb as our perception of the degredation around us. Everything deteriorates eventually.  Entrophy is a direct result of time x distance. Or the speed at which things change

the trippy thing about it is that if ita a result of the big bang then surely as the energy disapates then the distance travelled should be less with time.

It should follow the inverse square law like most other things do

or is it a considered a constant and the distance decreases to make the maths work. In which case we should be contracting. Which we are not. Wtf

If there was a big bang, and if things cannot communicate instantly across the universe, I have never seen an ounce of proof for those beliefs.

I witnessed communication experiments that showed otherwise, as far as communications maximum speed. It was not a pretty subject then, and still might get me a two day ban now. 

Look at our modern doctors, they go off to Africa to learn from Witch doctors how to mix certain rare plants, and what they might do for health. The medicine man often cures diseases that modern doctors could not. But then the medicine man or witch doctor explains it is because of the spirit of WannaEguana. I pull the rip chord and realize, that he has just stumbled on something that works. But does not have a clue as to why it works. "Modern science" basically just came in and put their name on very old stuff and discoveries that worked and still work. They just explained them with their theories. Con artists could learn a thing or two from the "modern scientist".


                      Sincerely,

                            William McCormick

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #10 on: 06/09/2012 10:44:38 »
  T = O


    Time is equal to the observer.  Simple, and correct..

 It is not a thing, made out of anything..it is observation.
 It is made up out the same stuff that "thoughts" are made out of, observations.


« Last Edit: 06/09/2012 10:46:16 by Emc2 »
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #11 on: 06/09/2012 17:32:05 »
JP:
Quote
Modern physics gave up the idea of some absolute universe that exists outside of all observers and instead formulates rules in terms of what can be measured by experiments.
There is nothing "absolute" about a naturally occurring universe formed by the laws of physics and totally "real"... "all by itself" independent of how or if it is measured.
Of course science is always challenged to find the best ways of measuring whatever parts of it, but its intrinsic properties do not depend on any such measurements.
I know that Einstein said that "real" is a meaningless word, because it all depends on observation, which varies for each observer, even observing the same object. But it is the observations that are variable, not the objects or distances between them, according to realism.

*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #12 on: 06/09/2012 17:44:46 »
Ok i thought for a minute i had e= mc^2 sussed and was using that as gospel.  I guess untill Proven other wise we can only make hypothis and speculation. In the best way of science. Rather than state" personal fact

simple

*

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #13 on: 06/09/2012 17:46:47 »
JP:
Quote
Modern physics gave up the idea of some absolute universe that exists outside of all observers and instead formulates rules in terms of what can be measured by experiments.
There is nothing "absolute" about a naturally occurring universe formed by the laws of physics and totally "real"... "all by itself" independent of how or if it is measured.
Of course science is always challenged to find the best ways of measuring whatever parts of it, but its intrinsic properties do not depend on any such measurements.
I know that Einstein said that "real" is a meaningless word, because it all depends on observation, which varies for each observer, even observing the same object. But it is the observations that are variable, not the objects or distances between them, according to realism.

But you are privileging a philosophical viewpoint over the scientific method that allowed these theories to be formulated.  If you set up prior conditions as an axiomatic part of your argument then there is a risk that there will be no common ground with science.  It is not merely that I observe flattening of objects at high relative velocities - if I smash two lead ions together at relativistic velocities the results are such that the only way we can understand the results is is the lead ions are flattened.
There’s no sense in being precise when you don’t even know what you’re talking about.  John Von Neumann

At the surface, we may appear as intellects, helpful people, friendly staff or protectors of the interwebs. Deep down inside, we're all trolls. CaptainPanic @ sf.n

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #14 on: 06/09/2012 18:28:28 »
imatfaal:
Quote
But you are privileging a philosophical viewpoint over the scientific method that allowed these theories to be formulated.


No I am not. Earth exists as is, as it was naturally formed, mostly by the law of gravity, independent of how variously it might be observed, and it turned out nearly spherical, like other planets and stars, formed by the same law of gravity. There is no scientific evidence for large scale length contraction, and certainly none for a "pancaked" shape of Earth, whatever length contraction has formulated as a theory.

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #15 on: 06/09/2012 23:29:26 »
There's no scientific evidence that gravity exists on planets we haven't yet discovered, but I'm betting it does.  The nice thing about the scientific method is that it allows you to predict things that you haven't yet experimentally observed.  You can always say that the theory could break down in some as-yet-untested scenario, but unless you have some scientific reason to think that a well-tested theory will break down on one of those cases, there's not much evidence to back you up.

