Does "time" really exist?

originally posted by: greenreflections
a reply to: PhotonEffect

We've created a measurement of time using clocks and watches and sun dials, all human tools

I disagree. My cat can catch a toy I kick in the air. For my cat to do it, it must have sense of timing which leads to anticipation of best catch trajectory spot. That carbon based life form, that leaves tons of hair on the carpet, has built in 'watch-timer'!

Right, which supports what I'm saying that you can not occupy a certain space (physical dimensions) without a specific time (temporal dimension) location. Had your cat not jumped into that space at the exact moment the toy passed over it, then it would not have caught the toy. He and the toy existed in the same spacial location at the same temporal location for that to have occurred.

a reply to: PhotonEffect

Right, which supports what I'm saying that you can not occupy a certain space (physical dimensions) without a specific time (temporal dimension) location.

Why not? What physical law does this violate?


In above post I was trying to make difference between term 'dimension' and how 'time' can be disregarded. Like when you need to find a location on google map, do you really care when exactly that map snapshot was taken?

What we call 'time' is really a measure of duration of a certain event, like duration of nuclear decay.

a reply to: greenreflections

Yes time is a duration, but this, like length, width, height, is a measurement.

Time is also a coordinate in space.

Think of a dimension as a way to specify the state of an object, or an event.
Anything in the universe happens at some place (denotable by the three space dimensions) and at some point of time. These together form an event in spacetime. Put in another way, to completely understand the state of an object or event, you need to know not only it's position, but also the time at which it was in the stated position. Hence, time must be a dimension (but not necessarily the 4th dimension). You can not define the location of an object in space without specifying a time for it to be in that location. If you prefer to think of this in terms of coordinates or vectors instead, then fine. It's still the same idea, which I think by now I've stated 4 different ways...

But at the minimum, you need 4 coordinates (dimensions) to define/describe/state etc etc the location of an object or event in space. Which is why space and time are inextricably linked. Now yes, time as a dimension acts differently than the 3 spatial dimensions. You can only "move" in one direction with time, where as with the other 3 you are free to move in anyway you please. Perhaps this so called "movement" through time is what causes confusion and conjures up tales of illusory existence.

No matter, without time nothing would exist, at least not now. But if not now, then when? If we don't know when, then where does not matter in the least.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Time could be a kind of result manifesting as experience and not really a cause behind the events in objective reality.

Perhaps the movement of objects create time as some kind of outcome to the mind, at least consequentially "after" their movement.

I guess then without time at all, all things would be motionless.

a reply to: PhotonEffect

Yes time is a duration, but this, like length, width, height, is a measurement.

I do not insist. I was trying to make a point that from the perspective on 'now' only 'duration' can be defined. But for the sake of an argument I will comment on your line above. All these are making sense as long as you using a ruler (small scale measurements), but if you are to measure length of an oil tanker or a length of the road from here to the next town, you will see that all of these you mentioned are also a 'duration'.

As the last, in cosmology our universe is described as 3D + Time. It is for a reason. Otherwise it would be called just 4D universe (time included).

Time is also a coordinate in space.

How is it coordinate in space? To me it makes no sense. I can assign to time value of zero (T=0), but I cannot do the same to the other three dimensions without losing the meaning. T=0 will indicate an 'instance' at any given point in time, imo.

Time unites and is common to spatial dimensions. It itself apparent in presence of matter, otherwise invisible. Like in case where you sit in a room and put a feather next to AC to make sure air is blowing out.

Unlike spatial dimensions, time has a defined arrow, a direction which you can see only when you put a 'feather' on it (populate spatial dimensions with matter). Without matter time flux is still there but has no tangible meaning. Or does it?


thanks


cheers!!)))

a reply to: greenreflections

Without matter time flux is still there but has no tangible meaning. Or does it?

I personally think it does. It sets 'cause and effect' rule which points to time having an arrow.
Following idea, really crazy one, is that expansion of the universe is driven by that arrow of time (the flux). )) That would mean that time 'moves' with the speed of c and if any part of energy field moving slower than c , it is becoming 'inertial mass' and subject to cause and effect.

