Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#1916 06/17/05 02:46 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Dear Friends,

I have just gone thorugh the main article posted on website regarding the non-existence of time.
My question do we really undertand the time.
What is time ?
Time is movement and vice-versa.
Where you see absolute calmness with no movements you will see no time there..
I understand in such a scenario no experiments could ever be performed to verify it. Because the act of verification will disturb the calmness and thus time will come into existence...
I do not disagree or agree with the neagtion to time concept ...I would like to say that timelessness is an unprovable concept...
As far as Big Bang is considered Stirng theory has managed to push back time before the big bang(in the 11th Dimension) hence the time was always there as fas as Observable universe is concerned.
If there is more meat to authors claim then we would love to eat it.

.
#1917 06/17/05 04:20 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Do we understand time?
No.

Do we understand your statement?
"Time is movement and vice-versa."
No again.


DA Morgan
#1918 06/17/05 06:53 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
I really don't see why this gentleman's posit should sound so controversial. Maybe if I had read his book I would know. I always operated under the assumption that most people agree that time doesn't exist (independently), and that even in combination with movement, it is just a measure we have agreed on with the wink of an eye.

True, some expressions by Big Names about the possibility of time going in reverse, etc. do worry me a little. I sometimes feel that some otherwise brilliant people forget that while natural phenomena can be expressed mathematically, such expressions are just abstractions. When you try to translate some mathematical implications back to the real world, you can't do so indiscriminately, lest you end up with something similar to the well known anecdote of the computer who was asked to translate an English phrase to Russian, and back to English.
INPUT: The spirit is ready, but the flesh is weak
OUTPUT: The vodka is fine, but the meat is rotten.


Look again, look harder
#1919 06/18/05 12:37 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
U
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
U
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
Quote:
What is time ?
Time is what an honest clock reads. If you don't like oscillators, use radioactive decay. Movement is irrelevant to the operation of a clock.


Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz3.pdf
#1920 06/18/05 01:49 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Hello!

The formula no mass and no energy = no time is a
very human point of view. We could also say: no
brain = no time smile I mean, just because we can't
see it, it does not mean that it is not there.

We are limited to our senses, and until a mokey is
not able to explain what a zoo is, we are not able
to explain time.

Personally, I have my own theory. I think that
time is not going in a straight time line, like we
think it does.

I think, if you wold take a look from out of the
universe, the time would appear like an old
movie-roll. You would be able, to see all frames
from the beginning till the end at the same time smile

But every frame is interacting with the frame that
comes before. That would make it also possible, to
change things AND to have an absolute time.

At the same time.

#1921 06/18/05 02:08 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
R
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
R
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally posted by Uncle Al:
Quote:
What is time ?
Time is what an honest clock reads. If you don't like oscillators, use radioactive decay. Movement is irrelevant to the operation of a clock.
Well, Al, as I'm sure you already know, clocks do run faster or slower depending upon your velocity in measurements of time intervals in relation to another object. Early tests even showed that a clock on an aircraft would run slightly faster because it is further away from the Earth's gravitational pull. Acceleration of an object also affects time relative to another object, so an astronaut moving rapidly away from Earth, say, would have time travel slower for them than those the astronaut left behind. Wouldn't you call that type of movement being relative to clocks?

This, I think, is just one aspect of Lynd's theory; that there is no independent universal time, just motion and the forces that affect that motion. He proves this to some extent by demonstrating that bodies in motion cannot have an underlying time 'instant' assigned to it. Which also means that it has no real coordinate at any given time interval; unless you force an arbitrary 'instant' upon it, as we do. It's like an addendum to Einstein's theory. Lynd is a huge fan of Einstein, after all. If you read Lynd's paper he even dismisses 'imaginary time' in respect to the theoretical 'right angle' relative to 'normal time' that predicts and records anomalous time variances, such as gravity. In this sense time does not have any, for use of a better word, 'un-normal' behaviour because it is only the sequence of events that matters, not a concept of measured time.

I hope this made some modicum of sense.

#1922 06/18/05 03:47 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
M
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
M
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
Well I certainly agree with Rusty Rockets above explanation.
The fact that Scientists have compared two identical atomic clocks, one remained in the Laboratory on Earth, while the other flown around the Earth in a jet and found to run slower,
is good enough proof for me.
However there is another way to look at time.
Our 'human conception of time'. Our body time.
Or our aging process....is dependant and averaged upon our 3 score years +10.
Therefore perception of time must run differently for different species. i.e Time runs faster for
a mouse, or a fly, but slower for tortoise.
Maybe I am expounding an incorrect arguement, but
would 'time'...as perceived by a Photon, last
virtually forever?
And also, if an Atomic Bomb, about to go off, was accelerated to almost the speed of light...would
its end, be just a slow fizz?


.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.


#1923 06/20/05 03:24 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Hello Guys ,

I just oversimplified time...
Time and Entorpy has something in common ... both can only increase in the forward direction and no way can anyone reverse its direction..
therefore in my opinion Entropy relates to time in a more fundamental way...
Movement was a over simplifaction and those who undertand Relativity know it...
Btw have you ever seen relativistic Entorpy equation...?
I.e have you come across the fact that Entropy depends on the reference frame...
Btw clock is measuring device for a dimension called Time just as your meter tape is for space dimension...
Think more.

#1924 06/20/05 04:52 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Too many mistakes there ... beg your pardon for assaulting your taste of English ...

#1925 06/20/05 08:01 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
R
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
R
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
On a light-hearted note:

The crew of Red Dwarf - three million years from Earth - find a time machine:

Kryten: Sirs, choose any year.

Rimmer: Since we can't guarantee this time drive is going to function properly, I suggest we select a neutral time period for our first jaunt.

Lister: He's got a point. Let's go to someplace nice and safe and dull. How about 1422?

Cat: How about 1421?

Lister: What's the difference?

Cat: No difference. I just wanted to make it look like I was paying attention.

Rimmer: Load 1421, Kryten.

Kryten: 1421 loaded, sir. August 17th. Engaging the time drive.

Kryten pushes buttons on the remote control. The screen is filled with a flash of red light.

Lister: Hey, we did it!

Kryten: Indeed we did. All the ship's chronometers indicate that this is August the 16th, in the year 1421, just one day out.

Rimmer: Give us visual. Let's see what it's like out there. Lister: Okay, punching it up.

15. Quick shot of empty boring space.

16. Back to the Cockpit -

Lister: Again? We're still where we were!

Kryten: Of course. We're still in deep space, sir, only now we're in deep space in the 15th century. Isn't it wonderful?

Rimmer: So we're still three million years away from Earth?

Kryten: Well, yeah.

Lister: Taking her back to the present.

Kryten: Keyed in. Engaged.

Flash of red light again.

#1926 06/20/05 12:23 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
E
Member
Offline
Member
E
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
Time is continuity, just the other side of infinity.
Our universe, a finite derivative thereof,
a white hot ember, aflight,
is bound and determined by the song that molded our ride.

Now!time is a slide show.
As a wave travels through water, the cosmic background hosts life teleported from Now! to Now!
We step to the tune of the CMB,
Now! to Now!, at 300Ghz?, 2x10^-43?

My thoughts' of Planck!time always end with a smile.
Imagine the temerity,
We ascribe the point beyond which time itself can not peer.
We've created God in our own image, and he's returned the favor.

Or, Is this the point at which we lose touch with time,
by definition, the realization denied us for our ephemeral existence?
In time, free from unsanctioned intrusion, a universe is borne.

#1927 06/20/05 02:48 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Well, in the mean time I did read the paper, and to me it seems perfectly commonsensical, although I'm still unsure about one of his arguments. But, as far as I can see, no-one else here, except Mr. Rockets, did read it, or get it. Everyone seems to be enamoured with the concept of time as the fourth dimension, vainly holding on, maybe, to some secret hope of time travel.
I, for one, am more confident than ever now. There is no time dimension except in graphs. In the real world, there are only matter-energy units moving at relative speed to each other. And suddenly, the world seems normal again. Yes, I too lament the demise of time travel, but speculation won't bring Santa out of non-existence either.


Look again, look harder
#1928 06/20/05 03:06 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
U
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
U
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
Quote:
Well, Al, as I'm sure you already know, clocks do run faster or slower depending upon your velocity in measurements of time intervals in relation to another object.
NO!!!

Annalen der Physik 4 XVII pp. 891-921 (1905)

The clock that traverses the greatest amount of space accumulates the smallest amount of time. There is no change within an inertial frame of reference. It is only when clocks are made local and compared that the Twin Paradox (that is not paradoxical) arises.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012
Hafele-Keating Experiment

http://bkocay.cs.umanitoba.ca/Students/Theory.html
The distorted cube


Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz3.pdf
#1929 06/20/05 05:06 PM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 65
Y
Member
Offline
Member
Y
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 65
Of course there is such a thing as Time. There is a "before," a "now," and a "later."

It is easily measurable, and the fact that time passes is easily observable.

The fact that time is relative does not affect its existence.


Bwa ha ha haaaa!!
#1930 06/21/05 03:25 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Good Poem but it was more of a spiritual truth.
(every truth has to be spiritual in nature)
Let me add something more to Plank Time.
The Plank Time is Plank Distance divided by speed of light.. At that level the quantum events overshadow our definition of speed and thus in that space it is possible to go from one place to another in an instant...Therefore in my opinion the Time dimension collapses at Plank Scale... you want to know why ?it is simple imagine you wish to calculate Entropy of 2 atoms.. Entorpy is a statistical concept and collapses if we reduce the sample sapce ...
similarly time collapses the moment we reduce the scale to Planks level....
Or may be we enter a new "Time" dimension ... in a sense we do not understand.. for e.g assume that there is a 11th Dimension and there are billions of Gravitons floating around... then we can measure the Entorpy of the gravitons .. which will essentially imply that we have entered a new Time Dimension...
This is my original concept and I think it explains how consciousness is indepedent of Time...

#1931 06/21/05 03:41 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Please dont take my "original concept" idea seriously ... My originality is the reflection of Popular Science books, Discovery Channel , Web and my passion for Physics...
I never took the risk of becoming a Physicist..

