dad

Me too.

So time in your conception depends on other frames of reference.

The issue is where it actually works and where it is belief.

To assume something unknown without knowing, and without evidence is belief. Well, I know that Einstein felt time was a fourth dimension. Now for proof..? I think it is a lot more.

Let's say you are 40 years old. That time is due to relativity?

Excellent, you admit it is just belief and assumption.

OK. So you feel reality is outside of the realm of science, and we should ask others. As for relativity, time is 'modeled' a certain way. So it seems that what you offer is a limited concept and definition of time. In the theory of relativity, yes. Guess there is no way to test time far away?

If so, what is the evidence?

What is time according to science or in reality? I don't think they really know, do they? Let's see.

Show us how you think you know time exists in the far universe. The issue is what the basis is. Not listening to how much time someone claims something takes to move. Another lame point and silly baseless claim. Who says light cannot travel in an area where time may be different than here?? Makes no sense. If time were woven in space in a way where (for example) there was less time in the mix...then it would take less time as we know it to move there...(not here)

You have no math that even addresses the issue. Face it. The math has to stand for something..represent something...you know...speed of light..etc... the issue is what the symbols represent, not whether you can spam a page of bogus math.

Relativity does not apply to time in deep space unless it existed. You are trying to obfuscate.

You cannot use identical clocks. Not in deep space. You may see two things move, but that does not tell us time exists as we know it on earth in any way at all. Now if you want to try and relate some of this seemingly random gibberish to the issue, try to do so. One cannot use the Lorentz transformation in deep space for time determinations. You have movement relative to other things THERE. Not here.

What deceptive falsehood. You observed nothing that involves proving time exists exactly as it does here at all. You also do not measure objects as far as size or distance unless time exists there.

Says who??? Who made that rule? Time does not have to be woven into space the same way as we know it here in order to have things move!!!! That is ridiculous. Only based on assuming time exists! You have yet to evidence that in any way at all. Until you do, you have NO way of determining ages. Only those who claim to know one way or the other need show evidence and boy do you need to show some!!!

Vague balderdash. What measure for time existing do you have?

You thought you could see time?? How would something behave if time was, say, less in the space time mix than here? If there was less or no time how could anything take the same time we know to do anything!? I think a better way to state what you were trying to say would be something like 'here in fishbowl earth, to us, it looks a certain way out there'. Well, that is overstated. Yes we have a lot of the same elements, but our ability to see and may not be such as that we see and detect all that really is out there. Regardless of that though that does not address the issue of whether time exists out there. You have models that use earth time and space. The consistency is relative to the place we are...where time does exist. Naturally to us it looks or seems like time golly gee just must be the same out there. You have the opportunity to show cosmology is more than that. A big fail so far. I do understand that it is a sensitive area for many, to have to face the truth science is a belief system only. Forget what we think. What do we know?

That is not a reason. What evidence could there be that time existed the same in deep space? You really really are preaching pure religion here.

There's no evidence to suggest that time is the same everywhere, so why do you think it would be the same throughout the Universe? Unless you have some real solid reasons, we will see that you do not know. I find it better to deal with what is known, rather than religion labeled as science. Surely you must have a reason for thinking that time might be the same across the Universe, don't you? What's that reason? If you have none it will remain a belief only. Funny thing is that this belief underlies cosmology and all it tells us about the universe.

If you do not know whether time exists in the universe how would you know that?

That is irrelevant. The issue is whether you have any evidence time exists and exists as we know it here or not. It doesn't matter what you ans I think. For a year to be a year in deep space we need time and need it exactly as we have it here. Otherwise a year could be equal to a minute, a second, or etc etc. Unknown. That would mean light years are useless units. That would mean the universe in not billions of years old either of course.

I never made any claim. I asked if we know.

Does time as we know it exist, or exist exactly the same as on and near earth? This may be unknown, so here is your chance to prove...or rather support with solid evidences that is does! If time does not exist, that means we do not know the distances to any far star. After all we need time for light to travel..light years etc etc. That would mean cosmology is basically a religion, or belief system only.