Does time exist?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Energy is motion and motion changes the configuration of the systems mass configuration, work causes the physical changes perceived as time by changing the masses motion(its energy). Energy moves mass and causes the changing of time. Energy moves time...
Seems a bit scrambled to me

But I think you are explaining AGE, which is not TIME,w

.......work causes the physical changes perceived as time.....

:)
 
Energy is motion and motion changes the configuration of the systems mass configuration, work causes the physical changes perceived as time by changing the masses motion(its energy). Energy moves mass and causes the changing of time. Energy moves time...

∫BdS = BS (+ constant of integration).
 
Time is the change-interval duality. Post #1986.

Things only change in the NOW the before and after are just a recording of sequential NOW moments. When something happens here NOW there is something happening everywhere NOW like a universal NOW. We record the motions/changes that transverse through the NOW and call it time. To the universe it is only the NOW that exists while it continuously changes to the next NOW configuration.

That's how I understand it? -_O
 
Things only change in the NOW the before and after are just a recording of sequential NOW moments. When something happens here NOW there is something happening everywhere NOW like a universal NOW. We record the motions/changes that transverse through the NOW and call it time. To the universe it is only the NOW that exists while it continuously changes to the next NOW configuration.

That's how I understand it?

I agree.

1) Clocks measure time, the continuity of things in the present.
2) Time does not need past nor future to exist.
3) We use the ideas of past and future to organize our lives.

In conclusion, time exists in a continuous present.

From post #1916.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BdS
It probably is, still working on it.


I can relate to the universe aging/evolving/changing, but if that is not time then where is time hiding?

:)

Same place as god. In the land of non existence

:)
 
All forms of energy and matter . From the micro to the macro ( in no particular order ) . They All exist always. Together .

Inotherwords there was No before .

BB is based on the physical .

How do you know this ? Just asking . river .

That the Sun is North of the North Pole ? The North Pole being defined as ....?

Geologic or Magnetic ?

Think more deeply upon what you propose .

PLEASE, STOP TROLLING.
 
SIGNIFIER, MEANING AND REFERENT

The signifier are all words or concepts, the meaning is the definition or idea of the signifier and the referent is the object to which the signifier refers.

For example:
1- HOUSE (signifier)
- is the building we use to live (meaning).
- the graphic or drawing of a house (referent).

2- LOVE (signifier)
- is the feeling that inclines us affectively towards another person, animal or thing (meaning).
- person in love (referent).

3- SPACE (signifier)
- is the emptiness that bodies occupy (meaning).
- any body (referent).

4- TEMPERATURE (signifier)
- is the level of heat a body has (meaning).
- the sensation of heat or cold (referent).

5- TIME (signifier)
- is the duration of things in a certain physical state or situation (meaning).
- as the time interval does not generate sensation, the referent of this concept is its measurement. It is for that reason that in Physics the concept of time passes to its measure without defining it properly.
 
In this image, the sun is north of the North Pole.

el-sol-y-la-luna_orig.jpg
How do you figure that?
 
To All waves and particles , time has no meaning . It is biological living entities that give time any meaning at all .
So how did the universe prevent everything happening at once in the first 10 billion years before life came along?
 
How do you figure that?
For me?

Well you know my position as regards the non existence of TIME

No-one has come forward with any property or evidence of its existence

So how did the universe prevent everything happening at once in the first 10 billion years before life came along?

Well everything did happen at once, and continues to do so

The totality of the Universe exist in a moment of NOW (perhaps it should be THE MOMENT OF NOW since there is only one)

Activities occur in NOW resulting in stuff AGEING and said effect being noticed

The only reason we do not notice everything occuring in a single NOW (everything at once) is the limitations of the speed of light

:)
 
Well you know my position as regards the non existence of TIME
No-one has come forward with any property or evidence of its existence
Dude. You acknowledge the existence of aging. What you call aging the rest of us call time. You just like being cryptic about it.
Like with W4U, a difference without a difference is not a difference.


The only reason we do not notice everything occuring in a single NOW (everything at once) is the limitations of the speed of light
This is demonstrably not true. The time it took me to type this sentence is most definitely longer than the time it takes light to travel ... from ... my fingertips ... to my keyboard?
 
Dude. You acknowledge the existence of aging. What you call aging the rest of us call time. You just like being cryptic about it.
Like with W4U, a difference without a difference is not a difference.

So you are going to be the one who gives up the evidence and/list a property of TIME

Waiting

Currently don't have the book detailing the difference between AGE and TIME (The Invention of Time and Space) but when home will put it back on my SD card for ease of access

But you might consider the following - AGEING involves change (which frequently is not detectable unless actively sought out)

Look forward to starting a list with yours being the first entry
Will it be colour of time
Frequency perhaps
Smell
Mass/weight
Atomic number

This is demonstrably not true. The time it took me to type this sentence is most definitely longer than the time it takes light to travel ... from ... my fingertips ... to my keyboard?