#1932 06/21/05 01:09 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Gentlemen, gentlemen...
Lynd never said that there is no such thing as time. What he says is that it isn't existential, you can't isolate any atomic components of it, it doesn't obey any laws that would make it, say, turn in reverse, warp, or dance the hula, and you can't treat is as if it were just another direction.
There are links to his paper scattered all over these sites, you know. You might consider reading it before bashing it. (Dunno, that's my quirky way of thinking: Reading, then bashing... Maybe it's just me)


Look again, look harder
#1933 06/21/05 01:15 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
I hear you dkv,
We are in the same boat. Besides, it seems like the theoretical physics elite has been using calculus like ancient I Ching masters would use their little sticks. It doesn't really say anything, it just serves to validate their musings and make it all look cool.


Look again, look harder
#1934 06/22/05 03:26 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Calculus is a wonderful tool and surprisingly it has been very successful in its application because the world is so discreet.

#1935 06/28/05 06:50 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Certainly. No questions raised. What bothers me is that some venture to treat time as a dimension, of equal rights with dimensions of space. Sure, it can be represented as such mathematically, but let us please keep in mind that mathematical representations are metaphorical.


Look again, look harder
#1936 06/28/05 08:09 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
You wrote:
"but let us please keep in mind that mathematical representations are metaphorical."

What makes you so sure that this is true? On what basis do you conclude that this entire entity we refer to as "the universe" isn't constructed, as a fractal, from zeros and ones?

One thing history has taught us about the common man is that he is almost always wrong.


DA Morgan
#1937 06/29/05 01:25 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
E
Member
Offline
Member
E
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
Hi dkv, Thanks for the kind word. The poem's point was in accord with the Voice's, "Lynd never said that there is no such thing as time. What he says is that it isn't existential..."

Quantization of time may merely be a convenience; convenience related to the fundamentals of day to day life, to physical barriers or levels of understanding, and perhaps, ultimately, related to a fundamental iterative; that being the rate at which light/life is 'clocked' from Now! to Now! across the cosmic background ~regards

#1938 06/29/05 03:22 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Quantization is not for convenience.. it is required and no other possibility has been found to explian the observation.And I think it has been proved also.
In my opinion we have not fully understood time ...We havent discovered all the properties of time...
Let me ask you a more fundamental question ...
What is Dimension?

#1939 06/29/05 05:25 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
J
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
The documentairy " Killing time " is worth to watch in this aspect. John Barbour explains why time doesn't exist in the lineair form we think it has. Click lin video here http://noorderlicht.vpro.nl/afleveringen/2380593/ , the narrator is Dutch, but most is English ...

Also the paper from Peter Lynds is at the moment in the eye of scientist : http://www.peterlynds.net.nz/ ...
the paper "Time and Classical and Quantum Mechanics: Indeterminacy vs. Discontinuityis" is here http://peterlynds.net.nz/papers.html


greets Johan, the low countries
#1940 08/12/05 04:25 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 16
A
asm Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 16
I think time is a wave that controls the speed at which everything operates.

#1941 08/12/05 09:23 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
What is Wave?

#1942 08/12/05 06:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
The only thing we can state with any sense that we are correct is that time relates to an increase in entropy. Beyond that all comment is pure speculation.

Even the question of whether time is a fundamental property of the universe or is derived is uncertain.

My recommendation: Pick up a copy of Brian Green's "The Fabric of the Cosmos".


DA Morgan
#1943 08/13/05 02:09 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 51
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 51
Isn't it beautiful how before the invention of the "mechanical" clock and its obscuration of larger scale motion in favor of "turning" rather than "moving", of "feeding" us the time rather than having us "grow-our-own", isn't it beautiful how before all that, we used to coordinate our interactions so consciously with motion? (I'll meet you when that star moves over there, I'll find you when all these sands have finished moving from here to here).


So does time move forward or does it circle back over itself? Will we ever be able to definitively agree, even scientifically, on a definition which will allow only one of these?

#1944 08/13/05 02:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Restate your question:

"So does entropy move in one direction or does it sometimes spontaneously decrease?

The answer should be clear.


DA Morgan
#1945 08/13/05 09:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 92
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 92
Everything continually changes but that's not time. Time ticks me off. It doesn't exist. It's just handy for experiments and meetings and everything.

#1946 09/27/05 10:28 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If there is no Absolute Origin then do you care for the Time?

#1947 10/07/05 11:41 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Time is an illusion. You've been told this but I will explain it. your brain works in points of conscience, like a frame-rate for a movie. (this is determined by the speed at which your brain processes input) The brain is also aware of these points of conscious and can compare it to the input. this is why we have a sence of time.

A common question relevant to time is; "why doesn't time just suddenly go the other way and make everything that happens unhappen (and visa-versa.) The answer is, every particle is following a set of rules and everything is a product of these rules. your brain witnesses this as input and creates a sense of time. In truth, time doesn't exist, only particles following rules do.

(The stuff about conscience points is not scientifically proven but is a very well thought out theory of mine.)

#1948 10/12/05 03:15 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
D
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
D
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by Rob:
Time is an illusion. You've been told this but I will explain it. your brain works in points of conscience, like a frame-rate for a movie. (this is determined by the speed at which your brain processes input) The brain is also aware of these points of conscious and can compare it to the input. this is why we have a sence of time.

A common question relevant to time is; "why doesn't time just suddenly go the other way and make everything that happens unhappen (and visa-versa.) The answer is, every particle is following a set of rules and everything is a product of these rules. your brain witnesses this as input and creates a sense of time. In truth, time doesn't exist, only particles following rules do.

(The stuff about conscience points is not scientifically proven but is a very well thought out theory of mine.)
Time is inextricably linked with the increase of entropy. We are macro-scopic (the realm where this increase of entropy becomes apparent).

Therefore time is not an illusion, and it certainly does exist objectively - there is a definable physical quantity that increases with the forward direction of time, and would decrease if time was somehow reversed.

#1949 10/12/05 09:00 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Perhaps time IS reversing, and then going forwards again. And we don't realise because things just re-happen. Like rewinding a film and playing it again.

#1950 10/13/05 05:40 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
We have discovered that there is no Absolute Origin of Time there is an inherent limitations to the level we can agree upon the correct time...
These limitations are due to two reasons:
1.Qunatum Fluctuations.(Can not be synchronized as probability comes in to picture and the measuring scenario results in a non standard equipment making the whole world containing multiple realities or standards...)
2.Locations on the Geodesic.(can be synchronized clasically)

So,What is Time ?

Information - > Information Entropy ->Entropy-> Time

Thus Moving Back In Time(locally) = Loss of Information

Where this happens? Any guesses.

#1951 10/13/05 06:47 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 47
J
j6p Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 47
Could time be directly related to movement, if there is no movement there is no time? Everything in the universe moves but at different velocities relative to everything else so time is different for everything.
This leads me to a conclusion that before the universe came into existence there was no movement, no motion, no velocity. No time.
If this is the way time works then it would explain why there could never be backward time travel. Even if we walk backwards, time still goes forward because there is motion. And if the universe started collapsing in on itself, like some believe it could, time wouldn't reverse because there would still be motion. It's impossible to have "minus NO motion" happening - therefore it's impossible to go backwards in time.

#1952 10/13/05 09:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
Time is the human measurement of past present and future divided into seconds, minutes and hours days weeks years decades centuries milleniums ages and eons as the main elements. However this is only the human perspective. There are different aspects of time, the bible records that God measures time differently. However time is real factor, how we measure it is our understanding or appreciation of it. Time travel is a real probability yet to be discovered as soon as scientists realize that Einstein made a mistake in his formulae concerning time travel. He failed to provide the answer for the real way to time travel. This is missing from his formulae. In his formulae time travel is not possible because of the speed you would be travelling. However if he had thought a little harder he would have realized that he was on the right path but neglected two important factors. It is possible to move at the speed of light and yet be stationary. I hope this answers your question.

#1953 10/15/05 06:00 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Frankly I was avioding its detailed discussion for some reasons I can not tell you... just as it will be too revolutionary for everyone to digest.
Primarly it is related to Quantization of Time.
There exists a formula to Qunatized Time and its related Measurement(It is not necessarily Plankanian) .And second is the relation between Consciounsness and Time.Information in its most Binarical Form was considered a good approximation by me therefore I gave that explantion.Forget what I said.
=====================================
Could time be directly related to movement, if there is no movement there is no time?
REP: There is no movement.Absoltely No movement.
NOtice the word ABSOLUTELY. Relatively Yes.
Relative Movement is thus Time.Relative Measurements can only be carried out inside Time Dimension and not outside. Thus I explained in the best possible way what is TIME.
May God Bless You.
=========================================
This leads me to a conclusion that before the universe came into existence there was no movement, no motion, no velocity. No time.
RE: No TIme for exotica living outside my Time Dimension.In Balck HOle the Time Dimension is different that ours.
========================================
If this is the way time works then it would explain why there could never be backward time travel.
REP: Enough of Absoulte Backwardness.I told you time comes out as a result of Relative Motion.
Now you as a observer can only see of feel Relative Motion. Thus when you go back in time there is no Relative Motion infact the Backward Universe is Not Symmetrical to Our Universe.
The BACKWARD UNIVERSE HAS ONLY ONE PARTICLE ...
May God Bless You for Hearing me.
I cry.

#1954 10/19/05 01:25 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
what do you guys think of my formula for time?
Time = Present + (0.0recurring1 * infinity)

#1955 10/21/05 11:51 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
What about past and future in your formulae, what about movement, the movement of the universe is an element of time. Note, most of everything especially black holes move in a circular motion. Time on earth is measured by the turning on its axis. If the earth had not been turning and orbiting the sun at the same time, would our perspective of time be the same. So your formulae is ofcourse wrong, would you like me to correct it for you?

#1956 10/22/05 04:18 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
what do you guys think of my formula for time?
Time = Present + (0.0recurring1 * infinity)

ROB: Time is Dimension.. and if you want to express it as formula please wait .. as we you grow with our discussion.Go thorugh all the concepts discussed by Great Scientists ... dont miss Einstein , Feynman and Stephan Hawking.
Heisenberg had said a truth too heavy for his time and I dont think you should understand it the way he told..
Go through some of threads on MEasurement as well.

