Time Doesn't Exist

[SpasticGramps]

Good read so far. I've only started reading it.

 

[FunkBomb]

Time is only relevant when you're talking about it in context to space. Other than that it has little importance outside the realm of physics. Our species uses time because our lives are short and pointless and we need some mechanism to mark our achievements.

-Funk

 

[jburns]

yeah i live in a no time zone. when i go to the bank i always have to look or ask for the date. i began my own theory. everyday is friday. i used to work around the clock on call, phone ringin all the time. its no way to live, so when i got fired i went off on my own to live life.

 

[SpasticGramps]

i used to work around the clock on call, phone ringin all the time. its no way to live,

I feel you there bro.

 

[Medium Pimpin']

Time is only relevant when you're talking about it in context to space. Other than that it has little importance outside the realm of physics. Our species uses time because our lives are short and pointless and we need some mechanism to mark our achievements.

-Funk

amen

if you setup the history of the earth on a 12 hour clock, we as humans didn't even show up til 11:59:58

that's right folks, we as a species have only been here for 2 seconds.

 

[BrainSellz]

Then eye would say tha human race is the human race against time or what we think iz time' are we tha time? (X) is a symbol of TIME and there iz a generation (X)' will this be what were about to experience in tha next two years heading towards 2012 az tha collective conscience evolvez' tha complete knowing of what time really iz or what time waz thought to be' maybe how to manipulate it' hmmm just a thought

 

[EdddieVHalen]

I am on island time mon

 

[GMT]

Never heard so much nonsense to be honest. Time does exist, it can be measured and is not relative to size. There are no time atoms. It doesn't matter how you live your life. Time passes by. You can't travel faster than light and catch up light that left ages ago.
These are very very basic concepts. There is nothing about to emerge in 2012. To discuss these concepts it helps to have read a couple of decent books on the subject.

 

[redspaghetti]

There are two kinds of human thoughts:
Those that handle the physical that does exist and those that handle the non-physical that is fiction that doesn't exist
To us human beings, the physical reality appears* to be made of material objects and immaterial active phenomenon. We do perceive the reality of objects and active phenomenon through our body senses, and in return we can describe that perception of reality.
An object or an active phenomenon is real or exist on the double condition that we are able to first perceive it then describe it.

By contrast that, which doesn't exist in reality, the non-physical, can only exist in our minds! Evidently we cannot perceive through our body senses that which does not exist in reality, and as a consequence we are unable to describe that, which doesn't exist.
Mental concepts that lack physical collateral cannot be perceived physically. And our inability to describe that which doesn't exist, corroborates that non existence.
Here are things that we perceive, along with their description, and which as such are physical or exist in reality.
Because we can touch them, material objects are physical, and exist in reality. In conjunction with that reality that does exist outside our minds, we make crystal clear mental images of material objects within our minds. And in return we can describe them.

Then in reality, unlike material objects though, there are phenomenon such as gravitation that occur and as such exist and are physical yet non-material.
Even though one cannot touch gravitation as one does material objects, and even though gravitation acts out of immaterial space, because gravitation makes objects fall, gravitation is physical.
Similarly even though one cannot grab them with one's hands, light rays are physical because they have a physical effect, light rays from the sun heat up our skin.
Both gravitation and light rays, even though non material, are physical and do exist or occur in reality because they act on matter; we clearly perceive their respective effects with our body; and in return we are able to concisely describe these effects as just done above.
Our perceptions then our descriptions of gravitation and light rays corroborate their physical existence.

Even though we have no idea of what are (in reality) matter, gravitation and light rays, and even though our human interpretations of these things are only ideas (concepts and pictures) we know that these ideas do coincide to real things! We can touch matter, gravitation makes an object fall and light from the sun heats our skin.
Both perception and description are needed to be confident that something is real or does exist in reality.
We can neither perceive physically our mental concept of time, nor describe it, as such time doesn't exist!
A does-time-exist-clock, which hands are question marks! For one, our idea of time doesn't run the clocks that "give" us the "time"! Is that not puzzling? In reality, metal springs or batteries and not time activate clocks.
Ask yourself this question: Why do I believe a clock gives me the time whereas time doesn't run that clock? Time is clearly missing from that specific reality that is a clock!
Then time is neither controlling the time duration of our life that is at the mercy of an accident, nor our aging, which runs on biological processes such as the physical duplication of cells.
Obviously time is not involved in our so-called aging process! Now choose any word, within our human language that implies time, you will find out that time is never involved! Even simultaneity and instantaneity must occur elsewhere than in time as both involve no time!
Besides there has to be a reason or some doubt, for which so many, including you and I, do ask the question:does time exist? And by the way, for which this page is so popular!

