Time

A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Time

In the sense that philosophy is a view of reality this little article of mine might be of interest. www.giwersworld.org/science/TIME/time.html

Time does not exist until it is observed
Summary
This is a different way of looking at time. It does not change anything. This is not yet properly organized and may never be. I have come up with a different way of looking at time than is common. It changes little other than how existing physics is looked at. In considering time this way things make more sense to me than looking at it the common way.

It is a matter of unlearning the linear arrow of time, clock time and the idea of time travel introduced by HG Wells. This is fully compliant with relativity and classical physics. It may be a better way of looking at things like quantum entanglement because it now appears clear to me what is going on. I do find myself having fewer problems with the "impossible" things in quantum physics looking at it this way.

I do not have the advanced math and physics to make this into any kind of paper. I have forgotten most of my B.S. stuff. On the other hand, as it is just a different way of looking at what exists, I don't see the point of filling it with equations just to make it look impressive. Perhaps I am really just being lazy.

There is no time until it is measured.

I am interested in feedback if anyone wants to spend the time.

Warning: Seeing the incorrect assumption of HG Wellsian time has nearly ruined SF stories about time travel for me. I now see it as buying into the Wells model of time that lead to the paradoxes that were much of the interest of the stories. Now they have to stand on the merits of the story alone. Fortunately Continuum came along from Canada a few months ago.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
Very good article, I enjoyed

Very good article, I enjoyed reading it, but how is this any different then how Einstein viewed time, and how Bohr viewed uncertainty?  Relativity basically says that there is no absolute time, that's why, as you've mentioned, the GPS system works. 

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Ktulu wrote:
Very good article, I enjoyed reading it, but how is this any different then how Einstein viewed time, and how Bohr viewed uncertainty?  Relativity basically says that there is no absolute time, that's why, as you've mentioned, the GPS system works.

It does not differ as treated by science when actually doing the math. I am addressing the popular view of time even among scientists trying to explain its "arrow" assume Minkowski space which is without evidence. The idea of time as a dimension "like" the other three implies travel in it like the other three. But the one way motion through time with only some arbitrary original "momentum" is only our head game perception of reality. None of our science depends upon that.

Take the classic "if we could travel back to the beginning" as an assumption of Minkowski space that it not in our science. I started by saying this changes no science. It contains no revelations. It just exposes a false working assumption we share about the nature of time.

This took me some six months to go through and unlearn all the Wellsian assumptions I was making in my thinking. If there is any possible science in it I would expect it to be in string theory and removing or drastically changing the way the time dimension is handled. OTOH, as I know next to nothing about string theory and generically dislike the idea of solving problems by making them more complicated I will not be doing any of it.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
I see where you're going

I see where you're going with this.  I remember a debate not that long ago where I mentioned to someone that time was a poorly understood concept.  His reply was that it was not, it was quite simple... when in reality it is nothing but.  

The way I think of time, in the Einsteinian sense, is to think of it as a dimension.  The universe gets older as entropy increases, and younger in the opposite direction.  As your article has touched on, this is only good in at an academic level, not really grounded in reality.  There is no absolute time, and local time is relative to energy, from e=mc2.  I think it was Feynman that explained it best.  Think of the upper speed limit of light as the amount of energy you have at any one time, constantly.  If you take an x,y axis where space is x and y is time, you can "use" the energy to move trough space, but it you divert it from time.  It's sort of like if you want to head north, but instead you start diverting some of your energy westward.  You will still be heading North, but it will take you longer to get there.  So, while you're at rest (relative to an observer), you have all your energy invested in time,.  If you start moving, your time will change accordingly, relative to that same observer.

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
There's a lot of things we

There's a lot of things we don't really understand. Even light is still rather elusive.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:In the

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

In the sense that philosophy is a view of reality this little article of mine might be of interest. www.giwersworld.org/science/TIME/time.html

Time does not exist until it is observed
Summary
This is a different way of looking at time. It does not change anything. This is not yet properly organized and may never be. I have come up with a different way of looking at time than is common. It changes little other than how existing physics is looked at. In considering time this way things make more sense to me than looking at it the common way.

It is a matter of unlearning the linear arrow of time, clock time and the idea of time travel introduced by HG Wells. This is fully compliant with relativity and classical physics. It may be a better way of looking at things like quantum entanglement because it now appears clear to me what is going on. I do find myself having fewer problems with the "impossible" things in quantum physics looking at it this way.