Wish you good luck.

#1957 10/24/05 09:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
Did time begin with the Big Bang?
________

#1958 10/25/05 03:10 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Did time begin with the Big Bang?
No.
The 3-D Spatial Location of Big Bang is not known.
It took palce in one of those so called Closed Dimensions.Some say it was the 11th Dimension.
That makes the number 11 very special.

#1959 11/02/05 01:36 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
The question what is time has generated many ideas and quotes, all of which are both entertaining and informative. There is a human element that I think was not adequately covered. I guess you could say there is real time and theoretical time. From my standpoint theoretical time deals with the scientific study of natural phenomenon where in altered time, as opposed to real time, is used to explain or try to explain some observed or tested happening.

Real time is what we live by. We are an Earth focused species that wants to interpret almost all circumstances in terms of Earth factors. Pick up an average book on astronomy and you will find almost all references in terms of Earth relation ships. Every planet has so many Earth days ? not rotations. Mass is shown as Earth =1 and then how the rest equate, like Jupiter is 317 times us.
My point is that if time was a stand alone fact Earth relationships are not at all meaning full in real time for what is going on in space. On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years? Time is an important measure only so long as it is not flexible. When we measure time it must relate to something specific. I will cut this short but it is important not to let clever or important theories, as yet evolving, influence your concept of when you must be at work tomorrow. For me time is a measure that we created to tell today from yesterday- never to be repeated, or duplicated in the exact same way.
jw

#1960 11/03/05 05:01 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
The question what is time has generated many ideas and quotes, all of which are both entertaining and informative. There is a human element that I think was not adequately covered. I guess you could say there is real time and theoretical time. From my standpoint theoretical time deals with the scientific study of natural phenomenon where in altered time, as opposed to real time, is used to explain or try to explain some observed or tested happening.
Real time is what we live by. We are an Earth focused species that wants to interpret almost all circumstances in terms of Earth factors.
REP: I dont want to give any privelge to any living species of Life.
Therefore such distinction is not required my theory.
==========================================
Pick up an average book on astronomy and you will find almost all references in terms of Earth relation ships. Every planet has so many Earth days ? not rotations. Mass is shown as Earth =1 and then how the rest equate, like Jupiter is 317 times us.
My point is that if time was a stand alone fact Earth relationships are not at all meaning full in real time for what is going on in space. On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?
REP: No.You can always standardize such simple cases. However please note that even after standarization there will always be relative difference in the measurement due to the finite speed of Information Spread.Making the inprinciple Clock Syncronization a false understanding of the nature of Time.
In short things are relative but to what extent is determined by Eintein's equation only(with subsequent corrections).
==========================================
Time is an important measure only so long as it is not flexible. When we measure time it must relate to something specific.
REP:"Specific" word sounds to me like an attempt to make an Absolute measurement.
Specific to me can be different from your specific.Time is not only an import measure but it is the foundation of Dimensional Growth.
========================================
I will cut this short but it is important not to let clever or important theories, as yet evolving, influence your concept of when you must be at work tomorrow. For me time is a measure that we created to tell today from yesterday- never to be repeated, or duplicated in the exact same way.
REP: Time is a consequence of relative understanding or measure.
===================================

#1961 11/04/05 05:23 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 127
Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 127
http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/051028_brain_time.html

"I would argue that time is more fundamental than space, because one can just close one's eyes and relive memories, going back in time, or prospectively go forward in time to predict something, without actually changing your position in space." -Duke neuroscientist Warren Meck

Circadian Clock: The most important rhythm in chronobiology is the circadian rhythm, which refers to an approximate 24-hour daily biological cycle; however, many other important cycles are also studied, including:

Infradian rhythms, which are long-term cycles, such as the annual migration or reproduction cycles found in certain animals or the human menstrual cycle.
Ultradian rhythms, which are short cycles, such as the 90-minute REM cycle in sleep or the 3 hour cycle of growth hormone production. They have periods of less than 24 hours.
Tidal rhythms, commonly observed in marine life, which follow the (roughly) 12-hour transition from high to low tide and back. -Wikipedia

http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.t...mp;filetype=pdf

"The mammalian circadian clock resides in neurons in the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). Our results suggest dynamic chromatin remodeling in the SCN occurs in response to a physiological stimulus in vivo".

Others believe time can be manipulated: http://www.timetravelfund.com/

"On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?"
-jjw004
Could you kindly explain this in more detail?

My take, do the best you can with the time you are given.

Sincerely,


"My God, it's full of stars!" -2010
#1962 11/05/05 10:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
Mung quotes:

?On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?"
-jjw004

Mung asks, ?Could you kindly explain this in more detail??

JW Rep: I am not sure what there is to explain. Suppose you were born on Mars instead of Earth. Your year would be about 686.95 sidereal days or you could say 686.95 Earth days that would mean nothing to you on Mars because your actual rotations (days) would be about 669.62. Also your day would not have 86,400 seconds because you rotate slower than the Earth giving you about 88,642 seconds in each day. When you grew up you would use a time schedule that made sense for Mars and you would not give a damn about Earth time. My reference to this circumstance was meant to emphasize how our time is invented relative to the Earth. If we live an average of 72 Earth years and lived 72 years on Mars we would (669.62/365.25) be living 1.83 times as long on Mars in the same number of years. I suppose I wanted to stress how focused we are on the Earth as if it was the center of everything. There is still the far out possibility that Earth time frames do not properly apply everywhere. Another example is that Pluto takes about 248 earth years to make one revolution around the Sun. By Earth standards we would not live more than a third of a revolution of Pluto. If organic aging is fixed to earth dwellers we can speculate it may be different elsewhere.
This helps?
jjw

#1963 11/07/05 06:03 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Time is not Organic or In-Organic.
Time is a Standard Measure defined by measuring intrument Clock.(Note that what is measured inside is anything with regularly periodicity giveing a sense of time)
For other Dimensions it is not so,unless we are looking at the crystal.
Therefore Time is always periodic it its manifestaion(eye based,feel based or heart based). Space is not required to be periodic ..Therefore a dual nature(organic-inorganic) is confined to Spatial Manifestation... There is always a possibility of findind a common Measuring Instrument.
However Qunatum Physics puts a limit on this ability and that all it does.
Therefore the relative measurement is relative only by the sense of relativity defined by Mr.Einstein and Quantum Physics .. nothing more .. nothing less (it hardly matter whether it was a 100 m race or 1000m race.We know which instrument to look at to realize how much time has passed)

#1964 11/07/05 06:48 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
How about this: at classical level, time is just a direct consequence of dynamics (motion).If there is no motion, there is no time. Perfect equilibrium means time hasno meaning. Non-equilibrium means gives time a meaning.

Leave neuroscientists alone on this one and think about the above.

#1965 11/07/05 07:42 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Great to hear from you after a long time.
What is equilibrium ?
When two opposites cancel out and remain in that State for time greater than 0.similary non-eqilibrium.
Thus both the Defintions requires exitence of Time.Thus it can not be the basis of Time Definition.
====================================

#1966 11/07/05 01:15 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
C
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
How about this (non rigorous) definition appropriate for a multiverse. smile

An observer is ultimately just an algorithm that processes information. If you assume a multivere then the same algorithm will be implemented in amy different sectors. Time evolution is defined by the algorithm itself. I.e. if the algoritm is run then it maps itself to another algorithm.

Example: The precise way my brain works defines me. If you put all this information in a computer and write a program that simulates me then that program is ''me''. But if you run to simulate 1 second of time evolution then the algorithm effectively changes (because the brain isn't static). So, a new ''me'' is obtained that differes slightly from the old ''me''. The new version of me has subjectively evolved 1 second, even if the simulation of that single second took 1 billion years of computation.

In a multiverse setting all possible versions of me exist. Some are related to each other via ''subjective time evolution'' as described in the above example. So, the class of all versions of me can be split into subsets that can be ordered according to the subjective time evolution. Each version of me exists in the multiverse. But each element will have a memory of a ''previous'' version which is defined by this ordering.

Here I've ignored interactions with the environment, but that won't spoil this argument.

#1967 11/07/05 05:59 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
dkv:"What is equilibrium ?When two opposites cancel out and remain in that State for time greater than 0.similary non-eqilibrium.
Thus both the Defintions requires exitence of Time.Thus it can not be the basis of Time Definition."

dkv,try harder.Rule of a thumb:first think, them talk/write. You don't need time to define equilibrium. Equilibrium means lack of change, nothing happens.Change(non-equilibrium) means events that follow one after the other (causally related). How many ticks of the clock you want to measure between two events is a matter of convenience and convention.

Ibliss, along the lines you like, I have recently heard a talk about gravity being described as a language, with all the correspondingbellsand whistles, syntax, forbidden sequences, entropy,etc. You might like this thing, it is along the lines of your arguments. Sounded interesting, but it's not my style.Look up Maya Paczuski, she gave the talk.

#1968 11/07/05 06:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
C
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
Pasti, that sounds intersting!

#1969 11/08/05 01:24 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
Hello to you Pasti; I will try again:

Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens.) and the Universe is full of motion. Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured. I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use. When they did the Einstein fly clock experiment one clock going with the Earths rotation gained a little and one clock going in retrograde rotation travel lost a little. Uncle Al offered somewhere that movement had nothing to do with clocks. Possibly correct, especially if they are based on the decay of elements. All normal clocks use a balance wheel of sorts which would equate to a pendulum which in turn has a motion dependent on gravity of location and rotation of the planet upon which it is situated. Gravity, for every day time functions is an important factor. The old hour glass with the falling sand might run slower on the Moon due to the reduced gravity slowing the rate of fall. Possibly ? as fast as on Earth. That would be true for any change of venue going faster or slower in relation to the Earth surface gravity being less or more. I think this would also apply to most normal clocks which rely on some form of the pendulum. I contend that in the real world time is relative but still only a measure created by humans to keep track of things.

Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured. No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason. So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect.
jjw

#1970 11/08/05 01:57 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
Hi Jim,

jjw:"Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens),and the Universe is full of motion."