Time forces matter to undergo changes.

Yes time exist. The expansion of the universe is what created time. That, the fact that we can even perceive time is because our planet orbits a star.

originally posted by: Artorias
Yes time exist. The expansion of the universe is what created time. That, the fact that we can even perceive time is because our planet orbits a star.

may be the other way around)) Time is driving universe expansion?

Something must set things (matter) in motion. In physics to set an object in motion, force must be applied to it. Matter does not move on its own, it does not have a propellant like little jet engines. Hence 'dark energy' hypothesis. Safe to assume at this point that time flux moves at the speed of light just as speed of universe expansion.

Except for 'life'. I, a physical object, can stand up from my desk and start moving and NO force was applied on me.

Time is a 'product' of more fundamental processes.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Does "time" really exist?


Nothing exists, when one is void.

originally posted by: FTURE
a reply to: dfnj2015

Does "time" really exist?


Nothing exists, when one is void.

please elaborate in few words if you could.

originally posted by: greenreflections

originally posted by: FTURE
a reply to: dfnj2015

Does "time" really exist?


Nothing exists, when one is void.

please elaborate in few words if you could.

I thought I did?

a reply to: greenreflections

As the last, in cosmology our universe is described as 3D + Time. It is for a reason. Otherwise it would be called just 4D universe (time included).

In one dimension, you have a line. Two dimensions make a flat plane. Three dimensions make a cube. Each time we go up a dimension, it doubles the "corners" or end points of measure. Time alone can not be the fourth dimension, there must be three additional properties to go along with it. There would also have to be reversed time. Can't have an up without a down. I have seen the fourth dimension explained as two cubes, linked together at every corner.

As far as time itself, it can't possibly exist as we understand it. It must be a byproduct of something else. Centrifugal force is based on angular deflection over time, where the major factor is the speed of the object. Can't get speed without time. I heard it said, the equator of the planet is moving approximately 1000MPH. At the poles, there is only rotational speed. One spin a day. That is a huge difference in the amount of force that gravity would have to overcome, to hold you to the planet. Yet, there is very little weight difference between the same object at each place. We know centrifugal force pushes outward over time, and gravity pulls inward over time. The common denominator is time. There is no equation you could produce that would explain this with time remaining a constant.

The only choices for a conclusion can be:
1. Time does not exist.
2. We are not on a spinning ball.
3. Centrifugal force amplifies gravity or gravity negates Centrifugal force almost completely.
4. We are in a simulation where rules were bent to create our reality.
5. Gravity is an energy field that is much stronger at the equator, destroying current thinking.
6. Some other seemingly impossible situation.

Welcome to my rabbit hole, hope you like the view.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

What can you sense? What is perceived is sensed - with the senses. Can you smell the past or hear the future?

Of course you can - certain smells trigger the past to be felt in real time (as in now)

health.howstuffworks.com...

A smell can bring on a flood of memories, influence people's moods and even affect their work performance. Because the olfactory bulb is part of the brain's limbic system, an area so closely associated with memory and feeling it's sometimes called the "emotional brain," smell can call up memories and powerful responses almost instantaneously. The olfactory bulb has intimate access to the amygdala, which processes emotion, and the hippocampus, which is responsible for associative learning. Despite the tight wiring, however, smells would not trigger memories if it weren't for conditioned responses. When you first smell a new scent, you link it to an event, a person, a thing or even a moment. Your brain forges a link between the smell and a memory -- associating the smell of chlorine with summers at the pool or lilies with a funeral. When you encounter the smell again, the link is already there, ready to elicit a memory or a mood.

Try this experiment - open a container of bleach and drink it - see why your living in the now will kill you - By that I mean that without the "yesterday" (where you learned of the poisonous nature) you would not know the difference between Chlorine or Beer. Living in the now is great to help relieve suffering and I understand that your intentions are trying to be helpful to the human condition.