I do not have the advanced math and physics to make this into any kind of paper. I have forgotten most of my B.S. stuff. On the other hand, as it is just a different way of looking at what exists, I don't see the point of filling it with equations just to make it look impressive. Perhaps I am really just being lazy.

There is no time until it is measured.

I am interested in feedback if anyone wants to spend the time.

Warning: Seeing the incorrect assumption of HG Wellsian time has nearly ruined SF stories about time travel for me. I now see it as buying into the Wells model of time that lead to the paradoxes that were much of the interest of the stories. Now they have to stand on the merits of the story alone. Fortunately Continuum came along from Canada a few months ago.

Noony, I am quite impressed that this post wasn't about your impetious hard on for blind loyalty to the Palistinians, while assuming everyone in the west, like me, has a blind hard on for Isreal.

But it really is nothing more than mental masturbation. Semantically while true, time only exists because of observation. Time in reality in the scientific sense existed prior to our births and will exist after our deaths.

This is as bad as "if a tree falls in the woods, and no one can here it, does it still make a sound". YES,  that tree will make a sound because of motion and air friction. Trees existed, and have rotted and fallen for billions of years. It does not need any individual's observation to happen. Just like there will be a baby born in Japan, who I am not aware of, will be born even if I never witness that individual's birth.

The only thing humans have to scientifically figure out, not that we ever will, is what happens at the end of the universe and its own heat death, what happens after that.

But time itself existed before we were born and as long as the universe is in motion, it will exist after we die and our planet dies.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Ktulu wrote:

I see where you're going with this.  I remember a debate not that long ago where I mentioned to someone that time was a poorly understood concept.  His reply was that it was not, it was quite simple... when in reality it is nothing but.

Here I am not trying to explain anything. I am trying to take away false assumptions we are making which make things hard to understand. That is why I put this in Philosophy rather than Science. So many things do not make sense if we consider time to be just like the other three. Minkowski space makes that assumption. Einstein mentioned Minkowski space as a possibility but was more interested in generalize Riemannian Manifolds. Several aspects of quantum mechanics have become less confusing to me when I stop trying to impose absolute time on it.

I have a long way to go and it is not an important interest to me as I don't have the tools to talk string theory and really have no interest in spending the time in hell to get them.

Quote:
The way I think of time, in the Einsteinian sense, is to think of it as a dimension.

Correct but a local dimension. Like the uncertainty principle, a thing that does not exist or cannot be known until it is observed.

Quote:
The universe gets older as entropy increases, and younger in the opposite direction.

There is what I am talking about. Our perception of younger and older imposed upon something that is simply different based upon something we cannot measure, time.

Quote:
As your article has touched on, this is only good in at an academic level, not really grounded in reality.  There is no absolute time, and local time is relative to energy, from e=mc2.  I think it was Feynman that explained it best.  Think of the upper speed limit of light as the amount of energy you have at any one time, constantly.  If you take an x,y axis where space is x and y is time, you can "use" the energy to move trough space, but it you divert it from time.  It's sort of like if you want to head north, but instead you start diverting some of your energy westward.  You will still be heading North, but it will take you longer to get there.  So, while you're at rest (relative to an observer), you have all your energy invested in time,.  If you start moving, your time will change accordingly, relative to that same observer.

From way back when what has gotten me is in relativity all reference frames have to have identical laws. A photon v=c experiences neither time nor distance but directly connects the emitter and the receiver. How can there be a valid reference frame regardless of velocity and one which cannot have either distance nor time simultaneously?

Consider the decay of a radioactive atom. There is no way to know when a particular atom will decay. Even if the math has the half life in microseconds it could be a billion years. And then the decay photon could be linked to a sensor an inch away or tickle a background radiation sensor a billion light years away. The time and distance from the point of view of the photon is no time and no distance. Or to wax poetic, that photon could go on forever and never be reabsorbed and exists only in the eternal now.

Damn you Wells! Our personal view of time does not apply.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

...

Noony, I am quite impressed that this post wasn't about your impetious hard on for blind loyalty to the Palistinians, while assuming everyone in the west, like me, has a blind hard on for Isreal.

And I think your pseudo patronizing is sort of cute, dumb but cute.

If you recall we last left it as both of us completely agreeing with the ethics Israel claims to have and that they are absolute not relative which gives me game, set and match. If you disagreed you would certainly have said so. 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 849
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
consider that

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

In the sense that philosophy is a view of reality this little article of mine might be of interest. www.giwersworld.org/science/TIME/time.html

Time does not exist until it is observed
Summary
This is a different way of looking at time. It does not change anything. This is not yet properly organized and may never be. I have come up with a different way of looking at time than is common. It changes little other than how existing physics is looked at. In considering time this way things make more sense to me than looking at it the common way.