If you predict the earth won't length contract, then you have a serious problem: you have to explain why special relativity breaks down in that case when it doesn't in all the other cases where we've verified it.  Simply saying "I haven't seen evidence" isn't good enough in science.

*

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1467
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #16 on: 07/09/2012 02:20:32 »

[/quote]
If there were no clocks would everything cease to move? (No.) I think time is the concept required for movement.
[/quote]

I would think the question should be phrased the other way around - if nothing moved - if the world was somehow completely static and unchanging, would there be time?

*

Offline William McCormick

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 153
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #17 on: 07/09/2012 04:08:26 »
There's no scientific evidence that gravity exists on planets we haven't yet discovered, but I'm betting it does.  The nice thing about the scientific method is that it allows you to predict things that you haven't yet experimentally observed.  You can always say that the theory could break down in some as-yet-untested scenario, but unless you have some scientific reason to think that a well-tested theory will break down on one of those cases, there's not much evidence to back you up.

If you predict the earth won't length contract, then you have a serious problem: you have to explain why special relativity breaks down in that case when it doesn't in all the other cases where we've verified it.  Simply saying "I haven't seen evidence" isn't good enough in science.

I have never seen one scarp of evidence support special relativity. It has accomplished nothing, it gives no understanding, whatsoever. It cannot be demonstrated. And it is based on a pack of lies so big, that an honest fellow, does not know where to begin knocking it.

Special relativity is like a giant tank of septic, spilling and leaking out nasty foul stuff. The people in charge of it, saying that it is the solution and the problem. If you could just stand back away from it, while observing the whole real life phenomena, you would realize that something terrible has happened to those individuals studying the leaking septic tank as a solution. To fix the problem, you have to just jump in, fix the leak, pump it out, and clean it up. It is going to stink either way, so you might as well get something good out of it for yourself, God and Country.

The sad part is that people get caught up in the unsolvable puzzle the rules of special relativity create. It dulls the mind. We are going down, we might as well make a human stand for truth. We are probably too late already, but isn't it worth a try?

                      Sincerely,

                            William McCormick

*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #18 on: 07/09/2012 04:23:52 »
What is this terrible thing that has happend. What is you take and solution

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12350
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #19 on: 07/09/2012 04:57:16 »
That's it OG :)
" We say that “time elapses” when things move. I agree. But that does not make time an entity of any kind which can “dilate.” "

As far as I think of it that is perfectly correct. Time never varies locally, the clock and ruler you use keep its proportions (relative each other) at all times, so to speak. And the reason it (time) can do so is 'c', and the fact that 'c' is a constant in all uniform frames of reference.. You can find arguments for that 'c' only is 'c' in uniform motions, but not in accelerations, but that is to me more a question about how you make your definitions. You can make them such as 'c' will be a constant in a acceleration too, although 'gravitationally dilated' and also depending on which way you measure, relative a motion.

But to make 'c' the constant we find it to be we have to make it a local definition, although valid for all frames of reference. And that one sounds weird but I find it correct to define it that way. Because the arrow of time as well as 'c' is always locally the same relative, for example, your life span, no matter where you are. But you will still find other frames of reference to present you with other ruler sizes and 'clock rates', when compared to your own. And as the only way we can make a first hand measurement is locally? Our repeatable experiments builds on the fact that you and me can do, and get, the same experiment in different locations and at different times, as long we use equivalent frames of reference. All other ways are cerebral, theoretical, trusting in, or 'lending', some other(s) measurement(s). But locally it is exactly as you describe it, time will never vary for you, or anyone else, locally. and neither will the room.

You will always need to make comparisons between 'frames of reference' to find contractions and time dilations, and you should need to be around half the speed of light to really start to notice it.
« Last Edit: 07/09/2012 05:23:19 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline William McCormick

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 153
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #20 on: 07/09/2012 05:09:04 »
What is this terrible thing that has happend. What is you take and solution

As an honors student, I was receiving what they called pre World War Two education. It was when the only subatomic particle was a particle of electricity. And the entire earth each atom was only a spherical structure of particles of eletricity. This method of understanding earth explains all the strange phenomena, and even gravity. At some point in my education, a college professor that used to get $1700.00 an hour to lecture came in and told us that as of next year, he would no longer be able to come in and teach us in a public school. Because the Federal government would cut funding to any shool that invited him in to teach such things.

What this fellow taught us, exactly matched what I learned at Grumman Aero Space, in the sixties and seventies. It was also what our circle of friends and family taught us.