Here is an answer:
There is no physical interaction whatsoever between our concept of time and any physical phenomenon.
As a consequence we cannot perceive physically our concept of time.
And as a consequence again we are unable to describe the alleged entity time.
Time fails both aspects of the double condition that could establish it's physical entity.
And that is true in the science of physics too! Richard Feynman, a renown physicist, suggested that "time runs independently of everything else."
Not connected to anything real, "time" is only a word of our language and "t" only a mathematical symbol in physics.
Time is non physical. Time does not exist in reality!

cheers,
red.

 

[BrainSellz]

Check it out' the word TIME spelled backwords EMIT

e·mit   /ɪˈmɪt/ Show Spelled[ih-mit] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), e·mit·ted, e·mit·ting.
1. to send forth (liquid, light, heat, sound, particles, etc.); discharge.
2. to give forth or release (a sound): He emitted one shrill cry and then was silent.
3. to utter or voice, as opinions.
4. to issue, as an order or a decree.
5. to issue formally for circulation, as paper money.

They say TIME is MONEY well hear you go #5 makes this a true statement if you see it both wayz

 

[EdddieVHalen]

Time is an illusion created by man. When man is gone so will be time.

Time is not a season or a part of the day. It is something man has placed in civilization.

 

[GMT]

time is a measurement like miles or litres. next you'll be arguing that distance or volume doesn't exist.

just to take the piss, hes fat wears a red suit, has a white beard, lives in the north pole, and gives out presents at xmas. By your logic santa now exists as I have described him.

 

[Mezz Mezzrow]

From our perspective it seems to exist in a strictly linear fashion, but to a being experiencing expanded dimensional awareness it would be different. The Astral being (or whatever "plane" the being inhabits) might have powers to experience all times simultaneously or to slip from one time to another. It's like how our hand would appear to an ant crawling on a flat surface - it would seem to magically appear and disappear in different places in reality as we lifted it and put it down somewhere else.

 

[SpellingEror]

So NPR just did a sweet piece on the very subject, last week I think, can't remember too many specifics. But, time is relative to the force of gravity, i.e. more gravity=slower perception of time. That means that as gravitational forces (which are actually being called into question lately as someone has published a paper attempting to describe gravity as a consequence of thermal dynamic properties rather than an actual force) increase, the rate of time according to you slows down. So if you are at sea level, your time is slower than someone who lives in Denver. But if you are running at sea level, your time is moving faster than the guy standing at the corner smoking a spliff. See as you run you have less friction with the Earth, which seems to be the large gravitational body dictating the rate at which our time flows, and with less friction enacting on your body you have less force from gravity which makes your perception of time faster than some inert body.

This effect is observable because it affects clocks and watches; if you and a friend sync up two identical watches at the same time, and you fly from LA to Boston and your friend stays in LA, and you call your friend on the phone in mid-flight, the times will be off, your watch will appear to have passed time more slowly than your friends'.

I dunno, I'm pretty sure that's the way it goes. Anyway just some food for thought.


(SP?)

 

[sac beh]

Time is an illusion created by man. When man is gone so will be time.

How can you be so sure of this? If time is an observable characteristic of human behavior, can't it also be one of most animals? Sure, the word "time" carries with it a lot of conceptual baggage which non-human animals don't understand. But as objective observers animals seems to conform to time as humans. And the most logical deduction to make from observing animal behavior is that many of them, like us, are conscious of the temporal character of their existence. Memories, hunger, the changing seasons, time measurements that animals and humans are constantly aware of.

 

[redspaghetti]

Everytime you smoke weed, time slows down.
Everytime you take speed, time speeds up.
Everytime you get stuck in traffic, time slow down.
Everytime you hit a line or 2, time speed up again.

Is time real ??

Only you can answer that question
cheers,
red.

 

[Mezz Mezzrow]

So NPR just did a sweet piece on the very subject, last week I think, can't remember too many specifics. But, time is relative to the force of gravity, i.e. more gravity=slower perception of time...

(SP?)

It begs the question what implications does it have for people in "outer space?" How will their consciousness be affected? I've heard a lot of astronauts have had spiritual epiphanies in space. It's the realization of of Timothy Leary's SMI2LE axiom: Space Migration, Intelligence Increase, Life Extension!

 

[DiiZZii3]

time is a measurement like miles or litres. next you'll be arguing that distance or volume doesn't exist.

just to take the piss, hes fat wears a red suit, has a white beard, lives in the north pole, and gives out presents at xmas. By your logic santa now exists as I have described him.

Yea but measurments (they have a starting point of "0" to measure from) are exact you can kno exact volume or exact distance therefor u must be able to measure time exactly, but as i tried to explain in my first post there is no exact time. To measure time there has to be a starting point.. the "Now", but we are unable to measure what time the "now" is. As red was saying it cannot be "physically" measured such as volume or distance. It is a concept we humans have come up with in our imagination, and a very flawed one at that.

Gotta remember i wasn't the one who came up with this concept some of the worlds greatest scientists did.