To live in your world one would have to be constantly asleep and dreaming - the reason consciousness and reflection became a thing is a survival imperative.

Living in the now is a great way to train thoughtless killing machine's that react without reflection.

'You' only pretend time so you can seem to have some control

I don't have control over time - I have control as to what importance I place over certain activities that to some other may be "time wasting" yet to me are fruitful.

Keep it simple - I place money in a bank so time & interest allows my money to grow (minus inflation) - I could convert my money into ice creams and watch them melt in a short space of time. I make a conscious effort to make time work for me.
In most of posts on ATS you carefully avoid using the word "planning" Why is that?

I now dive into the absurd ( we have had these discussions before) - Was there ever a time that you sat on a toilet and wished you had replenished your toilet rolls ahead of time. Be honest - how did you alleviate suffering by not buying those extra rolls? What "living in the now benefit" did you derive? In all honesty you would be the author of your own suffering if you didn't live partially in the future. Taken to its logical conclusion your philosophy doesn't just do away with suffering - it is inimical to life.

a reply to: bill3969

In one dimension, you have a line. Two dimensions make a flat plane. Three dimensions make a cube.

I don't think it is right. I can view the cube from six independent sides. I can color each side and six times see different color.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

The funny thing is that the Buddha was supposedly a rich prince who gave it all away to find the answer to suffering.
If people lived in the now constantly which is prevalent if one looks at the level of savings to debt, people would be always suffering in debt.

Put another way, saving today (in the now) for tomorrow relieves the suffering of tomorrow

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

The funny thing is that the Buddha was supposedly a rich prince who gave it all away to find the answer to suffering.
If people lived in the now constantly which is prevalent if one looks at the level of savings to debt, people would be always suffering in debt.

Put another way, saving today (in the now) for tomorrow relieves the suffering of tomorrow

Not true. 'Life' becomes 'life' only when it benefits of changes (sustains current state regardless of surrounding changes). It is mechanism with no loss. It is where every change is a try to accommodate further stable bond.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

The seer and seen happen at the same time.

No they dont - that's the biggest untruth you keep repeating - there is a delay between what the seer sees (through the agency of consciousness) and what happens at the same time


www.rt.com...

Scientists have revealed the human brain has a 15-second lag that helps stabilize incoming visual information, which we don’t notice bombarding us in the course of our everyday lives.
Eyes tend to receive an enormous information load from dusk till dawn, and as one opens his or her eyes in the morning, the brain starts its intensive work, processing incoming pictures from the surroundings, including imagery from TV screens and computer monitors. A team of vision scientists at the University of California, Berkeley and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) revealed this secret of the human brain: To save us from insanity induced by a constantly changing torrent of pictures, shapes and colors – both virtual and real world – the brain filters out information, failing in most cases to notice small changes in a 15-second period of time.

a reply to: greenreflections

I don't think it is right. I can view the cube from six independent sides. I can color each side and six times see different color.

It takes 3 coordinates to make a cube. X,y, and z. Graphical representation would be a cube. A cube has 8 corners. Each side would be a 2 dimension structure, then stack them together to make the other axis. Lines stacked make a sheet of paper, paper stacked makes a cube of paper. Question is what makes the next axis? How do we stack cubes? We can now move in any direction in our 3 axis system. If time were the 4th axis, we could only move in one direction. Where is the opposite direction?

a reply to: bill3969

It takes 3 coordinates to make a cube. X,y, and z

you just now have defined a coordinate of a point.

A cube has 8 corners. Each side would be a 2 dimension structure

so, how many 2D dimension it takes to form a cube? May be six? No? You see, you give no number of 'flat dimensions' to get a cube.

And why cube? With pyramid I can give you even less 'points'. I can color each side of the pyramid and get five different colors (sides).


cheers)

a reply to: greenreflections

- in physics to move physical object, the force has to be applied to it. Now, I can get up and start walking without any external input!!!! I just get up from my chair and start moving and NO force was applied on me!!

I like this !