Jim, time is not motion, it is related to motion. The concepts must be (and are) in fact completely different.

jjw:"Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured."

They are both right in a certain sense. Classically, galilean relativity tells you that in principle time could be absolute, while special relativity tells you that at high speed time is not absolute anymore.

jjw:"I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use."

Sure, no problem. But what do you mean by relative? In both instances I mentioned above, the words absolute and relative have a very exact meaning. What is the meaning of relative in the context of what you say?

jjw:"I contend that in the real world time is relative but still only a measure created by humans to keep track of things."

You can say that time is a human measure of keeping track of this.But this is only a "surface" argument. The more profound aspect is that as long as motion exists, nature itself orders events one after the other, so in this sense time is invented by nature itself, at the classical level.
As for the relativity that you mention, once again, you need to be more specific.

jjw:"Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured."

In special relativity you are correct, at least formally speaking. The "twins paradox" is well known, but one must be careful because it is an example referring only to the flow of time, not to the biological reaction to ageing with different time flows. Might sound like hair splitting, but it is worth mentioning.

jjw:"No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason."

May be true, but unfortunately you cannot use this as an argument pertaining to the nature of time.For the obvious reasons.

jjw:"So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect."

True, in principle. Unfortunately, not in the classical theory that you use. From the viewpoint of Newtonian gravity, time is not affected by gravity. Mechanical clocks and pendulums are affected by gravity, but not the physical quantity they measure,i.e. not time.
Things change if you go to general relativity, but as far as I understand, you don't want to use this theory (not to mention that it would really be an overkill to use it for planetary motion unless you have a very good reason).

#1971 11/09/05 06:32 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
There was some ghost here I lost my reply somewhere.
jjw:"Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens),and the Universe is full of motion."
Jim, time is not motion, it is related to motion. The concepts must be (and are) in fact completely different.
REP: Time is not motion.Time is A Dimension in
I-SAPCE. I-SPACE is pure Information holdable on any arbitary kind of Lowest Energy Matter Configuration.If the division of particles goes on indefintely on to the N+1 Value from N.
Then there exist a possibility of creating a Similars of the real world using a technology not understood by Us.
As we claim to not to understand my theory thus leaving a possibility of endless debate.
Therefore I am not last hope.
Many people will come and tell you the same thing.I told you in the most dramatized way as possible.Time is Information.Thats all.. Any Information means lack of Absoluteness in the Knowledge.Any claimed information which is not known is only the true information.Else it becomes a simple Reflex.With no information change.No relativity.I.which I associate to I-space is typical example of how We work.No one calls to tell you something you already know...No one takes any action whithout generating some ripple in the Abolute Knowledge.All actions have a purpose and you get affected by it.Thus Information in I space is Time.
===============================================
jjw:"Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured."
They are both right in a certain sense. Classically, galilean relativity tells you that in principle time could be absolute, while special relativity tells you that at high speed time is not absolute anymore.
REP: Yes.
================================
jjw:"I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use."
Sure, no problem. But what do you mean by relative? In both instances I mentioned above, the words absolute and relative have a very exact meaning. What is the meaning of relative in the context of what you say?
REP:Einteins wrote the equation but we need to solve it.
=================================
jjw:"Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured."
In special relativity you are correct, at least formally speaking. The "twins paradox" is well known, but one must be careful because it is an example referring only to the flow of time, not to the biological reaction to ageing with different time flows.
REP: Interesting I am impressed.
The Time I measure is something different and Time You measure is something different filled with all the possible bilogical consequences.. The Time Measurements are equally Valid.But the reality gets reflected in Higher or differnt combination of Dimensions or Qunatum States.
Higher Dimension Reduces Information.
Qunatum States Increase Information.
The Reality remains the Same.
But gets thorugh a Qunatum Evolution.With Observed facts depending on Spatial Locations.Everything can not be wirtten on one particle.It is everything.
=========================================
Might sound like hair splitting, but it is worth mentioning.
jjw:"No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason."
May be true, but unfortunately you cannot use this as an argument pertaining to the nature of time.For the obvious reasons.
jjw:"So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect."
True, in principle. Unfortunately, not in the classical theory that you use. From the viewpoint of Newtonian gravity, time is not affected by gravity. Mechanical clocks and pendulums are affected by gravity, but not the physical quantity they measure,i.e. not time.
Things change if you go to general relativity, but as far as I understand, you don't want to use this theory (not to mention that it would really be an overkill to use it for planetary motion unless you have a very good reason).
REP: Things are going through a Prism of Time...What you see depends on where you sit.

#1972 11/09/05 09:05 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
dkv,try harder.Rule of a thumb:first think, them talk/write.
You don't need time to define equilibrium. Equilibrium means lack of change, nothing happens.
REP:Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything.With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space.
==========================================
Change(non-equilibrium) means events that follow one after the other (causally related).
REP: Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... But the cause can be reconstructed using more and more Information from the Present.
But the loose Event(without cause) can never be explained fully because of lack of past data or understanding accuracy.
==========================================
How many ticks of the clock you want to measure between two events is a matter of convenience and convention.
REP: Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity gets manifested as Increase in Information in Gravity.
Resulting in Decay of Old Quantum gravitational Space-Time(Dimesion , State configuration) to New Quantum Gravitational State.
Notice that Configuration Decays and not Space-Time itself.Group Manifests itself in different Form with or without any link(due to finite speed of information spread).
==================================
Ibliss, along the lines you like, I have recently heard a talk about gravity being described as a language, with all the correspondingbellsand whistles, syntax, forbidden sequences, entropy,etc. You might like this thing, it is along the lines of your arguments. Sounded interesting, but it's not my style.Look up Maya Paczuski, she gave the talk
REP: Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully.

#1973 11/09/05 11:14 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
dkv, I won't even bother with your previous elucubrations about the universe and information. The only thing I will say is read more, learn more, and think more. Then talk/write.

dkv:"Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything."

Time is not in general periodic. In most cases it isn't, i.e. you don't have closed spacelike geodesics. As I said, read more, talk less.
As for your I-space, for the time being I will treat it simply as the fruit of your imagination.

dkv:"With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space."

Pure baloney. You don't understand neiter the issue of time nor the issue of its measurement. measurement,


dkv:"Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... "

You have no clue what causality means, in the context of GR. You are improvising with pitifully few resources.

dkv:"Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity ..."

"Alice in Wonderland" make infinitely more sense than your aberations.

dkv:"Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully."

Are you on some medication?Did you at the very least underdstand what I was trying to Ibliss?

What an utter waste of bandwidth dkv. You could spend much better the time you waste to pollute the forum, say by rading a book...

#1974 11/09/05 01:23 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
say is read more, learn more, and think more. Then talk/write.
REP: Not needed.
===========================================
dkv:"Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything."
Time is not in general periodic. In most cases it isn't, i.e. you don't have closed spacelike geodesics.
REP: We are talking about Time as an Independent dimension.Uncertainity Principle Puts a limit on it.And you are using the Word Geodesics which is
the net resultant of All the Dimesions involved.
===========================================
As I said, read more, talk less.
REP:How do you know that I dont know and am not well read.What proof do you have that I am an Idiot. :-))
That can not be criteria to argue.Take it cool.
=========================================
As for your I-space, for the time being I will treat it simply as the fruit of your imagination.
REP: THis space has Absolute Information Embedded in it .. The Actual Space is Dual in my imagiantion ... I-Space(absolute) and C-Space(relative).
========================================
dkv:"With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space."
Pure baloney. You don't understand neiter the issue of time nor the issue of its measurement.
measurement,
REP: AS I had said there are always two cases Measurment and No-Measurement with every event. I agree that Time is not simple concept to understand but since 0 dimesional objects can be created and studied on paper I think we can safely approximate Time as change in Information.
The rate of Change of Information (+ or-) reduces or increases the accuracy of time measuement. But the Time remains the same.Atomic Clocks are more accurate than digital ones.At any stage of Universe there exist a Way of Measuring Time by recalibrating or reconstructing the Clock by creating new Energy Wells within a new framework of reconfigured Dimension and States.
Much before the Black Hole Event Horizon.The Dimensions start changing its own Configurations.
What is observable there can be very different from what gets predicted here.
Relativity doesnt say that the Clock start running slowly in every frame.Relatively the values differ.But each of the Refernce Frames hold to their Times.The mixing of differentited Time and Space Configuration Produces A new Set Dimensions and Quantum States which is consistent with itself.I-Space projects the Reality in the fashion consistent with two reference frames.A return after 10 min journey and 100 year absence could result in some confusion if we assume that the Dimensional Configuration are same.Thats all I have to say right now.
=============================================
dkv:"Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... "
You have no clue what causality means, in the context of GR. You are improvising with pitifully few resources.
REP: Causality in the context of GR doesnt violate Cause and Effect Rule in Forward Time.
===========================================
dkv:"Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity ..."
"Alice in Wonderland" make infinitely more sense than your aberations.
REP: That wasnt a good argument against mine.
Alice in Wonderland has many parallels to the Quantum World as Observed By us but From Electrons View we can have A Different Truth. There are too many consequences of it. That I wish to open them slowly .. I guess there is no other way.
=====================================
dkv:"Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully."
Are you on some medication?Did you at the very least underdstand what I was trying to Ibliss?
What an utter waste of bandwidth dkv. You could spend much better the time you waste to pollute the forum, say by rading a book...
REP: Thats shows desperation of a weird kind when I wish yo make you a winner.
Go ahead and add your comments to the m-theory and I will reply.

#1975 06/20/05 04:52 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Too many mistakes there ... beg your pardon for assaulting your taste of English ...

#1976 06/20/05 08:01 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
R
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
R
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 175
On a light-hearted note:

The crew of Red Dwarf - three million years from Earth - find a time machine:

Kryten: Sirs, choose any year.

Rimmer: Since we can't guarantee this time drive is going to function properly, I suggest we select a neutral time period for our first jaunt.

Lister: He's got a point. Let's go to someplace nice and safe and dull. How about 1422?

Cat: How about 1421?

Lister: What's the difference?

Cat: No difference. I just wanted to make it look like I was paying attention.