It is a matter of unlearning the linear arrow of time, clock time and the idea of time travel introduced by HG Wells. This is fully compliant with relativity and classical physics. It may be a better way of looking at things like quantum entanglement because it now appears clear to me what is going on. I do find myself having fewer problems with the "impossible" things in quantum physics looking at it this way.

I do not have the advanced math and physics to make this into any kind of paper. I have forgotten most of my B.S. stuff. On the other hand, as it is just a different way of looking at what exists, I don't see the point of filling it with equations just to make it look impressive. Perhaps I am really just being lazy.

There is no time until it is measured.

I am interested in feedback if anyone wants to spend the time.

Warning: Seeing the incorrect assumption of HG Wellsian time has nearly ruined SF stories about time travel for me. I now see it as buying into the Wells model of time that lead to the paradoxes that were much of the interest of the stories. Now they have to stand on the merits of the story alone. Fortunately Continuum came along from Canada a few months ago.

time may not even exist. Your input- "There is no time until it is measured" says quite a bit. That means it has to be connected to intellect. If only intellect can use it or invent it--then it may be a mere invention based on Zero. What lay between one event and another, nothing, as time is not a tangible or material construction. Can the universe contain a non-material---debatable. But the universe is --no where. It doesn't have a somewhere. Relativity has to do with two or more material objects, and one can only be somewhere relative to an object. Without material objects there's no relativity. Distance then, can only be between two or more objects. How long it would take for one to travel from one object to another cannot be known unless there is something or a basis to create  time. IE- poof, ther you are suddenly existing, and you are on a plane, and off on the distance there is another. The universe then contains 3 objects--the 2 planets and you. If you want to travel to the other planet how long would it take you. There's no way to know because "you" have not established time and distance. That means then that time is directly a matter of you if it is to exist. Time and distance then is directly a matter of intellect.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 849
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
One can also

consider time to be in continuous flow. It is we that divide it into increments. But, it still takes something material to oberve to create the increments.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Now they

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Now they have to stand on the merits of the story alone. Fortunately Continuum came along from Canada a few months ago.

The SyFy channel has just started running that here in the states. I love that show. I can't wait to see where it is going. Every time I completely give up on television ( which is 99% of it) something will come along that pleasantly surprises me.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3204
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
I'm still reading this but

I'm still reading this but it is interesting. Buddhism teaches similar information as part of the illusion of being alive is that we measure time and space here in this Universe.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Buddhism teaches similar information as part of the illusion of being alive is that we measure time and space here in this Universe.

Interesting.

I have heard of quotes that are along that line, but some seem to contradict each other.

I know that I have heard some people say : Just Be

But I am not sure if that is coinciding with actual time or not.

What exactly is the teaching of illusion/space/time ? Don't worry, I am not asking for TOO many details.

Just a brief synopsis.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3204
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:
Interesting.

I have heard of quotes that are along that line, but some seem to contradict each other.

I know that I have heard some people say : Just Be

But I am not sure if that is coinciding with actual time or not.

What exactly is the teaching of illusion/space/time ? Don't worry, I am not asking for TOO many details.

Just a brief synopsis.

You can find this information on several website, but I direct you to:

http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Buddhist_Perspective_on_Time_and_Space

While this entire page will give you information I am associating with, the section I think which is most pertaining to our conversation is section 3.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3391
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
in the words of the great

in the words of the great bodhisattva willie nelson, "it's always now."

another favorite of mine is "i didn't come here and i ain't leavin'."

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3204
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:in the words of

iwbiek wrote:

in the words of the great bodhisattva willie nelson, "it's always now."

another favorite of mine is "i didn't come here and i ain't leavin'."

My favorite is "Being nobody, going nowhere".

 

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:iwbiek

digitalbeachbum wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

in the words of the great bodhisattva willie nelson, "it's always now."

another favorite of mine is "i didn't come here and i ain't leavin'."

My favorite is "Being nobody, going nowhere".

 

I like these. I'll have to use them somewhere.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
"I will always be

"I will always be here."
Something I came up with a couple years back. Literally true, from a certain perspective.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


x
Bronze Member
Posts: 591
Joined: 2010-06-15
User is offlineOffline
Like

"I have always been here before" - Roky Erickson.