I gotta ask you so if time does exist and it is constant and flowing "unchanging/unaltering" then how is the concept of "time travel" actually possible? Lets say you were an astronat and were in a spaceship possible of traveling close to the speed of light. Lets say that you lanched into orbit today 9/14/2010, and circled the earth close to the speed of light for 10 years, then landed back on earth. You would find that everyone you once knew had all aged 100 years when you've only aged 10 years. You would arrive back on earth in the year 2110.

This shit blows my my mind, its somethin we'll nevr really understand. in truth u kno that were all actually time travelers. For instance when we look up at the sun, were actually looking into the past.. were seeing what the sun looked like 8 minutes ago. This works on a smaller scale as well. when we look at the person next to us were actually seeing them in the past beacuse the light takes lets say .0000000002 (made up #) seconds to reach you.

to everyone who is able to grasp this concept... really requires some abstract thinkin.

 

[Mudita]

Time won't give me time, and time makes lovers feel like they've got something real,
but you and me, we know they've got nothing but time, and time won't give me time.



other than that i pretty well agree with gmt, in general.

There's always a question about "what happened before the big bang," or about the nature of time. Stephen dealt with that in "A Brief History of Time," and you helped with that vision through your work on "A Briefer History of Time." How does this book advance the ball?
A: One of Stephen's big ideas in this book is called "top-down cosmology." It's the idea that we should trace the history of the universe from the present time backwards — and that the universe has many histories because it's a quantum system. In "normal" physics, we work in a laboratory and we do experiments. We set up the experiment in an initial state, then we let it go for a while, then we do measurements on its final state — and we check predictions. The theory tells us how the initial state should develop, and then we make predictions about the final state.
We can't do that with the universe as a whole. We don't set up the initial state. We don't have a laboratory where we can control what's going on. We can't repeat the experiment and take the data. Also, the universe — since we believe in quantum theory now — is a quantum system.
In normal cosmology, people start with the initial state as if it were a laboratory — which it's not — and they use classical ideas, meaning that there's one history of the universe which they trace forward. Stephen believes that we should start from our observations now, because that's all we can do, and trace it backwards, taking into account the fact that the universe has many histories and not just one.
Q: Right, there's a discussion in the book about how the past is as much affected by quantum mechanics as the future is. So there's uncertainty about the past — which is counterintuitive. That must be a hard sell with normal people who say, well, I remember specifically what I had for dinner yesterday. We know for sure what happened in the past because of things ranging from human memory to the fossil record to the process of baryogenesis at the beginnings of the universe. So how can you say that there's a factor of uncertainty about past events?
A: Well, if you happened to have experienced all possible aspects of the universe for all of time, there would not be uncertainty. Quantum theory doesn't say that if you ate an egg, you might not have eaten the egg. Let's get that straight. What quantum theory says is that in between the times when we observe and measure, and interact in that way, these properties that we talk about have no meaning.
For instance, in classical theory, if you push a billiard ball down the table, and if no one is interacting with it or measuring it, it still has one path with a well-defined position at every time. Those properties exist. In quantum theory, if you push it and then no one interacts with it, you cannot in general say that it has a particular position and velocity at any time. In classical theory, we say that it has those properties, and when we measure it, we're just reading off those properties. In quantum theory, it's not correct to say that a measurement is merely reading off those properties. Rather, it doesn't have those properties when we don't measure it.
Now, if you had an egg yesterday, you interacted with the egg, and there's an egg there. When we look at the universe today, with top-down cosmology, we don't allow for the possibility that the moon is made of green cheese – because we already know that the moon isn't made of green cheese. We put in all the data of all our observations, and that prunes down the number of different histories that have to be taken into account. But where observations haven't been made, we don't.
So the vagueness of the past is the vagueness of things unmeasured in the past.
Q: Does that imply then that there will be no way to answer that classic question, "What happened before the big bang"? Because the uncertainty goes to an indeterminately high level?
A: No, it's not that. As you go backward in time, quantum theory, combined with general relativity, tells you that if you go back early enough in the universe, time ceases to have the meaning that we assign to it today. It ceases to act as we know it. So it's not a well-posed question to say, "What happened at the beginning of time?" — because time doesn't go back to the beginning.
According to general relativity, time and space exist under certain conditions. Quantum theory tells you that there are always fluctuations in empty space, and if you make the universe small enough, the fluctuations are great enough that the matter is squashed down enough that this affects the character of space and time itself. Time doesn't exist at that point. So the question doesn't make any sense.

 

[Mezz Mezzrow]

Yea but measurments are exact you can kno exact volume or exact distance therefor u must be able to measure time exactly, but as i tried to explain in my first post there is no exact time.
to everyone who is able to grasp this concept... really requires some abstract thinkin.

I hear what you're saying. Can we measure volume and distance any more exactly though? I mean you can always add more decimal points, right? It's the paradox of how can the ball you threw at the wall ever get there if you can theoretically keep measuring in smaller units?