Rimmer: Load 1421, Kryten.

Kryten: 1421 loaded, sir. August 17th. Engaging the time drive.

Kryten pushes buttons on the remote control. The screen is filled with a flash of red light.

Lister: Hey, we did it!

Kryten: Indeed we did. All the ship's chronometers indicate that this is August the 16th, in the year 1421, just one day out.

Rimmer: Give us visual. Let's see what it's like out there. Lister: Okay, punching it up.

15. Quick shot of empty boring space.

16. Back to the Cockpit -

Lister: Again? We're still where we were!

Kryten: Of course. We're still in deep space, sir, only now we're in deep space in the 15th century. Isn't it wonderful?

Rimmer: So we're still three million years away from Earth?

Kryten: Well, yeah.

Lister: Taking her back to the present.

Kryten: Keyed in. Engaged.

Flash of red light again.

#1977 06/20/05 12:23 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
E
Member
Offline
Member
E
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
Time is continuity, just the other side of infinity.
Our universe, a finite derivative thereof,
a white hot ember, aflight,
is bound and determined by the song that molded our ride.

Now!time is a slide show.
As a wave travels through water, the cosmic background hosts life teleported from Now! to Now!
We step to the tune of the CMB,
Now! to Now!, at 300Ghz?, 2x10^-43?

My thoughts' of Planck!time always end with a smile.
Imagine the temerity,
We ascribe the point beyond which time itself can not peer.
We've created God in our own image, and he's returned the favor.

Or, Is this the point at which we lose touch with time,
by definition, the realization denied us for our ephemeral existence?
In time, free from unsanctioned intrusion, a universe is borne.

#1978 06/20/05 02:48 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Well, in the mean time I did read the paper, and to me it seems perfectly commonsensical, although I'm still unsure about one of his arguments. But, as far as I can see, no-one else here, except Mr. Rockets, did read it, or get it. Everyone seems to be enamoured with the concept of time as the fourth dimension, vainly holding on, maybe, to some secret hope of time travel.
I, for one, am more confident than ever now. There is no time dimension except in graphs. In the real world, there are only matter-energy units moving at relative speed to each other. And suddenly, the world seems normal again. Yes, I too lament the demise of time travel, but speculation won't bring Santa out of non-existence either.


Look again, look harder
#1979 06/20/05 03:06 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
U
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
U
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 540
Quote:
Well, Al, as I'm sure you already know, clocks do run faster or slower depending upon your velocity in measurements of time intervals in relation to another object.
NO!!!

Annalen der Physik 4 XVII pp. 891-921 (1905)

The clock that traverses the greatest amount of space accumulates the smallest amount of time. There is no change within an inertial frame of reference. It is only when clocks are made local and compared that the Twin Paradox (that is not paradoxical) arises.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012
Hafele-Keating Experiment

http://bkocay.cs.umanitoba.ca/Students/Theory.html
The distorted cube


Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz3.pdf
#1980 06/20/05 05:06 PM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 65
Y
Member
Offline
Member
Y
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 65
Of course there is such a thing as Time. There is a "before," a "now," and a "later."

It is easily measurable, and the fact that time passes is easily observable.

The fact that time is relative does not affect its existence.


Bwa ha ha haaaa!!
#1981 06/21/05 03:25 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Good Poem but it was more of a spiritual truth.
(every truth has to be spiritual in nature)
Let me add something more to Plank Time.
The Plank Time is Plank Distance divided by speed of light.. At that level the quantum events overshadow our definition of speed and thus in that space it is possible to go from one place to another in an instant...Therefore in my opinion the Time dimension collapses at Plank Scale... you want to know why ?it is simple imagine you wish to calculate Entropy of 2 atoms.. Entorpy is a statistical concept and collapses if we reduce the sample sapce ...
similarly time collapses the moment we reduce the scale to Planks level....
Or may be we enter a new "Time" dimension ... in a sense we do not understand.. for e.g assume that there is a 11th Dimension and there are billions of Gravitons floating around... then we can measure the Entorpy of the gravitons .. which will essentially imply that we have entered a new Time Dimension...
This is my original concept and I think it explains how consciousness is indepedent of Time...

#1982 06/21/05 03:41 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Please dont take my "original concept" idea seriously ... My originality is the reflection of Popular Science books, Discovery Channel , Web and my passion for Physics...
I never took the risk of becoming a Physicist..

#1983 06/21/05 01:09 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Gentlemen, gentlemen...
Lynd never said that there is no such thing as time. What he says is that it isn't existential, you can't isolate any atomic components of it, it doesn't obey any laws that would make it, say, turn in reverse, warp, or dance the hula, and you can't treat is as if it were just another direction.
There are links to his paper scattered all over these sites, you know. You might consider reading it before bashing it. (Dunno, that's my quirky way of thinking: Reading, then bashing... Maybe it's just me)


Look again, look harder
#1984 06/21/05 01:15 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
I hear you dkv,
We are in the same boat. Besides, it seems like the theoretical physics elite has been using calculus like ancient I Ching masters would use their little sticks. It doesn't really say anything, it just serves to validate their musings and make it all look cool.


Look again, look harder
#1985 06/22/05 03:26 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Calculus is a wonderful tool and surprisingly it has been very successful in its application because the world is so discreet.

#1986 06/28/05 06:50 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
V
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
V
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 11
Certainly. No questions raised. What bothers me is that some venture to treat time as a dimension, of equal rights with dimensions of space. Sure, it can be represented as such mathematically, but let us please keep in mind that mathematical representations are metaphorical.


Look again, look harder
#1987 06/28/05 08:09 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
You wrote:
"but let us please keep in mind that mathematical representations are metaphorical."

What makes you so sure that this is true? On what basis do you conclude that this entire entity we refer to as "the universe" isn't constructed, as a fractal, from zeros and ones?

One thing history has taught us about the common man is that he is almost always wrong.


DA Morgan
#1988 06/29/05 01:25 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
E
Member
Offline
Member
E
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 60
Hi dkv, Thanks for the kind word. The poem's point was in accord with the Voice's, "Lynd never said that there is no such thing as time. What he says is that it isn't existential..."

Quantization of time may merely be a convenience; convenience related to the fundamentals of day to day life, to physical barriers or levels of understanding, and perhaps, ultimately, related to a fundamental iterative; that being the rate at which light/life is 'clocked' from Now! to Now! across the cosmic background ~regards

#1989 06/29/05 03:22 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Quantization is not for convenience.. it is required and no other possibility has been found to explian the observation.And I think it has been proved also.
In my opinion we have not fully understood time ...We havent discovered all the properties of time...
Let me ask you a more fundamental question ...
What is Dimension?

#1990 06/29/05 05:25 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
J
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
J
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2
The documentairy " Killing time " is worth to watch in this aspect. John Barbour explains why time doesn't exist in the lineair form we think it has. Click lin video here http://noorderlicht.vpro.nl/afleveringen/2380593/ , the narrator is Dutch, but most is English ...

Also the paper from Peter Lynds is at the moment in the eye of scientist : http://www.peterlynds.net.nz/ ...
the paper "Time and Classical and Quantum Mechanics: Indeterminacy vs. Discontinuityis" is here http://peterlynds.net.nz/papers.html


greets Johan, the low countries
#1991 08/12/05 04:25 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 16
A
asm Offline
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 16
I think time is a wave that controls the speed at which everything operates.

#1992 08/12/05 09:23 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
What is Wave?

#1993 08/12/05 06:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
The only thing we can state with any sense that we are correct is that time relates to an increase in entropy. Beyond that all comment is pure speculation.

Even the question of whether time is a fundamental property of the universe or is derived is uncertain.

My recommendation: Pick up a copy of Brian Green's "The Fabric of the Cosmos".


DA Morgan
#1994 08/13/05 02:09 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 51
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 51
Isn't it beautiful how before the invention of the "mechanical" clock and its obscuration of larger scale motion in favor of "turning" rather than "moving", of "feeding" us the time rather than having us "grow-our-own", isn't it beautiful how before all that, we used to coordinate our interactions so consciously with motion? (I'll meet you when that star moves over there, I'll find you when all these sands have finished moving from here to here).


So does time move forward or does it circle back over itself? Will we ever be able to definitively agree, even scientifically, on a definition which will allow only one of these?

#1995 08/13/05 02:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Restate your question:

"So does entropy move in one direction or does it sometimes spontaneously decrease?

The answer should be clear.


DA Morgan
#1996 08/13/05 09:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 92
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 92
Everything continually changes but that's not time. Time ticks me off. It doesn't exist. It's just handy for experiments and meetings and everything.

#1997 09/27/05 10:28 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If there is no Absolute Origin then do you care for the Time?

#1998 10/07/05 11:41 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Time is an illusion. You've been told this but I will explain it. your brain works in points of conscience, like a frame-rate for a movie. (this is determined by the speed at which your brain processes input) The brain is also aware of these points of conscious and can compare it to the input. this is why we have a sence of time.

A common question relevant to time is; "why doesn't time just suddenly go the other way and make everything that happens unhappen (and visa-versa.) The answer is, every particle is following a set of rules and everything is a product of these rules. your brain witnesses this as input and creates a sense of time. In truth, time doesn't exist, only particles following rules do.

(The stuff about conscience points is not scientifically proven but is a very well thought out theory of mine.)

#1999 10/12/05 03:15 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
D
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
D
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by Rob:
Time is an illusion. You've been told this but I will explain it. your brain works in points of conscience, like a frame-rate for a movie. (this is determined by the speed at which your brain processes input) The brain is also aware of these points of conscious and can compare it to the input. this is why we have a sence of time.

A common question relevant to time is; "why doesn't time just suddenly go the other way and make everything that happens unhappen (and visa-versa.) The answer is, every particle is following a set of rules and everything is a product of these rules. your brain witnesses this as input and creates a sense of time. In truth, time doesn't exist, only particles following rules do.

(The stuff about conscience points is not scientifically proven but is a very well thought out theory of mine.)
Time is inextricably linked with the increase of entropy. We are macro-scopic (the realm where this increase of entropy becomes apparent).

Therefore time is not an illusion, and it certainly does exist objectively - there is a definable physical quantity that increases with the forward direction of time, and would decrease if time was somehow reversed.

