This is the theory I buy into. The past, present, and future all exist simoultaneously, but we can only see the present because we live in the 3rd dimension.GundamSentinel said:
Here:
That clears it all up, right?
Time; do you believe in it?
- Thread starter XHolySmokesX
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Here:
That clears it all up, right?
But how do you know it is moving? How do you know decay requires time? Because our perception of time is a movement from point A to B, or A to -Z? That's conjecture based on our notion of time -- purely subjective. I've yet to ever hear proof that can show time to exist outside of us.King Toasty said:
I disagree. I think you are confusing the concept of time with it's definition. Yes, days and years and hours and minutes ect. are all man-made constructs, but the flow of time, the existence of time is not. With no man around, plants still grow; animals live, die, and replicate. Radioactive elements break down, water evaporates. A state cannot change without time. Without time there can be no motion, no chemical reactions, nothing. Time undeniably exists, and it is uniform, because these phenomena occur in the same amount of time every time, regardless to the presence of man.XHolySmokesX said:
To say that time doesn't exist because we created arbitrary scales for it is like saying distance doesn't exist because a meter is different than a yard, or that volume doesn't exist because a liter is different than a quart. Just because the scale used to measure something was arbitrarily created by man, doesn't mean that that thing doesn't exist.
I also don't agree with your statement that our concept of time revolves around days and years. It doesn't. It revolves around the concept that things change, that time flows, and that every day is different than the last. We would still have a concept of time if we had evolved underground, unable to see the sun. We would probably define it differently, but the concept of time would still exist.
I don't think the theories based on the Linear Universe are correct, unfortunately the tech and math to prove or disprove is really damn hard or simply non-existent. I personally like to believe that the universe is flexible enough to allow really crazy/impossible shit to occur without imploding.., but without evidence to prove or disprove all we can go on is observations. When you consider the mostly excepted big bang theory requires that all the forces that hold matter together where at some point different, and requires the laws of physics to change from what they were to what they currently are, it's not hard to conclude that reality has much greater rules than we can, or will ever be able, to observe in our universe.
That said yes time exists as the 4th dimension (length, width, height, and time), all of which can be distorted and bent by crazy shit (like gravity), all the dimensions can be plotted on a graph. How you scale time can be as varied as how you measure the first 3.
Random side note, String theory has a minimum 6 dimensions (the last 2 dimensions being perspective concepts, since both time and matter can change by distance, speed, and proximity to other matter), allows for insane things to happen over time as perspective changes. Theoretical Physics is some fun shit, no doubt it.
That said yes time exists as the 4th dimension (length, width, height, and time), all of which can be distorted and bent by crazy shit (like gravity), all the dimensions can be plotted on a graph. How you scale time can be as varied as how you measure the first 3.
Random side note, String theory has a minimum 6 dimensions (the last 2 dimensions being perspective concepts, since both time and matter can change by distance, speed, and proximity to other matter), allows for insane things to happen over time as perspective changes. Theoretical Physics is some fun shit, no doubt it.
I've always loved that video.Frozen Donkey Wheel2 said:
Of course. We may have made an arbitrary scale to measure it based on the rotation of the earth, but time is not a man-made concept. We just quantified it.
I just gave you it. The eventual collapse of isotopes isn't subjective at all, nor is the directionality. If time WASN'T moving in a direction, atoms would decay or reverse-decay randomly. If time wasn't directional, it would be logically impossible to make any guesses about the future or past without them being absolutely wrong. But we CAN make theories about the past and future, so they both must exist.Snowy Rainbow said:
Past and future exist separately, and we can prove it by cause and effect.
If we feel the effect of a cause, the cause must logically have already happened, or is in the process of happening. This isn't our perception, it's a universal fact. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, but the initial action has to have already happened. This proved the past exist.
Now, the future is a bit trickier, and this is where people either refer to multiple timelines, or fixed points. But then quantum physics get involved and everything goes batshit.
It's been suggested that time as we think of it is largely a matter of human perception. In as much as I am mortal, and a day has a certain length, and my food supply is dictated by seasonal patterns and so on, though, disputing the "reality" of time generally seems to be about as meaningful as a man falling to his death proclaiming as he falls that gravity is nothing more than the pull of two masses upon one another.
err... ok. time actually exists. it's a tangible element of our universe. we can actually slow down time (albeit, not by very much) in certain experiments. time can be warped by gravitational forces as well (theoretically).
I think time is an effect that can be seen and felt in different ways, and that all man did was give time a label that man himself is able to understand.
You're considering time only as a measurement. That is completely a construct of men, just like any measurement is, because that is the whole point of measurements.
