What is time?

[skuzie]

I was thinking what Ghosh said about the inverse relation then it hit me, back to my example of 3 objects, object A travelling at the speed of light in relation to object C will naturally 'observe' object C as stationary, it must because it uses light to 'observe'! Think about it light travels as waves and the object is travelling along side with these light waves thus how can it 'observe' object C if all the indication of observing object C is performed by detecting light waves that are travelling along side with you. Now imagine if object A 'could' go faster then light, things would get crazy as object A would be observing object C reversing in time = going backwards! :shrug: since you are travelling ahead of the light emitted by object C from the past. If you are 10 light years from earth you will be basically looking back in time 10 years if you would look at earth right?

 

So, "Energy is not out of time but is what defines time" - very true, and i think the act of observing is really what defines time by making sense of the energy in a linear sequence of events. Through our senses we observe time, time would not exist otherwise.

 

Is time a dimension? i believe the observer defines the time the dimension, other wise this dimension does not exist, a rock has no senses, it has no concept of present and future, it exists .. period. :eek_big:

[questor]

if time does not exist as an entity, then how do you explain the half life of radioactive compounds? rocks do change over time. they undergo degeneration of different types. as do people. if time is merely an observation and not an entity, how do you explain what you see with your eyes?

[Little Bang]

Every event in the universe that we can see is the result of some interaction with a photon, no matter how small or how large. This implies that everything we see could have been written (for lack of a better word) on the continuum by a single photon created at the beginning. A single photon would experience no time therefore could write every possible event on the continuum for us to experience as time.

[Millard Alexander Dorsey]

Every event in the universe that we can see is the result of some interaction with a photon, no matter how small or how large. This implies that everything we see could have been written (for lack of a better word) on the continuum by a single photon created at the beginning. A single photon would experience no time therefore could write every possible event on the continuum for us to experience as time.

Would you speculate what medium carried the photon? Plasma soup, air, water, GOD, . I am listening and I feel what you are gathering. Evolution and space-time limits so many people who wish to argue one's credibility instead of flowing in the continuum as a photon (smile). I guess the gluon or even a virtual particle is closer to what I thought a few of our other egg-head friends were going to consider, instead they refuse to employ (in there evaluations) teh Feyman or even Maxwells equations.

 

DORSEY

[skuzie]

if time does not exist as an entity, then how do you explain the half life of radioactive compounds? rocks do change over time. they undergo degeneration of different types. as do people. if time is merely an observation and not an entity, how do you explain what you see with your eyes?

 

Suppose there are other dimensions that we are not aware of, if I were to ask you how do you experience the 7th dimention you would answear that its irrevelant since you dont, sure the 7th dimension might exist and it might affect you in some ways but you are totally unaware of it, so does it really exist? for something to exist as an entity is must first be observed, just like the 7th dimension. Now take our rock, ask the rock do you experience the dimension of time? If im being philosophical here well maybe because this is a philosophical forum! :shrug:

[Qfwfq]

Who are the egg-head friends,Millard Alexander Dorsey?

 

Please avoid remarks like this.

[arkain101]

I was thinking what Ghosh said about the inverse relation then it hit me, back to my example of 3 objects, object A travelling at the speed of light in relation to object C will naturally 'observe' object C as stationary, it must because it uses light to 'observe'! Think about it light travels as waves and the object is travelling along side with these light waves thus how can it 'observe' object C if all the indication of observing object C is performed by detecting light waves that are travelling along side with you. Now imagine if object A 'could' go faster then light, things would get crazy as object A would be observing object C reversing in time = going backwards! since you are travelling ahead of the light emitted by object C from the past. If you are 10 light years from earth you will be basically looking back in time 10 years if you would look at earth right?

 

So, "Energy is not out of time but is what defines time" - very true, and i think the act of observing is really what defines time by making sense of the energy in a linear sequence of events. Through our senses we observe time, time would not exist otherwise.

 

I know where you are coming from, but there are reasons it hasnt be so easily clarified. Light has been understood to always be measured at the same velocity in any frame of reference.

 

In your example, "Think about it light travels as waves and the object is travelling along side with these light waves thus how can it 'observe' object C if all the indication of observing object C is performed by detecting light waves that are travelling along side with you"

 

Both objects would measure the velocity of light in their observation has remaining consistent with "C", approx: 300,000km/sec. Because of this apparent law You can not travel along side a light wave. Each object you described is going to mathamatically reside in a different time flow rate or time zone in response to light never changing its speed. This has been measured to exist in reality and not only as an equation.

 

Light also travels in quantized packets. Each wave front of light or each photon, travels in a packet based off the constant known as Planks constant, which is 6.63x10-34 J/s. Light has been measured to act in steps of magnitude based off of this constant of 0,1,2,3.. integers of power. Known as a quantized manner and not a free linear matter (my poor explanation :shrug: ). Hence the founding of quantum physics. So EMR/light acts in very strange ways. Therefore the logic of Tieing time, with light, with velocity, with energy, with constants, is more complicated than meets the eye.

I have been wondering if time is the bases dimension in order for our reality and universe to exist. Light and matter are interchangeable, by a constant, and are not fixed in lets say, scale and characteristics, and because of this, imo, dont make up the fundementals of the universe. Time is important for the reality to occur. It is a feeling related to our consciousness, but it is also a dimension responsible for how Energy will respond. It can be considered as physical as our 3 dimensional space. Also, it can be considered as, supernatural and untangible to our consciousness. It has this duality, like light has the duality of particle action and wave action, in a non base, non fixed ..scale. And matter itself has also been predicted and observed to respond in this duality aswell, with the de Broglie Wavehttp://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/physics/quant/node6.html#SECTION002750000000000000000 effect.