#2000 10/12/05 09:00 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Perhaps time IS reversing, and then going forwards again. And we don't realise because things just re-happen. Like rewinding a film and playing it again.

#2001 10/13/05 05:40 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
We have discovered that there is no Absolute Origin of Time there is an inherent limitations to the level we can agree upon the correct time...
These limitations are due to two reasons:
1.Qunatum Fluctuations.(Can not be synchronized as probability comes in to picture and the measuring scenario results in a non standard equipment making the whole world containing multiple realities or standards...)
2.Locations on the Geodesic.(can be synchronized clasically)

So,What is Time ?

Information - > Information Entropy ->Entropy-> Time

Thus Moving Back In Time(locally) = Loss of Information

Where this happens? Any guesses.

#2002 10/13/05 06:47 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 47
J
j6p Offline
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 47
Could time be directly related to movement, if there is no movement there is no time? Everything in the universe moves but at different velocities relative to everything else so time is different for everything.
This leads me to a conclusion that before the universe came into existence there was no movement, no motion, no velocity. No time.
If this is the way time works then it would explain why there could never be backward time travel. Even if we walk backwards, time still goes forward because there is motion. And if the universe started collapsing in on itself, like some believe it could, time wouldn't reverse because there would still be motion. It's impossible to have "minus NO motion" happening - therefore it's impossible to go backwards in time.

#2003 10/13/05 09:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
Time is the human measurement of past present and future divided into seconds, minutes and hours days weeks years decades centuries milleniums ages and eons as the main elements. However this is only the human perspective. There are different aspects of time, the bible records that God measures time differently. However time is real factor, how we measure it is our understanding or appreciation of it. Time travel is a real probability yet to be discovered as soon as scientists realize that Einstein made a mistake in his formulae concerning time travel. He failed to provide the answer for the real way to time travel. This is missing from his formulae. In his formulae time travel is not possible because of the speed you would be travelling. However if he had thought a little harder he would have realized that he was on the right path but neglected two important factors. It is possible to move at the speed of light and yet be stationary. I hope this answers your question.

#2004 10/15/05 06:00 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Frankly I was avioding its detailed discussion for some reasons I can not tell you... just as it will be too revolutionary for everyone to digest.
Primarly it is related to Quantization of Time.
There exists a formula to Qunatized Time and its related Measurement(It is not necessarily Plankanian) .And second is the relation between Consciounsness and Time.Information in its most Binarical Form was considered a good approximation by me therefore I gave that explantion.Forget what I said.
=====================================
Could time be directly related to movement, if there is no movement there is no time?
REP: There is no movement.Absoltely No movement.
NOtice the word ABSOLUTELY. Relatively Yes.
Relative Movement is thus Time.Relative Measurements can only be carried out inside Time Dimension and not outside. Thus I explained in the best possible way what is TIME.
May God Bless You.
=========================================
This leads me to a conclusion that before the universe came into existence there was no movement, no motion, no velocity. No time.
RE: No TIme for exotica living outside my Time Dimension.In Balck HOle the Time Dimension is different that ours.
========================================
If this is the way time works then it would explain why there could never be backward time travel.
REP: Enough of Absoulte Backwardness.I told you time comes out as a result of Relative Motion.
Now you as a observer can only see of feel Relative Motion. Thus when you go back in time there is no Relative Motion infact the Backward Universe is Not Symmetrical to Our Universe.
The BACKWARD UNIVERSE HAS ONLY ONE PARTICLE ...
May God Bless You for Hearing me.
I cry.

#2005 10/19/05 01:25 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
what do you guys think of my formula for time?
Time = Present + (0.0recurring1 * infinity)

#2006 10/21/05 11:51 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
What about past and future in your formulae, what about movement, the movement of the universe is an element of time. Note, most of everything especially black holes move in a circular motion. Time on earth is measured by the turning on its axis. If the earth had not been turning and orbiting the sun at the same time, would our perspective of time be the same. So your formulae is ofcourse wrong, would you like me to correct it for you?

#2007 10/22/05 04:18 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
what do you guys think of my formula for time?
Time = Present + (0.0recurring1 * infinity)

ROB: Time is Dimension.. and if you want to express it as formula please wait .. as we you grow with our discussion.Go thorugh all the concepts discussed by Great Scientists ... dont miss Einstein , Feynman and Stephan Hawking.
Heisenberg had said a truth too heavy for his time and I dont think you should understand it the way he told..
Go through some of threads on MEasurement as well.

Wish you good luck.

#2008 10/24/05 09:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 184
Did time begin with the Big Bang?
________

#2009 10/25/05 03:10 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Did time begin with the Big Bang?
No.
The 3-D Spatial Location of Big Bang is not known.
It took palce in one of those so called Closed Dimensions.Some say it was the 11th Dimension.
That makes the number 11 very special.

#2010 11/02/05 01:36 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
The question what is time has generated many ideas and quotes, all of which are both entertaining and informative. There is a human element that I think was not adequately covered. I guess you could say there is real time and theoretical time. From my standpoint theoretical time deals with the scientific study of natural phenomenon where in altered time, as opposed to real time, is used to explain or try to explain some observed or tested happening.

Real time is what we live by. We are an Earth focused species that wants to interpret almost all circumstances in terms of Earth factors. Pick up an average book on astronomy and you will find almost all references in terms of Earth relation ships. Every planet has so many Earth days ? not rotations. Mass is shown as Earth =1 and then how the rest equate, like Jupiter is 317 times us.
My point is that if time was a stand alone fact Earth relationships are not at all meaning full in real time for what is going on in space. On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years? Time is an important measure only so long as it is not flexible. When we measure time it must relate to something specific. I will cut this short but it is important not to let clever or important theories, as yet evolving, influence your concept of when you must be at work tomorrow. For me time is a measure that we created to tell today from yesterday- never to be repeated, or duplicated in the exact same way.
jw

#2011 11/03/05 05:01 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
The question what is time has generated many ideas and quotes, all of which are both entertaining and informative. There is a human element that I think was not adequately covered. I guess you could say there is real time and theoretical time. From my standpoint theoretical time deals with the scientific study of natural phenomenon where in altered time, as opposed to real time, is used to explain or try to explain some observed or tested happening.
Real time is what we live by. We are an Earth focused species that wants to interpret almost all circumstances in terms of Earth factors.
REP: I dont want to give any privelge to any living species of Life.
Therefore such distinction is not required my theory.
==========================================
Pick up an average book on astronomy and you will find almost all references in terms of Earth relation ships. Every planet has so many Earth days ? not rotations. Mass is shown as Earth =1 and then how the rest equate, like Jupiter is 317 times us.
My point is that if time was a stand alone fact Earth relationships are not at all meaning full in real time for what is going on in space. On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?
REP: No.You can always standardize such simple cases. However please note that even after standarization there will always be relative difference in the measurement due to the finite speed of Information Spread.Making the inprinciple Clock Syncronization a false understanding of the nature of Time.
In short things are relative but to what extent is determined by Eintein's equation only(with subsequent corrections).
==========================================
Time is an important measure only so long as it is not flexible. When we measure time it must relate to something specific.
REP:"Specific" word sounds to me like an attempt to make an Absolute measurement.
Specific to me can be different from your specific.Time is not only an import measure but it is the foundation of Dimensional Growth.
========================================
I will cut this short but it is important not to let clever or important theories, as yet evolving, influence your concept of when you must be at work tomorrow. For me time is a measure that we created to tell today from yesterday- never to be repeated, or duplicated in the exact same way.
REP: Time is a consequence of relative understanding or measure.
===================================

#2012 11/04/05 05:23 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 127
Offline
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 127
http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/051028_brain_time.html

"I would argue that time is more fundamental than space, because one can just close one's eyes and relive memories, going back in time, or prospectively go forward in time to predict something, without actually changing your position in space." -Duke neuroscientist Warren Meck

Circadian Clock: The most important rhythm in chronobiology is the circadian rhythm, which refers to an approximate 24-hour daily biological cycle; however, many other important cycles are also studied, including:

Infradian rhythms, which are long-term cycles, such as the annual migration or reproduction cycles found in certain animals or the human menstrual cycle.
Ultradian rhythms, which are short cycles, such as the 90-minute REM cycle in sleep or the 3 hour cycle of growth hormone production. They have periods of less than 24 hours.
Tidal rhythms, commonly observed in marine life, which follow the (roughly) 12-hour transition from high to low tide and back. -Wikipedia

http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.t...mp;filetype=pdf

"The mammalian circadian clock resides in neurons in the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). Our results suggest dynamic chromatin remodeling in the SCN occurs in response to a physiological stimulus in vivo".

Others believe time can be manipulated: http://www.timetravelfund.com/

"On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?"
-jjw004
Could you kindly explain this in more detail?

My take, do the best you can with the time you are given.

Sincerely,


"My God, it's full of stars!" -2010
#2013 11/05/05 10:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
Mung quotes:

?On planet Earth we live so many years composed of 365 days because it takes us that long to make a trip around the sun. If you lived on Mars it would take about 668 Earth days for the same trip, does that mean that time is traveling slower on Mars and we would live more days there in the same number of years or possibly would it mean more years?"
-jjw004

Mung asks, ?Could you kindly explain this in more detail??