If you consider time as movement in a direction, it most likely exists, as things would *probably* never change without the progression of time.
Arguing over which is the correct way to define it is just a petty matter of semantics.
If you consider time as movement in a direction, it most likely exists, as things would *probably* never change without the progression of time.
Arguing over which is the correct way to define it is just a petty matter of semantics.
We actually measure time via the number of quantum events in specific radioactive elements. A second is defined as 9,192,631,770 periods of radioactive output by caesium-133. You could change an ordinary mechanical clock, but you try that with the ultra-accurate atomic clocks used for GPS usage, it simply would not work.XHolySmokesX said:
Otherwise, I saw a similar program a while ago, and I couldn't think of anything else for days. I had to stop watching similar programs because they were giving me migraines
I'm going to take a second to put some stuff to rest. I Wasn't very clear with my explanation, as i can see with the amount of people mentioning how i may be confusing time with a measurement for time, which i now realise is what i was doing, i wasn't trying to convey that measurements aren't real.
After reading all your posts i think i've come up with a better way of explaining what i meant:
If we take the idea of the measurement of time as what time is then time doesn't exist. Time, like how a meter is a measurement of distance, is a measurement of change. In this respect Time is a man made concept created to help us understand the concept of change. This then leads to the fact that our understanding of time is as a measurement and not as an actual physical 'thing'.
The idea that time doesn't exist was forged on the basis that time is not physical, and therefore cannot be interacted with in our demention...
It is impossible to travel from the 3rd to the 4th dimention, which in laymans terms means it is impossible to time-travel.
I believe this for the same reason that we cannot transition from the 3rd to the 2nd dimention. It is impossible for us to take away one of our dimentions, and for this reason it is impossible for us to add a dimention onto ourselves.
For us to add a dimention we would have to bring the 4th dimention down to our level. This is becasue atoms, as stated before, can only decay, and becasue of this the only way to time-travel would be to decay time to a 3rd dimentional level. This act could not be possible as dimentions are not physical, and therefore cannot be manipulated by something within themselves.
.
Ps: the phrase "the faster you go the slower you are going" means something different in the context of my ideas. It is not literally saying the faster YOU go the slower TIME is going, but rather the faster YOU move the slower YOUR BODY is working.
PPs: cheers for all the replies, i have thoroughly enjoyed reading them =)
After reading all your posts i think i've come up with a better way of explaining what i meant:
If we take the idea of the measurement of time as what time is then time doesn't exist. Time, like how a meter is a measurement of distance, is a measurement of change. In this respect Time is a man made concept created to help us understand the concept of change. This then leads to the fact that our understanding of time is as a measurement and not as an actual physical 'thing'.
The idea that time doesn't exist was forged on the basis that time is not physical, and therefore cannot be interacted with in our demention...
Now that all the background is out of the way here's my 'updated using physics' theory.
It is impossible to travel from the 3rd to the 4th dimention, which in laymans terms means it is impossible to time-travel.
I believe this for the same reason that we cannot transition from the 3rd to the 2nd dimention. It is impossible for us to take away one of our dimentions, and for this reason it is impossible for us to add a dimention onto ourselves.
For us to add a dimention we would have to bring the 4th dimention down to our level. This is becasue atoms, as stated before, can only decay, and becasue of this the only way to time-travel would be to decay time to a 3rd dimentional level. This act could not be possible as dimentions are not physical, and therefore cannot be manipulated by something within themselves.
.
Ps: the phrase "the faster you go the slower you are going" means something different in the context of my ideas. It is not literally saying the faster YOU go the slower TIME is going, but rather the faster YOU move the slower YOUR BODY is working.
PPs: cheers for all the replies, i have thoroughly enjoyed reading them =)
You seem to be talking more about measurement of time rather than time itself. Time is effectively a measurement of change. Although nothing changes solely due to time, they would not change without time. Time is how a cause is given effect.
EDIT: Good ninja-ing, there. The below is still relevant though.
In regards to time travel, I don't think it's possible without applying an inverse change which would affect the world in its present state and would not only be highly difficult to achieve but would also be rather silly. I don't believe that time exists so much as a dimension but it's open to discussion and certainly some interesting science-fiction has emerged from such contemplation of time.
EDIT: Good ninja-ing, there. The below is still relevant though.
In regards to time travel, I don't think it's possible without applying an inverse change which would affect the world in its present state and would not only be highly difficult to achieve but would also be rather silly. I don't believe that time exists so much as a dimension but it's open to discussion and certainly some interesting science-fiction has emerged from such contemplation of time.