The college professor warned us that as of 1973 that the neutron would be considered a real particle. And that the actual atom would no longer be taught. Since we could do anything we wished, with science at that time. And only the government was stopping us. I was totally sure that he was telling us the truth. You have to understand, the Senators told us on national TV in the late sixties that, counterintelligence would be used in American schools. To keep violent minority types from leaking such dangerous information to the Russians. I don't say this with much hope of it being believed, but that is what I lived through.

Others in my perish, were aware of what was said by the senators. And my pastor got out his special scriptures, to read us a passage. To combat what the Senators said on TV.

It was about three men that lived in a village. There was a mountain that God spoke to the people of earth from. And the story went like this. Leaders of the village, were becoming corrupt, they were lying and making rules that allowed them to do pretty much whatever they wanted. So three wise men went to the mountain of God, and called to God. They explained that the leaders where wrighting laws and rules that were clearly not the work of good or God. They went on and on about all the problems it was leading to. God finally spoke when they were done. God said to them, if you live under mans laws you must obey mans laws, and the mountain trembled.

So the three men returned very unhappy with what God had said to them. In the short time they were gone, the leaders were now wearing short robes, and clearly partaking in sex with very young people in the village. They wrote laws and tied them to God, by saying these are the laws of God, and his wishes.

The three wise men knew this was blaspheme, and rushed to the mountain. Before they even got there, they were screaming God, God, now the leaders of the village are claiming that it is your word that they should make laws for us to follow, and they are starting to...... God Thundered, and made them tremble, He said if you live under mans laws you must obey mans laws. Now almost disgusted, they turned and slowly walked home.

When they got home, their community was all but ruined, the streets smelled of urine, the leaders, proclaimed that now God had made the leaders Gods, and that from now on, there word would be Gods word.

The three wise men ran to he mountain, Screaming God, God, the leaders are making laws that are.... God shook the mountain and said if you live under mans laws, then you must obey mans laws! One of the men spoke up and said but God, they said they are God now. There was silence, and then God said, to them, if they are claiming to be God and doing things in my name, then there is nothing you cannot do to them in my name.

The point is that, all this stuff unfortunately happened. And afterwards, a kid about 9 years old, going to the strongest people in the church, could only get adults to hang their heads down and say "we are not strong enough to do anything about it". So again believe what you like, but I am very sure of where I live.

The solution is to remove law makers and replace them with leaders.

                      Sincerely,

                            William McCormick



*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #21 on: 07/09/2012 05:30:22 »
Mmm ok thats cleared things up. Thanks

*

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 279
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #22 on: 07/09/2012 05:34:38 »
That's it OG :)
" We say that “time elapses” when things move. I agree. But that does not make time an entity of any kind which can “dilate.” "

Couldn't you also say that distance "elapses" when things move? Is there any fundamental way in which time is different to any spacial dimension?

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12350
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #23 on: 07/09/2012 05:41:27 »
As a political statement of distrust that one was strong William :)

But this is the 'main stream' science forum. When it come to political and social points of view, don't know really where to put it? I put mine in 'just chat' as I remember it, because it's not hypothesis's or 'science related' ideas to me. It's more of a question why life looks as it looks, and as all such questions colored by ones personal views. Not saying that a scientific idea can't be that way too, but we have to set limits for those and defining our 'system' so that we can test it for our selves. Better have it in 'just chat' I think, not meaning that this kind of questions are unimportant btw.
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12350
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #24 on: 07/09/2012 05:45:11 »
I don't think so Bizerl. To me 'the arrow' and the room complement each other, both using 'c' and motion/mass (gravity) as their definer. If you think of it that way you can do all sorts of brain gymnastics with 'dimensions' :)
=

Eh, meant that as a answer to 'Is there any fundamental way in which time is different to any spacial dimension? I don't think there is, or if it is, then it still have a local invariant definition. And thinking of it as 'degrees of freedom', how things can 'move', instead of 'dimensions' release one from a lot of spiderweb methinks :)
=

And then we have that final border 'energy', which I , btw, still wonder what it really should be seen as?
« Last Edit: 07/09/2012 05:54:02 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #25 on: 07/09/2012 06:15:21 »

If there were no clocks would everything cease to move? (No.) I think time is the concept required for movement.
[/quote]

I would think the question should be phrased the other way around - if nothing moved - if the world was somehow completely static and unchanging, would there be time?
[/quote]


   time is not a "thing", it is not made up of anything...it is only observation..

   progression, expansion, aging, decay, movement, etc..  these are things that "time: is used to describe...
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #26 on: 07/09/2012 06:39:16 »
"Time is there to stop everything happening at once "

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #27 on: 07/09/2012 07:07:07 »
"Time is there to stop everything happening at once "
 
LOL, but seriously.