JW Rep: I am not sure what there is to explain. Suppose you were born on Mars instead of Earth. Your year would be about 686.95 sidereal days or you could say 686.95 Earth days that would mean nothing to you on Mars because your actual rotations (days) would be about 669.62. Also your day would not have 86,400 seconds because you rotate slower than the Earth giving you about 88,642 seconds in each day. When you grew up you would use a time schedule that made sense for Mars and you would not give a damn about Earth time. My reference to this circumstance was meant to emphasize how our time is invented relative to the Earth. If we live an average of 72 Earth years and lived 72 years on Mars we would (669.62/365.25) be living 1.83 times as long on Mars in the same number of years. I suppose I wanted to stress how focused we are on the Earth as if it was the center of everything. There is still the far out possibility that Earth time frames do not properly apply everywhere. Another example is that Pluto takes about 248 earth years to make one revolution around the Sun. By Earth standards we would not live more than a third of a revolution of Pluto. If organic aging is fixed to earth dwellers we can speculate it may be different elsewhere.
This helps?
jjw

#2014 11/07/05 06:03 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Time is not Organic or In-Organic.
Time is a Standard Measure defined by measuring intrument Clock.(Note that what is measured inside is anything with regularly periodicity giveing a sense of time)
For other Dimensions it is not so,unless we are looking at the crystal.
Therefore Time is always periodic it its manifestaion(eye based,feel based or heart based). Space is not required to be periodic ..Therefore a dual nature(organic-inorganic) is confined to Spatial Manifestation... There is always a possibility of findind a common Measuring Instrument.
However Qunatum Physics puts a limit on this ability and that all it does.
Therefore the relative measurement is relative only by the sense of relativity defined by Mr.Einstein and Quantum Physics .. nothing more .. nothing less (it hardly matter whether it was a 100 m race or 1000m race.We know which instrument to look at to realize how much time has passed)

#2015 11/07/05 06:48 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
How about this: at classical level, time is just a direct consequence of dynamics (motion).If there is no motion, there is no time. Perfect equilibrium means time hasno meaning. Non-equilibrium means gives time a meaning.

Leave neuroscientists alone on this one and think about the above.

#2016 11/07/05 07:42 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Great to hear from you after a long time.
What is equilibrium ?
When two opposites cancel out and remain in that State for time greater than 0.similary non-eqilibrium.
Thus both the Defintions requires exitence of Time.Thus it can not be the basis of Time Definition.
====================================

#2017 11/07/05 01:15 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
C
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
How about this (non rigorous) definition appropriate for a multiverse. smile

An observer is ultimately just an algorithm that processes information. If you assume a multivere then the same algorithm will be implemented in amy different sectors. Time evolution is defined by the algorithm itself. I.e. if the algoritm is run then it maps itself to another algorithm.

Example: The precise way my brain works defines me. If you put all this information in a computer and write a program that simulates me then that program is ''me''. But if you run to simulate 1 second of time evolution then the algorithm effectively changes (because the brain isn't static). So, a new ''me'' is obtained that differes slightly from the old ''me''. The new version of me has subjectively evolved 1 second, even if the simulation of that single second took 1 billion years of computation.

In a multiverse setting all possible versions of me exist. Some are related to each other via ''subjective time evolution'' as described in the above example. So, the class of all versions of me can be split into subsets that can be ordered according to the subjective time evolution. Each version of me exists in the multiverse. But each element will have a memory of a ''previous'' version which is defined by this ordering.

Here I've ignored interactions with the environment, but that won't spoil this argument.

#2018 11/07/05 05:59 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
dkv:"What is equilibrium ?When two opposites cancel out and remain in that State for time greater than 0.similary non-eqilibrium.
Thus both the Defintions requires exitence of Time.Thus it can not be the basis of Time Definition."

dkv,try harder.Rule of a thumb:first think, them talk/write. You don't need time to define equilibrium. Equilibrium means lack of change, nothing happens.Change(non-equilibrium) means events that follow one after the other (causally related). How many ticks of the clock you want to measure between two events is a matter of convenience and convention.

Ibliss, along the lines you like, I have recently heard a talk about gravity being described as a language, with all the correspondingbellsand whistles, syntax, forbidden sequences, entropy,etc. You might like this thing, it is along the lines of your arguments. Sounded interesting, but it's not my style.Look up Maya Paczuski, she gave the talk.

#2019 11/07/05 06:22 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
C
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 375
Pasti, that sounds intersting!

#2020 11/08/05 01:24 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
Hello to you Pasti; I will try again:

Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens.) and the Universe is full of motion. Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured. I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use. When they did the Einstein fly clock experiment one clock going with the Earths rotation gained a little and one clock going in retrograde rotation travel lost a little. Uncle Al offered somewhere that movement had nothing to do with clocks. Possibly correct, especially if they are based on the decay of elements. All normal clocks use a balance wheel of sorts which would equate to a pendulum which in turn has a motion dependent on gravity of location and rotation of the planet upon which it is situated. Gravity, for every day time functions is an important factor. The old hour glass with the falling sand might run slower on the Moon due to the reduced gravity slowing the rate of fall. Possibly ? as fast as on Earth. That would be true for any change of venue going faster or slower in relation to the Earth surface gravity being less or more. I think this would also apply to most normal clocks which rely on some form of the pendulum. I contend that in the real world time is relative but still only a measure created by humans to keep track of things.

Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured. No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason. So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect.
jjw

#2021 11/08/05 01:57 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
Hi Jim,

jjw:"Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens),and the Universe is full of motion."

Jim, time is not motion, it is related to motion. The concepts must be (and are) in fact completely different.

jjw:"Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured."

They are both right in a certain sense. Classically, galilean relativity tells you that in principle time could be absolute, while special relativity tells you that at high speed time is not absolute anymore.

jjw:"I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use."

Sure, no problem. But what do you mean by relative? In both instances I mentioned above, the words absolute and relative have a very exact meaning. What is the meaning of relative in the context of what you say?

jjw:"I contend that in the real world time is relative but still only a measure created by humans to keep track of things."

You can say that time is a human measure of keeping track of this.But this is only a "surface" argument. The more profound aspect is that as long as motion exists, nature itself orders events one after the other, so in this sense time is invented by nature itself, at the classical level.
As for the relativity that you mention, once again, you need to be more specific.

jjw:"Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured."

In special relativity you are correct, at least formally speaking. The "twins paradox" is well known, but one must be careful because it is an example referring only to the flow of time, not to the biological reaction to ageing with different time flows. Might sound like hair splitting, but it is worth mentioning.

jjw:"No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason."

May be true, but unfortunately you cannot use this as an argument pertaining to the nature of time.For the obvious reasons.

jjw:"So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect."

True, in principle. Unfortunately, not in the classical theory that you use. From the viewpoint of Newtonian gravity, time is not affected by gravity. Mechanical clocks and pendulums are affected by gravity, but not the physical quantity they measure,i.e. not time.
Things change if you go to general relativity, but as far as I understand, you don't want to use this theory (not to mention that it would really be an overkill to use it for planetary motion unless you have a very good reason).

#2022 11/09/05 06:32 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
There was some ghost here I lost my reply somewhere.
jjw:"Various postings have described time as motion (seems to be logical, no motion nothing happens),and the Universe is full of motion."
Jim, time is not motion, it is related to motion. The concepts must be (and are) in fact completely different.
REP: Time is not motion.Time is A Dimension in
I-SAPCE. I-SPACE is pure Information holdable on any arbitary kind of Lowest Energy Matter Configuration.If the division of particles goes on indefintely on to the N+1 Value from N.
Then there exist a possibility of creating a Similars of the real world using a technology not understood by Us.
As we claim to not to understand my theory thus leaving a possibility of endless debate.
Therefore I am not last hope.
Many people will come and tell you the same thing.I told you in the most dramatized way as possible.Time is Information.Thats all.. Any Information means lack of Absoluteness in the Knowledge.Any claimed information which is not known is only the true information.Else it becomes a simple Reflex.With no information change.No relativity.I.which I associate to I-space is typical example of how We work.No one calls to tell you something you already know...No one takes any action whithout generating some ripple in the Abolute Knowledge.All actions have a purpose and you get affected by it.Thus Information in I space is Time.
===============================================
jjw:"Some offer that time is fixed and some make arguments suggesting that time differs dependent on the speed of movement wherein the time is measured."
They are both right in a certain sense. Classically, galilean relativity tells you that in principle time could be absolute, while special relativity tells you that at high speed time is not absolute anymore.
REP: Yes.
================================
jjw:"I suggest that time can be relative in the every day use."
Sure, no problem. But what do you mean by relative? In both instances I mentioned above, the words absolute and relative have a very exact meaning. What is the meaning of relative in the context of what you say?
REP:Einteins wrote the equation but we need to solve it.
=================================
jjw:"Returning to my last post I want to stress that ageing, as a measure of the passing of time may be environmentally related to the location of the person being measured."
In special relativity you are correct, at least formally speaking. The "twins paradox" is well known, but one must be careful because it is an example referring only to the flow of time, not to the biological reaction to ageing with different time flows.
REP: Interesting I am impressed.
The Time I measure is something different and Time You measure is something different filled with all the possible bilogical consequences.. The Time Measurements are equally Valid.But the reality gets reflected in Higher or differnt combination of Dimensions or Qunatum States.
Higher Dimension Reduces Information.
Qunatum States Increase Information.
The Reality remains the Same.
But gets thorugh a Qunatum Evolution.With Observed facts depending on Spatial Locations.Everything can not be wirtten on one particle.It is everything.
=========================================
Might sound like hair splitting, but it is worth mentioning.
jjw:"No one has spent a long time on any other planet so we have no criteria to compute. If gravity provides the wear and tare on our bodies not only would we live more comfortably on a planet with less gravitation we could actually live longer for the same reason."
May be true, but unfortunately you cannot use this as an argument pertaining to the nature of time.For the obvious reasons.
jjw:"So, what is time? To me it is a useful measure but also a variable related to location and gravitational effect."
True, in principle. Unfortunately, not in the classical theory that you use. From the viewpoint of Newtonian gravity, time is not affected by gravity. Mechanical clocks and pendulums are affected by gravity, but not the physical quantity they measure,i.e. not time.
Things change if you go to general relativity, but as far as I understand, you don't want to use this theory (not to mention that it would really be an overkill to use it for planetary motion unless you have a very good reason).
REP: Things are going through a Prism of Time...What you see depends on where you sit.

