If there is no energy, does time exist?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by wegs, Jul 6, 2019.

  1. TheFrogger Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,047
    Yes. On a graph we may have x,y,z AND the value that is stored at that location (time.)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    Just had breakfast 9am

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Thanks for the link at end of your post

    Physicist Argues Time Is Real
    Headline above says it all and appears to back my understanding of TIME

    So at least you and I appear to have our ideas from dialing physicist

    Will read in detail your link, again thanks and hopefully learn more about this puzzle

    Unlike the above. Because I refuse to continue to supply answers to S questions and recieving nothing in return characterised it as above.
    Problem as I saw it I was willing to stay around with my bat and ball while S was putting on about how he had a bat and ball but never put up

    Much as I said about theist who keep saying ' yes we have evidence ' but coming up empty handed

    A quick note for you to chew on before I get back in more detail

    I take the position that EVERYTHING Universe wide does indeed happen at the same instant, called NOW.

    YES space is
    and the distance of space and the maximum speed of light, which is the maximum speed of the transfer of information, gives the illusion of TIME

    To be continued

    Cheers

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,474
    exchemist:

    I can't help you with that. I think my knowledge of quantum mechanics is probably comparable to yours in this regard. The various versions of the uncertainty principle follow in QM from the non-commutativity of the relevant operators. I think there is probably a connection there, as you do, but I haven't followed up on exactly what the connection is.

    Maybe Q-reeus can actually do something useful for a change and help with this. Or somebody else.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    No - no such animal as time with direction. You should know it's a human thought just as a expression to convey a idea. Plus a direction would not be a property

    One event following another is AGEING of the WHOLE of the Universe with we always see the local effect

    Shock - horror - wash your mouth out - you have just given succour to theist and their claim of a non physical invisible smart man in the sky

    be physical to be real

    never said it had to be - but but but has to be detectable

    Is detectable as is gravity, though both invisible. Not a problem

    The Invention of Time and Space by Patrice F. Dassonville

    My reference for you, highly recommend

    Agree but as I understand no method of detection has been devised as is the same for inches

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    Don't think you have one

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,419
    Thanks, in a way, James R for confirming my observation elsewhere we are personal foes. You have the clear advantage in this rat infested sewer known as Sf, of having a loyal coterie of shits eagerly coming in to bat for you: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/divide-and-confuse-backfires.162132/

    Now, concerning the on-topic matter of connecting (one of) Noether's theorems to HUP, I have no real expertise there and defer to what e.g. Wikipedia has to say:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugate_variables

    I could link to other sites where there are various opinions not always agreeing, but why bother.
     
  10. wegs With brave wings, she flies . . . Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Not so much looking for a 'cause' for time, but does time depend on something else to exist in the first place.

    I'll return to your post a bit later, didn't want you to think that I didn't appreciate you taking the time to explain this as you have.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    Like I said, the issue of time is controversial, but I see it as a part of the multi dimensional frame work we call spacetime.
    I also see such effects as change, movement etc, as occurring in time, not causing time.
    We also see effects we label as caused by a magnetic field...we feel the effects that we label gravity...we also obviously see the aging process...we call that time. we see both space and time as variable concepts, dependent on our FoRs, and also how in some ways they are interchangeable.
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/muon.html
    And of course your universal now can never really be put to any test, because the speed of light is finite. We can never determine a universal now, only a now as defined by the speed of light. Think about it.
    Here's another rundown on time....
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-debate-over-the-physics-of-time-20160719/
     
  12. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    Will try to get to your reference later thanks

    I don't follow how a Universal NOW is defined by the speed of light

    Only the INFORMATION about what is happening on the other side of the Universe is not available to us

    We, I would contend, obviously exist NOW, as does the other side of the Universe at our NOW, except if it just happens to have been destroyed, but you understand what I mean.

    What you appear to be advocating is we have our NOW and the other side of the Universe has a different NOW at a different moment

    My thinking is NOW does not work like that

    Again we only lack the INFORMATION due to the speed of light limitation (ie distance)

    We don't lack the moment ie NOW

    The NOW is Universal

    Got to run

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,290
    You don't believe in time but you do believe in NOW. What are the properties of NOW, with data and links please. I'll be waiting.
     
  14. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    Would be strange not to believe in NOW since I live, as does everyone else, in NOW

    As for PROPERTIES, pick all, I mean ALL, every single atom of the Universe, list the properties of everything in existence in the Universe, bundle them all together, that bundle of properties represents reality and as such are the properties of NOW

    As for data and links, will let you select your favourite item which exists in the same reality as yourself

    NOW is the only reality in existence (unless anyone has another they can produce)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    We all certainly live in a personal now, but they need not be the same.
    My cousin living on planet X orbiting Proxima Centauri version of now, will not be recognised by me until 4.5 years later.
     
  16. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,377
    True, but but but you have just confirmed light left from cousin, coincidentally, as light left from yourself at a Universe NOW moment, the only difference being location that being your not be the same

    Both light beams pass and cousins arrives to yourself and your light beam arrives at cousin, both beams AGED 4.5 light years old, which is exactly the same amount of AGE as you each have accrued to arrive together at the current Universal NOW moment

    As for being same, not sure what you are trying to say

    What I note - you and cousin are separated by large distance and it takes 4.5 light years before information from each other reaches the other

    Sorry do not see TIME

    See two light beams each AGED 4.5 light years and both lock step in reality from the start of each journey to the finish

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
  17. wegs With brave wings, she flies . . . Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Okay, I'm finally ready to get into this lol


    Not so much a cause, as much as does time need energy to exist? I don't know why that is confusing to me.

    I know. But, I understand this reply based on you thinking that I was asking if time has a cause.

    Ahhh...gotcha. Okay.

    But wait, doesn't energy come in different ''forms?'' Light, motion, heat, etc...when I think of energy, I think of those ''forms'' of energy. Going with what you're saying, let's see if I get this correct -- energy is essentially the power to do work, whether that power is fueled by heat, light, or motion?


    Sorry.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Why is it a problem? We simply don't know what occurred or existed before the BB, so why would that be a problem? We should rely on our confidence, even if it's limited. We didn't create the limits.


    Okay, I see...but why couldn't time and energy legitimately exist before the BB, we simply couldn't observe it? Is it because it brings up the question of infinity?


    I wonder if we'll ever have definitive answers. But...we can keep striving to learn more. Thanks, James for replying, and sorry to bring you more questions.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,290
    Time and energy could exist before the Big Bang. That is unknown territory.

    My view is that time isn't a "thing". It's an emergent quality (as they say) rather than fundamental.
     
  19. wegs With brave wings, she flies . . . Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    I just did a quick google search...and you are not alone in your thinking.

    Time emerges from ''entanglement.'' Just another quantum mystery, I reckon.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Every time that I think I'm getting somewhere, the rug gets snatched from under me!
     
  20. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,290
    But that's not a flying rug. We can imagine a flying rug but we know they are not real.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. wegs With brave wings, she flies . . . Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    I see what you did there. Cross pollinating threads, are we?

    For shame!
     
    Seattle likes this.
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,846
    Best understood imo by our overwhelmingly supported model we call the BB, that is space and time [as we know them] evolved at t+10-43 seconds.
    How they existed [if they did] at that first quantum/Planck instant is unknown.
    Take that along with the fact that the BB is only applicable to the observable universe.
     
    wegs likes this.
  23. wegs With brave wings, she flies . . . Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,841
    Did you know that the BB model isn't universally accepted, but it's the most encouraging model that we have to help us understand the evolution of the universe? I'm not a naysayer, just adding that, though.
     

Share This Page