  Time is just a word invented by Humans to describe events.
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline bizerl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 279
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #28 on: 07/09/2012 07:25:38 »
"Time is there to stop everything happening at once "
 
LOL, but seriously.

  Time is just a word invented by Humans to describe events.

Of course "time" is a word invented by humans. Everything we are discussing are "words". This statement is usless. If someone asked what christmas was you could say "christmas is just a word invented by humans to describe an event". So is christmas the same as time?

Whatever word you use, it is describing a phenomenon which is as real as anything else in this bizarre state we call "existence". It is another direction for matter to travel in and provides a mechanism in which matter can arrange itself in different configurations.

The title of the thread is "Does time really exist" and you can get bogged down in semantics until the cows come home (which would prove it does exist! :P) or you could look at the fact that everyone and nearly everything experiences a motion that runs perpendicular to the three conventional dimensions of space. We can't control the direction as such, but if we run fast enough in one of the other spacial dimensions, we can control the speed (or velocity - I'm never sure which) in the time dimension.

If time did not exist, energy could not have developed into mass, mass could not have evolved into life, life could not have evolved into humans and no one would be around to ask about time.

I think that's what I wanted to say. I tend to go off in tangents.

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #29 on: 07/09/2012 10:23:02 »
Time does not exist....

  if you say it does, then tell me exactly what time is made out of ?

  Time is a word, and that is important, not irrelevant...because it describes something, but it itself is not a "thing".

  that is key to understand........

  what does exist, is progression, expansion, growth, aging, seasons, decay, etc. etc these are all real "things" that the word time is used to describe.........

  so time is observation of an event, not an event itself....

   
  and to prove that time does not exist, except for the observer,  consider this.

  time is  past, present, and future..

  does the past exist ?
  does the future exist ?
 
  NO......

 the only thing that exists right now, "is now", so time "technically" can only exist in the here and now anyways...

 and it only exists to the observer, because it is just an observation of the present....


« Last Edit: 07/09/2012 10:34:14 by Emc2 »
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #30 on: 07/09/2012 18:02:05 »
There's no scientific evidence that gravity exists on planets we haven't yet discovered, but I'm betting it does.  The nice thing about the scientific method is that it allows you to predict things that you haven't yet experimentally observed.  You can always say that the theory could break down in some as-yet-untested scenario, but unless you have some scientific reason to think that a well-tested theory will break down on one of those cases, there's not much evidence to back you up.
Your argument works against planets or stars being flattened via the length contraction effect in any case. The physics behind all fully formed planets and stars being nearly spherical is well established. Yes, we can predict that planets we have not yet discovered will also be nearly spherical. None will be “pancaked.”

Quote
If you predict the earth won't length contract, then you have a serious problem: you have to explain why special relativity breaks down in that case when it doesn't in all the other cases where we've verified it.  Simply saying "I haven't seen evidence" isn't good enough in science.
No, you have to explain how a large solid planet, formed as spherical by the laws of physics like all other planets, can possibly “morph” into a pancaked shape. Yes, we know that light speed is constant. Granted. We do not know that that constant makes solid objects shrink when observed from relativistic speeds, even though they may **appear** to shrink. What each frame of reference *observes* is an image of an object carried by the medium of light. Length contraction on large scale confuses the image with the object. Earth stays about spherical no matter how various the observed image from extreme frames.
By what law of physics do very large solid (not malleable) objects *actually* get squeezed into pancaked form? They don't, and empirical science will never do an experiment confirming a pancaked Earth. Length contraction advocates will eventually have to "get over it."

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #31 on: 07/09/2012 18:17:04 »
There's no scientific evidence that gravity exists on planets we haven't yet discovered, but I'm betting it does.  The nice thing about the scientific method is that it allows you to predict things that you haven't yet experimentally observed.  You can always say that the theory could break down in some as-yet-untested scenario, but unless you have some scientific reason to think that a well-tested theory will break down on one of those cases, there's not much evidence to back you up.
Your argument works against planets or stars being flattened via the length contraction effect in any case. The physics behind all fully formed planets and stars being nearly spherical is well established. Yes, we can predict that planets we have not yet discovered will also be nearly spherical. None will be “pancaked.”

