Does time exist?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by hansda, Apr 10, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    Has anybody seen time?

    What we could see or perceive are mass, energy, space and their relative movements.

    'Time' can be defined as the interval(other than space-interval) between two events. An 'event' can be considered as 'any happening in space'. As nothing is in 'absolute rest', all the things are in some sort of motion. 'Rest' is only a relative concept and not 'absolute concept'. So, we have 'motion' and 'relative motion'.

    All our idea of 'time' is from a 'local clock'. A clock is not time. A clock is nothing but mass or energy with a 'uniform motion'. All other motions being compared with this 'uniform motion', gives us an idea of 'time'. So, a clock basically signifies the 'relative motion'. Does 'time' only signify this 'relative motion'?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. andy1033 Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,060
    Considering that gravity can bend both space and time, our relation to time only really exists on earth, as we revolve around our sun.

    What happens when we go out there and the strength of gravity is different, and how we relate to it, who knows.

    Its probably the main reason why we have not gone massively out into space yet. There probably are secret space agencies, but they never tell us nout. The stuff with gravity, is probably a massive reason why humans have not gone out into space like scifi predicted.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    do you see earths atmosphere/air ?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    Air has weight/mass. It supports for flying. So we can perceive atmosphere/air.
     
  8. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    so in space you will not die ?

    well the ones who have been in a fraction of space from space missions.
    and also the people who are called scientist who study's space and such knows.

    not even true.
    learn basic physics and you will understand why.
    also telescopes/Satellite have.

    not even true.
    learn basic physics and you will understand why.
    also telescopes/Satellite have.
     
  9. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    are you aware ?

    so i'm assuming you mean number 2.
     
  10. andy1033 Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,060
    No i never said that. I said our relation to time exists only on earth. How gravitational forces outside earth being different from our own would affect us no one knows.

    Go and watch neil armstrong talk about the moon, and how he did not trust his own perception there.

    If gravity can bend both space and time, time as we know it only exists here on earth, as we relate to it here.

    Like i said, its probably the reason why we never left earth on mass yet, as we cannot understand this, or we cannot adapt to it properly. Like neil armstrong said about being on the moon. Our perception is everything to us.
     
  11. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    We only breathe air. Exhale heavily, put your hand in front of nose; you can feel/perceive air or air-flow. Air can not be seen but it can be perceived.
     
  12. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    When we measure time, we need a dynamic tool, such as a clock, which uses energy. We can measure distance with a passive tool like a meter stick. But time needs a dynamic tool to be measured. We can use the sand within the hour glass, the mechanical spring of a watch or the battery of a digital display, but all involve energy. Although time is not energy, per se, time needs energy to be measured, therefore time has a backdoor connection to energy.

    Time is connected to an aspect of energy called free energy. If we reacted hydrogen and oxygen gases to make water, the total energy of the system includes the mass of the atoms, via E=MC2. Although mass is potential energy, this aspect of the total energy is not free energy. In this example, the free energy is contained only within the chemical bonds and can be freed. Time is not connected to restricted mass/energy, but connected to free energy which makes change possible.

    Time has the closest connection to the free energy associated with entropy. The entropy of the universe has to increase according to the second law, while time has to move forward. These both move in one direction. Energy, on the other hand, is conserved and therefore stays the same, which is not how time works. Entropy and time both have to increase in one direction, with entropy connected to free energy. While we need free energy flow to measure time with our clock.

    If you look at gravity, time will slow due to the contraction of space-time. If time has a connection to entropy, than gravity should also cause entropy to decrease. This is observed and does so via pressure.

    Although the entropy of the universe has to increase (as a whole), it is possible to lower entropy locally. But this would need to be compensated by entropy increasing slightly more elsewhere; maintain second law. If time is connected to entropy, this would suggest that time can reverse or go backward, locally, but this would require time speed up elsewhere to reflect the amplified entropy. This would suggest time travel might be possible, back in time, but your body would age quickly to maintain entropy balance.
     
  13. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    You are co-relating 'time' with 'entropy'. 'Entropy' is nothing but disorder of a system. Disorder is due to motion or relative motion. So, essentially you are relating 'time' with 'relative motion' only.
     
  14. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    it appears you are so behind in physics
    but I'm not sure.
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,493
    Time is one of those primal phenomena, like consciousness itself, that cannot be empirically proven to exist by science because it is a logical premise of all empiricle demonstration that there is already time for events to happen in. Likewise with space. To prove space existed we would have to be able to stand outside of it and experience it like an object separate from us. Such a pov is impossible. The same applies to time. It exists, and it manifests itself apodictically as self-existent to our immediate consciousness.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2013
  16. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    I swear this site is full of junior high school kids or something.
     
  17. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,493

    There you go again insulting posters by juvenilizing them again. If you think a particular op is nonsensical, why don't you just ignore it? Did it ever occur to you that posting that it or its responses is immature only exposes your own childish inability to tolerate original ideas or new povs?
     
  18. hansda Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,424
    May be 'time' is related with our 'consciousness'.
     
  19. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,493
    Deeply so I suspect. When you think about consciousness, what is it really more than the TIME in which events can happen in? Consciousness in this sense is not extended in space, and yet encompasses events as the temporal continuum they happen in. Does time really even exist separately from consciousness? Perhaps no more than matter exists separately from our own bodies.
     
  20. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    seriously ???

    i just lost interest in this site.

    i have been on this site a while evaluating it.
    i'm curious if there's actual scientist or physicist on this site.

    it appears to be a no..just a bunch of childish mentalities, and it's obvious form these post.
     
  21. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,493
    Then get lost. You're only coming off as an ahole by constantly bitching about new threads without contributing to them..
     
  22. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    first of ,
    me being seen as an a hole is meaningless and irrelevant to anything.

    second, I'm not contributing to a whole lot on here , because i contributed to most of these topics in 6th grade.
    which was a couple of decades ago.

    most conversations on this site are way behind or childish.
    i do not know if I'm on a actual physicist forum or in elementary school..it's hard to tell.

    what I find funny is, it's you who is offended..
    that says a lot.
    funny.

    why are you continuing to be offended when i mention how childish these topics are ?
     
  23. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,493
    Trolling (verb):"Being a prick on the internet because you can. Typically unleashing one or more cynical or sarcastic remarks on an innocent by-stander, because it's the internet and, hey, you can."

    Guy: "I just found the coolest ninja pencil in existence."
    Other Guy: "I just found the most retarded thread in existence."


    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page