time exists?

[Guest danydrunk]

This is just something i thought about, its just a thought, correct me if im wrong, im not a scientist, just like to think about things:

 

Time does not exist as most people imagine it. Only movement and space. "Time" is a way to measure an amount of movement, we say "one day" but we really are just refering to the rotation of earth, we then picture everything we did in that day and see it as a progression of events related to morning, night, and other movements we can use to measure our activities, but the truth is that matter does not exist in a time line, it just "exists" in an infinite instant, changing its form, location, etc. Time travel as imagined, is not possible, since, there is no time, we can't travel in it, it would be phisically impossible first because we are not able to replicate matter, and second because only movement exists, we can only move matter in a regreseion so it matches its before state. so i think the only way of "time" traveling would be to find a way of making an object enter a regresion of its particle movement.

 

The moment where I was born, is still this moment, only millions of movements ago, if i want to be young again i would have to find the way to move exactly backwards in a regression of my movements

 

My english is not perfect, I hope you understand what i tried to say, If someone has scientific facts, Im open to forget about this idea, its just an idea, thats all, but I do want to learn more about the latest research in time, and other related stuff, so i can build a more accuratte point of view thank you

[amoda]

umm...by what ive been taught what you just said is the basic understanding of time.

 

This is what i've been taught:

Time: Describes the duration of an objects motion. (im in gr10 physics so they might have hidden something till later on in school)

[jordan]

I recently read a book by Paul Davies called "About Time". Unfortunatly I had to return it and didn't get to reread it like I would of liked to. However, I was left with the impression that time, on a universal scale, is still relativly unkown. It talked about how what we see at any time is light from distant objects and the consequences of moving to different locations, like how doing so effected cause/effect relationships and how all events are happening at some point in the universe depending on where you are. Therefore it is difficult to establish a universal "now". It was a quite a good book.

[Crash]

I thought time is bought about by space......a property of space???? Maybe Hawking was wrong

[amoda]

hmm...no one knows a thing about time i guess

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

Time is a waste by product of movement, for without movement there would be nothing to measure. Nothing to measure would mean that nothing exists.

[Sayonara]

Time is a waste by product of movement, for without movement there would be nothing[/b'] to measure. Nothing to measure would mean that nothing exists.

Surely the reverse case is equally valid? That movement is a byproduct of time, etc etc.

[Radical Edward]

same goes for space too. without space there would be nothing to measure, hence space is just a by product of things not being in the same place.

[Duke]

But you need the dimention of time to measure movement. Speed = Distance/time

[Sayonara]

But why single out time as opposed to distance?

[Radical Edward]

But you need the dimention of time to measure movement. Speed = Distance/time

 

and you need distance to single out movement too, so why the bias? One is two temporal coordiantes, and one is two spatial coordiantes, and as GR shows us, space and time can be treated as equivalent.

[admiral_ju00]

equivalent.

 

i thought it was equidistant?

[Aeschylus]

and you need distance to single out movement too, so why the bias? One is two temporal coordiantes, and one is two spatial coordiantes, and as GR shows us, space and time can be treated as equivalent.

 

Yes indeed velocity is dx/dt, so in order to have velocity we must 'have' dx and dt (i.e. there must be a change in both postion and time).

 

Well GR has some situations in which spacelike dimensions become timelike, but this is the exceptional case in places like the interior of a black hole. In relatviity even though the concept of a spacetime continuum is introduced, there is still a very definite differnce between the two. This is easiest to see in the simplest case of a spacetime continuum, as described by (a form of)the Minowski metric (taking c =1): ds² = dx² + dy² + dz² - dt², notice in this form that dt cannot really be considered equivalent to dx, dy or dz due it's minus sign.

[Nevermore]

Time does exist, it is a 4th dimention, allowing room to stack all of the events that ever happened, without having to worry about the constrictions of the size of the universe.

[Dave]

Time does exist, it is a 4th dimention, allowing room to stack all of the events that ever happened, without having to worry about the constrictions of the size of the universe.

 

QM (or rather Dr. Heisenberg) says that you can't know the position and momentum of a particle at any one time. I would say that you can't really "stack" all the events in the manner you describe.

[john5746]

At the speed of light, time doesn't exist. But then again, do the other dimensions exist at the speed of light?

[TimeTraveler]

In philosophy time does not exist and to my knowledge it seems to be a sore subject between philosophers and physicists.

 

According to "most" philosophers time is only experiantial, meaning without consciousness time cannot exist. When you have hallucinations or even when your dreaming, time appears to move at different speeds than we are used to. If no conscious mind existed in the universe time would also cease to exist.

 

My opinion on the philosophers view is using this form of logic you could deny the existance of everything. Even reality. Which no one could ever prove wrong but it is just something I don't want to believe.

 

Physicists view time as something more real, as in moving forward in a sequence of events or duration. Time (in my view) seems to "flow" forward, but some occurances in the universe also dilate and warp time. To me this would suggest that time does indeed exist, however to my knowledge no existance of time has ever been proven. The dialation and warping of time is also argued by philosophers as perception by the conscious mind.

 

So as far as I know there is no proof that time does exist.

 

But then again I am only a Freshman college student so I know very little

[Playmaker03]

Dannydrunk, i know a lot as been posted since your inital post, but i must say, your ideas are very similar my own thoughts.

 

I know its a very basic notion and said all the time but time really is a man made concept.

 

Even though the idea of time travel is very exiting, i must admit my overwelming pessimism on the subject. Before it is mentioned i know time travel forward is theoritically possible (travel at light speed, return to earth blah blah), however i don't see how it is even possible to travel back in time.

 

Anyone with theories on this, please post.

[Kenaniah108]

My concept of time is that it is an illusion cast by the shadows of motion that exist only because of gravity and propulsions that occure naturaly in space and on Earth. More on that later, I GTG.

[Sayonara]

Take your time.

 

 

Boom boom.

[brokenbin]

sure time exists, isn't time the fourth dimension? and according to the theory of relativity, if (and i must italicize the if here) anything can travel faster than the speed of light, it would be traveling through time. Well, of course, no one has really proven this theory yet, but time still exists, although it is much more abstract than anything we know, such as the volume of a cup or the weight of a baseball. Wouldn't time still go on without human?