[Little Bang]

Would you speculate what medium carried the photon? Plasma soup, air, water, GOD, .

 

I don't think you have yet fully understood what I'm saying. When that photon came into existance, it appeared everywhere instantly, no need of a medium. It enteracted with all POSSIBLE EVENTS instantly. In other words creating all possible events instantly. The speed limit of light is an observational limit, that's what we perceive as the speed of THE photon. From the point of view of THE photon it's speed is infinite.

[Little Bang]

if time does not exist as an entity, then how do you explain the half life of radioactive compounds?

 

Beta decay is one of the possible events created by that photon, Therefore we can experience that event.

[Boerseun]

Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.

 

- Douglas Adams.

[Jehu]

Please, the simple fact is we don’t know whether or not a photon experiences time, my guess is that it doesn’t experience much of anything. Likewise, we don’t know what a dimension even is, let alone how many there might be. Space, time, mass, energy, and motion/change, are clearly the fundamental elements of all things, that is to say, of reality, and as such, they cannot be things in themselves, and so cannot be independently perceived or thought about. Consequently, to speak of time as though it had an independent existence is meaningless. Time is not a thing, and so can only be expressed in terms of the other four elements, for it has no existence apart from them. Furthermore, not one of these five elements has ever been independently observed, and yet those who profess to worship only empirical evidence still cling tenaciously to the notion that they are somehow real! Scientists cannot fathom how energy might possibly translate into work, so they created an intermediary concept, “the force”, and then think we have solved the problem. But how then does energy translate into a force? Now as useful as these concepts might be at predicting the occurrence of future events, they merely describe what appears to be going on in the world, they do not explain it. On the other hand, the ancient wisdom tradition knew these elements well, far better than they are understood today. They knew them as spirit, water, earth, fire, and wind, but they are the very same elements. If you can understand that to which these five elements truly belong, you will have your answer to the question, “what is time?”, and the answer will astound you!

[Little Bang]

Jehu, I guess that I must bow to your obvious powers of intellect.

[Qfwfq]

Beta decay is one of the possible events created by that photon

:hihi:

n --> p + e- + nu

How is the photon creating the event?

[Qfwfq]

Scientists cannot fathom how energy might possibly translate into work, so they created an intermediary concept, “the force”, and then think we have solved the problem.

Actually "force" is a Newtonian concept that he defined in relation to quantity of motion. Energy as a term was adopted later, I can't remember the term anywhere in the Andrew Motte translation.

 

But how then does energy translate into a force?

That's actually less direct than the relation between Energy and work, which is a trivial matter of definition. Whatever the devil the two are, they are like your current account balance vs. single debit or credit movements:

 

Energy is the ability to perform work. <==> Work is the act of exchanging energy.

 

In a 20th century visual, energy and momentum are conserved quantities as described in Nöther's theorem, tightly related to space and time, while mass is just one addend of energy. Conserved quantities can be viewed as "some kind of a substance" although they don't appear as such to the layman, the way water or gold do.

 

On the other hand, the ancient wisdom tradition knew these elements well, far better than they are understood today. They knew them as spirit, water, earth, fire, and wind, but they are the very same elements. If you can understand that to which these five elements truly belong, you will have your answer to the question, “what is time?”, and the answer will astound you!

C'mon, shoot! Astound us!

[Millard Alexander Dorsey]

Who are the egg-head friends,Millard Alexander Dorsey?

 

Please avoid remarks like this.

I would never call you anything! I am sure you are not even an egghead! Why would you ask who are the eggies? Do you feel close to the point of reference, or closer to the speed of light?

Don't answer that; rest my friend, I would never call you an egg head.

[Qfwfq]

I didn't ask if you meant me, I asked who you meant.

[Millard Alexander Dorsey]

Actually "force" is a Newtonian concept that he defined in relation to quantity of motion. Energy as a term was adopted later, I can't remember the term anywhere in the Andrew Motte translation.

 

That's actually less direct than the relation between Energy and work, which is a trivial matter of definition. Whatever the devil the two are, they are like your current account balance vs. single debit or credit movements:

 

Energy is the ability to perform work. <==> Work is the act of exchanging energy.

 

In a 20th century visual, energy and momentum are conserved quantities as described in Nöther's theorem, tightly related to space and time, while mass is just one addend of energy. Conserved quantities can be viewed as "some kind of a substance" although they don't appear as such to the layman, the way water or gold do.

 

C'mon, shoot! Astound us!

I am an American Indian (Partly), my tribe was Blackfoot which became part of the Sioux Nation, during the unified body area. We knew that all events reoccured and the spirits were not prejudice to humans, rocks, birds,trees,water, every thing has a space-time relationship with every thing else. You have the right to claim the spirit of your ancestor this means you could have been an Eagle at one time, if evolution or Darwin's opinion is correct you were even a fishy kind of thing at one time. Quantum Mechanics at level 4, is entering the spiritual realm where all acts are instant i.e. thought. Observation is stopping energy long enough to react to it, or collide with it. (If A collides with B , than A1 and B1 are created) A will continue and B will continue but now A1,B1 will continue as

ab1, all that to suggest the "some kind of substance" is a spirit (maybe?).

 

DORSEY