???? So ???? Sorry do not follow your thinking

Found this in my notes

However, just because the sight of the tip of your nose arrives within a miniscule moment frame and edge of Universe in a longer moment frame does NOT mean they occurred within different NOWs

No part of the Universe exist in the future
No part of the Universe exist in the past
The information at any location in the Universe is restricted from being known at another location as have mentioned by the finite speed of light.

:)
 
Last edited:
This is demonstrably not true. The time it took me to type this sentence is most definitely longer than the time it takes light to travel ... from ... my fingertips ... to my keyboard?


So you are going to be the one who gives up the evidence and/list a property of TIME
OK, so you show me a property of aging, and I'll show you a property of time.


Look forward to starting a list with yours being the first entry
Will it be colour of time
Frequency perhaps
Smell
Mass/weight
Atomic number
So it's your contention that ageing does have these things? colour, frequency, smell,mass, weight, atomic number?
Show.


The only reason we do not notice everything occuring in a single NOW (everything at once) is the limitations of the speed of light
This is demonstrably not true. The time it took me to type this sentence is most definitely longer than the time it takes light to travel ... from ... my fingertips ... to my keyboard?
???? So ???? Sorry do not follow your thinking
You asserted that the only thing stopping us noticing everything happening at once is the limitations of the speed of light.

The characters in this post appeared on my screen one after the other in the correct order by my finger movements, distributed across almost a minute. If the speed of light is what stopped them from appearing all at the same time, then they must have travelled at least one light minute (that's about 11 million miles) to result in such a delay. Explain what he speed of light has to do with my typing.

Could I shorten that light speed delay by getting closer to my keyboard? If I got only 2 inches away, would my typing appear on the screen over only 6 seconds instead of 60?
 
OK, so you show me a property of aging, and I'll show you a property of time.
So you don't have anything and moving goal post to "you (me) first game"
Sorry I don't play that game

So it's your contention that ageing does have these things? colour, frequency, smell,mass, weight, atomic number?
Show.
Nope you cannot read into a request for information (properties - not just those on my list - ANY property) of time into a statement that I claim said properties exist in something else

If the speed of light is what stopped them from appearing all at the same time,
Noooooooo The contention is the speed of light is a limiting factor about

EVERYTHING WHICH HAS HAPPENED AT ANY PARTICULAR MOMENT

IS NOT KNOWN WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR MOMENT

DUE TO SEPARATION OF DISTANCE AND THE FINITE SPEED OF LIGHT WHICH HAS TO CARRY THE INFORMATION OVER SAID DISTANCE

distributed across almost a minute

That minute you speak of is what you call time and is obtained from a arbitrary measurement between a arbitrary NOW moment to another arbitrary NOW moment

So I will wait a little longer for that property of TIME yes?

Can't start my list of properties unless yourself or another person provides, because I have have failed to find anything so I am starting to believe TIME does not exist

:)
 
Last edited:
So you don't have anything and moving goal post to "you (me) first game"
Sorry I don't play that game
If anyone's playing a game, it's you.

You asked (facetiously ) what colour time might have. Yet age doesn't have a colour either. Thus colour is not a criteria by which we can judge whether something exists.
If you apply a test to age but not to time, your argument is hypocritical.

Nope you cannot read into a request for information (properties - not just those on my list - ANY property) of time into a statement that I claim said properties exist in something else

Is your list a valid test of whether something exists?
OK then , you just showed that age doesn't exist either.
Still a valid test? Or are you willing to retract it?

EVERYTHING WHICH HAS HAPPENED AT ANY PARTICULAR MOMENT
'Moment' is a unit of time.
If you don't believe in time, you can't use it as an argument.

So I will wait a little longer for that property of TIME yes?
Just as long as we will wait for a property that distinguishes it from "age".

..I am starting to believe TIME does not exist
Then you must also conclude that aging doesn't exist - since, above - you used units of time to define it.

Don't respond right away. Your idea has a fair bit of polishing to do.
 
That minute you speak of is what you call time and is obtained from a arbitrary measurement between a arbitrary NOW moment to another arbitrary NOW moment.

So I will wait a little longer for that property of TIME yes?

You cannot concentrate all moments in one now. It is a very limited vision of time. You forget that changes can be ordered in a before and an after. The properties of time are: continuity, sequentiality and a star and an end. You could not be born in a now and die in a now. That is a fallacy. You were born in a before now and will die in a after now. The time interval is between a before and an after.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top