#2023 11/09/05 09:05 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
dkv,try harder.Rule of a thumb:first think, them talk/write.
You don't need time to define equilibrium. Equilibrium means lack of change, nothing happens.
REP:Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything.With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space.
==========================================
Change(non-equilibrium) means events that follow one after the other (causally related).
REP: Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... But the cause can be reconstructed using more and more Information from the Present.
But the loose Event(without cause) can never be explained fully because of lack of past data or understanding accuracy.
==========================================
How many ticks of the clock you want to measure between two events is a matter of convenience and convention.
REP: Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity gets manifested as Increase in Information in Gravity.
Resulting in Decay of Old Quantum gravitational Space-Time(Dimesion , State configuration) to New Quantum Gravitational State.
Notice that Configuration Decays and not Space-Time itself.Group Manifests itself in different Form with or without any link(due to finite speed of information spread).
==================================
Ibliss, along the lines you like, I have recently heard a talk about gravity being described as a language, with all the correspondingbellsand whistles, syntax, forbidden sequences, entropy,etc. You might like this thing, it is along the lines of your arguments. Sounded interesting, but it's not my style.Look up Maya Paczuski, she gave the talk
REP: Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully.

#2024 11/09/05 11:14 AM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
dkv, I won't even bother with your previous elucubrations about the universe and information. The only thing I will say is read more, learn more, and think more. Then talk/write.

dkv:"Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything."

Time is not in general periodic. In most cases it isn't, i.e. you don't have closed spacelike geodesics. As I said, read more, talk less.
As for your I-space, for the time being I will treat it simply as the fruit of your imagination.

dkv:"With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space."

Pure baloney. You don't understand neiter the issue of time nor the issue of its measurement. measurement,


dkv:"Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... "

You have no clue what causality means, in the context of GR. You are improvising with pitifully few resources.

dkv:"Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity ..."

"Alice in Wonderland" make infinitely more sense than your aberations.

dkv:"Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully."

Are you on some medication?Did you at the very least underdstand what I was trying to Ibliss?

What an utter waste of bandwidth dkv. You could spend much better the time you waste to pollute the forum, say by rading a book...

#2025 11/09/05 01:23 PM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
say is read more, learn more, and think more. Then talk/write.
REP: Not needed.
===========================================
dkv:"Nothing Happens Means No New Information Gets Generated.Now if this what you call is Time then you are little wrong because Time stands for Unique Periodic Variation of anything."
Time is not in general periodic. In most cases it isn't, i.e. you don't have closed spacelike geodesics.
REP: We are talking about Time as an Independent dimension.Uncertainity Principle Puts a limit on it.And you are using the Word Geodesics which is
the net resultant of All the Dimesions involved.
===========================================
As I said, read more, talk less.
REP:How do you know that I dont know and am not well read.What proof do you have that I am an Idiot. :-))
That can not be criteria to argue.Take it cool.
=========================================
As for your I-space, for the time being I will treat it simply as the fruit of your imagination.
REP: THis space has Absolute Information Embedded in it .. The Actual Space is Dual in my imagiantion ... I-Space(absolute) and C-Space(relative).
========================================
dkv:"With Pendulum or Register..And least it is periodic Variation of Information from 0 to 1 in I-Space."
Pure baloney. You don't understand neiter the issue of time nor the issue of its measurement.
measurement,
REP: AS I had said there are always two cases Measurment and No-Measurement with every event. I agree that Time is not simple concept to understand but since 0 dimesional objects can be created and studied on paper I think we can safely approximate Time as change in Information.
The rate of Change of Information (+ or-) reduces or increases the accuracy of time measuement. But the Time remains the same.Atomic Clocks are more accurate than digital ones.At any stage of Universe there exist a Way of Measuring Time by recalibrating or reconstructing the Clock by creating new Energy Wells within a new framework of reconfigured Dimension and States.
Much before the Black Hole Event Horizon.The Dimensions start changing its own Configurations.
What is observable there can be very different from what gets predicted here.
Relativity doesnt say that the Clock start running slowly in every frame.Relatively the values differ.But each of the Refernce Frames hold to their Times.The mixing of differentited Time and Space Configuration Produces A new Set Dimensions and Quantum States which is consistent with itself.I-Space projects the Reality in the fashion consistent with two reference frames.A return after 10 min journey and 100 year absence could result in some confusion if we assume that the Dimensional Configuration are same.Thats all I have to say right now.
=============================================
dkv:"Events are not necessarily Causally related because the Information can also get lost ... leaving a loose state of Event appearing without a cause... "
You have no clue what causality means, in the context of GR. You are improvising with pitifully few resources.
REP: Causality in the context of GR doesnt violate Cause and Effect Rule in Forward Time.
===========================================
dkv:"Yes thats why the ideal clock will use the Periodic Space-Time Decay as its standard(in principle).The periodic information you lost in Anti-Gravity ..."
"Alice in Wonderland" make infinitely more sense than your aberations.
REP: That wasnt a good argument against mine.
Alice in Wonderland has many parallels to the Quantum World as Observed By us but From Electrons View we can have A Different Truth. There are too many consequences of it. That I wish to open them slowly .. I guess there is no other way.
=====================================
dkv:"Try m-theory .. it explains beautifully."
Are you on some medication?Did you at the very least underdstand what I was trying to Ibliss?
What an utter waste of bandwidth dkv. You could spend much better the time you waste to pollute the forum, say by rading a book...
REP: Thats shows desperation of a weird kind when I wish yo make you a winner.
Go ahead and add your comments to the m-theory and I will reply.

#2026 11/09/05 04:44 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Question (from dvk):
"How do you know that I dont know and am not well read. What proof do you have that I am an Idiot"

Answer:
Reading what you have posted.

As Samuel Clemens wrote:
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

You have removed all doubt.


DA Morgan
#2027 11/10/05 04:37 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
So What do you say about it.
The theory is shining it its ability to express elegance and beauty and Universe..
A truth so simple that Einstein would have kissed me.But sadly the experiment required for its verification makes the Understanding Dual...
Very few understand truly the meaning of what Feynman and Einstein Said.
And there are fewer of the kind who understand what I mean.Pasti it appears is one of them...
He had impressed me with his discussion on the Number Transformation 'Trick' which I had used to show that Truth can not oscillate between Maths and Physics.The Entire Truth can be found in m-theroy.
===================================
Morgan has always been my mirror of arrogance and ignorance.
but in many ways he has helped me find my Answers.
So you are somewhere in the middle in my Universe.I refuse to accept anything lower than that...

#2028 11/10/05 04:18 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
Hm, you wonder whay you could be considered an idiot? Although I did not make such a statement, I will provide you with arguments in support of it.

Take the hypotheses of your theory. BTW,according to your statemets in that post, they are equally the proof and the fundamental assumptions of your theory! From the start this is a strong indication about the fact that you have no clue of what you are talking about.

dkv:"1.The Universe is composed of Groups of Information.(Single Valued , Multi Value.. etc)"

While it sounds pompous, it doesn't say much. You offer no proof or at least example on which your assumption is based.You also offer no definition of what your elucubration means, what it does, etc. You are just stringing words regardless of their meaning.

As the poet says: "It is easy to write verses/When you have nothing to say/Stringing empty words together/Riming only in the tail/"

dkv:"2.All the Groups Exist on Space Time (which is a line between Maths and Physics).Therefore all Groups attract."

This simply makes no sense.The Universe IS the the spacetime. This means,according to your above definition that spacetime is made of groups which are defined on spacetime, which is made of groups whih are defined defined on spacetime which is made of...etc. The conclusion would be that groups are defined on themselves, and what is more interesting, they also attract, whatever that means. Would you care to elucubrate, pardon me,elaborate on the details of your definition?

As I said, the Easter Bunny in "Alice in Wonderland" makes more sense than you do.

dkv:"3.No Absolute measurement is ever made.(It predicts that Space Itself always Travles at speed of Light but not the Measured Photon.. it is obvious when we see that Vaccum is not a Vaccum at all)or alternatively assume that a Mesurement is always always made.Also In other words it means that There is No Begining or End of an Experiment.. (punch line ...There is no Memory... or all memeory.)"

This does not make sense, once again.Space itself travels at the speed of light but not the photon?
Space itself travels in wha' at the speed of light? And the photon's speed is,in your acception, what?

As I said before, are you on any medication? 'cause it aint working!

dkv:"4.Let us assume that MultiDimensional Unique Quantum Garvitational States can be constructed."

Well,then construct one!This I would like to see, really. I am all ears.

dkv:"5.Let all events be equally likely."

This is patently untrue. In atomic physics,for example,you have forbidden events(transitions) and allowed transitions. So of all the possibilities/possible events, some are more likely and some are not likely at all. And of those that are likely to happen, some are more likely than the others (in spectroscopy, this is a known and proven experimental fact).

So exactly how would you characterize someone who talks non-sense, believes he is a genius,tries to convince the others that he is a genius by talking even more nonsense, and does not even want to perceive how ridiculous he is?

#2029 11/10/05 04:31 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
What is time? Stuff happening and being noticed by other stuff happening.
To be more specific: continuous cycles comparing themselves to other continuous cycles and some non-continuous cycles.

#2030 11/10/05 06:28 PM
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
A
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
A
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Rob: What is time? Stuff happening and being noticed by other stuff happening.
To be more specific: continuous cycles comparing themselves to other continuous cycles and some non-continuous cycles.

Noticed?

The "movement" of time can be thought of as the increase in entropy. As time goes on, entropy increases.

#2031 11/11/05 04:50 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
To be more specific: continuous cycles comparing themselves to other continuous cycles and some non-continuous cycles.
REP: That is close to the Truth.Cycles concept is important.It is Cyclic Part which we measure or can be measured for time.Rest is just renormalized against cyclic 'understanding'.

#2032 11/15/05 01:23 AM
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
J
jjw Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
J
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 636
dkv, take heart.

I do not understand you -but- I am not supposed to understand you. My concern is what will my condition be when and if I start to understand you? Cheers!
jw

#2033 11/16/05 01:43 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
the real question is; why isn't everything suspended in non- motion? The answer is; because of the rules of physics. Therefore, we see that time is merely a product of the rules of physics.

#2034 11/16/05 06:11 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 201
Rob:"the real question is; why isn't everything suspended in non- motion? The answer is; because of the rules of physics. Therefore, we see that time is merely a product of the rules of physics."

You are setting the stage for a circular argument. The remaining part of the argument you have omitted reads something like this:"...and the rules of physics are nothing else that the laws of nature expressed in a different (mathematical if you like it better) language, so time is merely a product of nature."

Now the circular argument is complete and you are back to the question of what time is.

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5