Actually, that's not true.  The laws of physics hold in all reference frames (that's the point of relativity), so in some frames, you'll see planets form "pancaked" because the laws of physics say they should. 

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12350
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #32 on: 07/09/2012 18:31:07 »
It's tricky OG but what you need to consider is that we never, from birth to death, will observe this. And what we don't observe 'doesn't exist' so to speak. But it's actually a prediction that has to be true, or else relativity lie and 'gravitational time dilations' doesn't exist. But they do.
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline old guy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 165
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #33 on: 07/09/2012 18:32:38 »
Any moderators around? I request that posts 30 and 31 be moved to my "Length Contraction" thread.
Or... maybe its OK for me to cut and paste them to where they belong, so as not to derail the subject on the ontology of time. Here goes:

*

Offline GatoNegroPeludo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 10
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #34 on: 09/09/2012 06:50:01 »
Time does not exist....

 
  does the past exist ?
  does the future exist ?
 
  NO......

 the only thing that exists right now, "is now", so time "technically" can only exist in the here and now anyways...

 and it only exists to the observer, because it is just an observation of the present....

This is interesting but i think there is no "present" at all... so this mean (for me) time really doesnt exist...
I think, what is now, what is present, if we look really close, we can't have a specific "present" (as i said before) because you can always make the present smaller... so "present" or "now" means a millisecond, or maybe a nanosecond or femtosecond?... present is only an illusion...

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #35 on: 09/09/2012 07:43:51 »


  does the past exist ?
  does the future exist ?
 
  NO......

 the only thing that exists right now, "is now", so time "technically" can only exist in the here and now anyways...

Time interacted with energy.Time is interacting with energy.Time will interact with energy.Clocks don't show quantity of interacted time.Clocks show quantity of made motion.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2012 07:56:02 by simplified »

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #36 on: 10/09/2012 09:57:02 »
Time does not exist....

 
  does the past exist ?
  does the future exist ?
 
  NO......

 the only thing that exists right now, "is now", so time "technically" can only exist in the here and now anyways...

 and it only exists to the observer, because it is just an observation of the present....

This is interesting but i think there is no "present" at all... so this mean (for me) time really doesnt exist...
I think, what is now, what is present, if we look really close, we can't have a specific "present" (as i said before) because you can always make the present smaller... so "present" or "now" means a millisecond, or maybe a nanosecond or femtosecond?... present is only an illusion...


  Present is only an observation, based upon the observer.  It may only be a nanosecond, but it does exist....
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #37 on: 10/09/2012 10:00:29 »


  does the past exist ?
  does the future exist ?
 
  NO......

 the only thing that exists right now, "is now", so time "technically" can only exist in the here and now anyways...

Time interacted with energy.Time is interacting with energy.Time will interact with energy.Clocks don't show quantity of interacted time.Clocks show quantity of made motion.

 
       Clocks show us a 24 hour day, that only the people on this planet understand......

  they show us, what we "program" / "set" / "gear"  them to tell us.
  clocks are only good at telling us how fast we are spinning and rotating around the Sun......

   http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=experts-time-division-days-hours-minutes

Thanks to the ancient civilizations that defined and preserved the divisions of time, modern society still conceives of a day of 24 hours, an hour of 60 minutes and a minute of 60 seconds. Advances in the science of timekeeping, however, have changed how these units are defined. Seconds were once derived by dividing astronomical events into smaller parts, with the International System of Units (SI) at one time defining the second as a fraction of the mean solar day and later relating it to the tropical year. This changed in 1967, when the second was redefined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 energy transitions of the cesium atom. This recharacterization ushered in the era of atomic timekeeping and Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).

Interestingly, in order to keep atomic time in agreement with astronomical time, leap seconds occasionally must be added to UTC. Thus, not all minutes contain 60 seconds. A few rare minutes, occurring at a rate of about eight per decade, actually contain 61.
« Last Edit: 10/09/2012 10:05:34 by Emc2 »
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline Fluid_thinker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 54
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #38 on: 10/09/2012 15:07:14 »
Does Frame Dragging distort time, if time is only now?

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #39 on: 10/09/2012 15:22:23 »
Does Frame Dragging distort time, if time is only now?
Frame dragging reduces quantity of interacting time.

*

Offline stu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #40 on: 11/09/2012 00:38:01 »
If we think about speed as time x distance travelled (relating to the earth moving around the sun) the the man at the ocean travels slower than the man at everest.

But that just relating to the earth spin not the relationship between sun an earth or does it

if this is the case then does time reduce in magnatude when operating at altitude.

the atomic degredation would remain the same of the atomic clock if it were both locations would it not?

Please explain the error or the function that creates this disparity.


Allbeit miniscule

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #41 on: 11/09/2012 04:04:24 »
If we think about speed as time x distance travelled (relating to the earth moving around the sun) the the man at the ocean travels slower than the man at everest.

But that just relating to the earth spin not the relationship between sun an earth or does it

if this is the case then does time reduce in magnatude when operating at altitude.

the atomic degredation would remain the same of the atomic clock if it were both locations would it not?

Please explain the error or the function that creates this disparity.


Allbeit miniscule

Kinematic slowing of time yes.But gravitational slowing of time here is stronger. :P

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #42 on: 11/09/2012 07:26:36 »
Time is relative to the observer, relative to observers mass/momentum in relation to the speed of light

   T = C

  The closer you get to the speed of light, the more time dilation you get,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

    In the theory of relativity, time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or differently situated from gravitational masses.

An accurate clock at rest with respect to one observer may be measured to tick at a different rate when compared to a second observer's own equally accurate clocks. This effect arises neither from technical aspects of the clocks nor from the fact that signals need time to propagate, but from the nature of spacetime itself.

   A case of time dilation in action is that astronauts return from missions on the International Space Station (ISS) having aged less than the mission control crew that remained on Earth. Such time dilation has been repeatedly demonstrated (see experimental confirmation below), for instance by small disparities in atomic clocks on Earth and in space, even though both clocks work perfectly (it is not a mechanical malfunction). The laws of nature are such that time itself (i.e. spacetime) will bend due to differences in either gravity or velocity—each of which affects time in different ways.[
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #43 on: 11/09/2012 12:47:45 »
EMC2 - please put quotes around material that you bring in from other sites even if you think it is clear.  Thanks.

There’s no sense in being precise when you don’t even know what you’re talking about.  John Von Neumann

At the surface, we may appear as intellects, helpful people, friendly staff or protectors of the interwebs. Deep down inside, we're all trolls. CaptainPanic @ sf.n

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #44 on: 11/09/2012 13:43:24 »
Time is relative to the observer, relative to observers mass/momentum in relation to the speed of light

   T = C

  The closer you get to the speed of light, the more time dilation you get,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

    In the theory of relativity, time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or differently situated from gravitational masses.

An accurate clock at rest with respect to one observer may be measured to tick at a different rate when compared to a second observer's own equally accurate clocks. This effect arises neither from technical aspects of the clocks nor from the fact that signals need time to propagate, but from the nature of spacetime itself.

   A case of time dilation in action is that astronauts return from missions on the International Space Station (ISS) having aged less than the mission control crew that remained on Earth. Such time dilation has been repeatedly demonstrated (see experimental confirmation below), for instance by small disparities in atomic clocks on Earth and in space, even though both clocks work perfectly (it is not a mechanical malfunction). The laws of nature are such that time itself (i.e. spacetime) will bend due to differences in either gravity or velocity—each of which affects time in different ways.[
No relative time in Stu's case.

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #45 on: 12/09/2012 06:20:20 »
Stu's case ?  has that been scientifically tested ? has it been observed ?

  If so, please provide documentation..
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline waytogo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 68
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #46 on: 13/09/2012 14:29:44 »
My point: No, the time does not exist as we actually know it.

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #47 on: 13/09/2012 15:08:49 »
Stu's case ?  has that been scientifically tested ? has it been observed ?

  If so, please provide documentation..



In Stu's case  two factors of slowing of time are.Do you think that gravitationally slowed time is relative?
« Last Edit: 13/09/2012 15:11:38 by simplified »

*

Offline Emc2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 175
  • <-- free thinker ..
    • View Profile
    • getting there
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #48 on: 14/09/2012 06:04:51 »
Stu's case ?  has that been scientifically tested ? has it been observed ?

  If so, please provide documentation..



In Stu's case  two factors of slowing of time are.Do you think that gravitationally slowed time is relative?

  Again I ask, show me a link that corroborates this...
never think that you have ever learned enough.....

*

Offline simplified

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 428
    • View Profile
Re: Does time really exist?
« Reply #49 on: 15/09/2012 17:14:56 »
Stu's case ?  has that been scientifically tested ? has it been observed ?

  If so, please provide documentation..



In Stu's case  two factors of slowing of time are.Do you think that gravitationally slowed time is relative?

  Again I ask, show me a link that corroborates this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment