Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so

[crab]

Post your solutions to the infinite regression paradox here.
How can time pass without time to pass in?
Answers on a postcard plox
(just wondering what people will say, don't pretend to have much knowledge of the mysteries of space and time myself)

[LeoZ]

:confused:

[crab]

this is a highly intellectual forum amirite

[LeoZ]

what are your thoughts on the matter?

[swarfegahead]

Time is a loosely defined concept, and cannot be truly explained or comprehended by the human mind.

My 2c !

[Mash89]

Change the word time to a car.

How can a car pass without a car to pass in?
(Rephrased: How can a car do what it does without using another car?)

Cars don't use other cars in order to pass. Cars pass on their own. Time is much the same.

P.S. Mash loves HHGTHG...

[LeoZ]

oh right you've just read Hitchhikers. Congratulations sir.

[crab]

Change the word time to a car.

How can a car pass without a car to pass in?
(Rephrased: How can a car do what it does without using another car?)

Cars don't use other cars in order to pass. Cars pass on their own. Time is much the same.

P.S. Mash loves HHGTHG...
that's a false analogy. Cars still pass relative to other things (in this case, you), and over time. The point of time you are in changes, but over what time does it pass in?

[Mash89]

Space

[LeoZ]

Mash89 wins.

[Mash89]

Mash89 wins.

WOOHOO!

EDIT: To clarify, in deepest darkest physics, where they actually think about fundamental particles and whatnot, like relativity and quantum stuff, to all means and ends time is just another dimension like space.

[Disgruntledgoat]

It's simply a confusion of language. Time is an abstract form rather than a physical object and therefore does not need to pass anything.

Disgruntledgoat Used Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis!

[malcolio]

Time's not a strict progression of cause to effect, but, actually, from a non-linear viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly...timey-wimey...stuff.

As for me, I'm going back to the past to kill my own grandfather. I'll let you know how it goes...

[crab]

WOOHOO!

EDIT: To clarify, in deepest darkest physics, where they actually think about fundamental particles and whatnot, like relativity and quantum stuff, to all means and ends time is just another dimension like space.
Then how come we perceive it sequentially?

[Mash89]

Just to note, it is not sequential under a certain distance.

I can't answer your question though. There probably is an answer, and I probably have read it somewhere in a Hawking or Feynmann book, but I've most likely just forgotten.

EDIT: Reid lots of Kant ad Leibniz.

[crab]

Just to note, it is not sequential under a certain distance.
Planck's second constant or somesuch? I vaguely remember that as the smallest possible unit of time or something

[Mash89]

There is a Planck length (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length) and time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time), all related to Planck units (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units).

There is an equation that involves time being borrowed in exchange for energy, as long as it's not too much of both. I'm very hazy though.

[GorillaBearBear]

So it is basically the same as the solution to Xeno's paradox, namely that in real life things happen in time and space?

[Mash89]

in real life things happen in time and space?

Is that a paradox?

EDIT: Ah, it could be viewed as similar... Zeno's paradox is all about limitations of the system/mind to understand something. Here we aren't able to understand time...

[crab]

Xeno's paradox is about there being a distinction between there being infinite instances of state A (the arrow not having passed the turtle) and there being 0 instances of state B (the arrow having passed the turtle), which seems totally unrelated to me

[T-Bear]

Reading this thread, i feel very stupid. I'm going to play vida gaems, instead of trying to comprehend any of the intense thought going on here.

[dinnerbone]

In the second scroll of Wen the Eternally Surprised a story is written concerning one day when the apprentice Clodpool, in a rebellious mood, approached Wen and spake thusly: "Master, what is the difference between a humanistic, monastic system of belief in which wisdom is sought by means of an apparently nonsensical system of questions and answers, and a lot of mystic gibberish made up on the spur of the moment?" Wen considered this for some time, and at last said: "A fish!" And Clodpool went away, satisfied.
I hope this answers your question.

[Hydralisk]

We don't exist.

That's right kids, technically we don't exist, because next to a theoretically endless amount of universes, our masses approach zero compared with everything else. The other universes, compared with the other universes, also have a near zero mass, except for two different types: some of an infinite amount of mass (respective to that universe) and some with negative amounts of masses (some leading to the negative infinity, also "infinite" respective to that universe.) However, compared to all other forms of universes, simple mathmatical equations tell us that -OO + OO = 0. Thus, the cosmos is filled with NOTHING.

Need more proof? Scientists still can't find a big chunk of our universe, even when energy, regular matter, anti matter, dark matter, anti-dark matter etc. are taken into account.

When taking the fundamental forces of the cosmos into account... well... Read my sig for more information.

[Tiggs]

@Hydralisk: You're effectivley using rounding errors to deny out exsitance. The universe is (as far as current theories go, at least) finite, meaning we occupy a definate space within it and so do exist. Even if the universe (or multiverse, but thats just speculation as it stands), the solution to mathamitacal equations would be undefined rather than zero, so would still work, we would just be unable to calculate it.

As for the positive mass plus negative mass (if such a thing exists) idea, imagine two people of the same weight sitting on a seesaw. They balence and so their effect on the seesaw cancels out. Does that imply that they're not sitting on it? No, just that they have no overall effect.


And going all the way back to the original question, time itself is the medium, its just the object we have trouble imagining. Time is just another dimension, like the three dimensions of space we're used to. We can clearly see how objects move through those dimensions, but not how they move through the forth. The only way I can imagine is is like something gliding through space in a straight line. Don't touch it and it will keep on going, clocks will keep on ticking just as we expect. But just like any object, put a force on it and that will change, you could speed it up, slow it down, even make it go backward.


These are just the theoretical spewings of my brain at 2 in the morning. Feel free to rip it to shreds.

[matt bird]

a woman says to her husband, "would you care for an orange?"

the husband replies "only if it really needed me"

[Sorcha]

Time is simply an incremental measurement of change.

[Martinus]

You can't really answer this question without a complete knowledge of the nature and 'mechanism' (for want of a better word) of time.

You can find a likely solution but without a means to prove it other than a thought experiment you're not going to have an answer that satisfies. As such, asking how time can pass time allows almost any answer that 'makes sense' irrespective of accuracy. The only way you can disprove all 'likely' answers is to provide a definitive one.

I therefore suggest that time simply passes itself utilising the same mechanism the rest of us do: Videogames.

[tom93]

Time doesn't pass relative to time.
As far as we can conceive, it doesn't pass relative to anything, except us.
If I walk forward, How am I moving relative to myself? I'm not. So, time?
I dunno, this is stupid. Video games!

[Ferg]

Yup time passes relative to us, depending on what we feel like doing. So the faster we go, the slower time goes compared to us. Not sure why really, perhaps time thinks it's cute that we're trying to catch up to it and so, being kind and sympathetic, it slows down to help us out a a little. How nice time is :)

Although if we go too fast than time will get into a bit of a strop and will just turn around and go home, taking us with it. Of course even though time will be going backwards, home is very very far away and it'll take a little while to get there.

Also!! Don't forget that we can alter our own perception of time, depending on how we use our little internal clock. Experiments have been done and apparrently you can actually slow down your perception of time. I think the experiment involved tennis, as that's where the slowing of time would be most useful :D But I suppose time is still moving normally, all you've really done is sped up your mind secretivley while not telling your concious self about the change of pace.



This thread is awesome as it ties up my brain into giraffe shapes that go 'moo' :D

[Bail]

To be honest I don't care much about the contents of this thread, I'm just amazed by my wristwatch and novelty ring tone.

[Martinus]

Experiments have been done and apparrently you can actually slow down your perception of time.

The most cited experiment involved imbibing a solution consisting of two thirds of a kilo of dry coffee powder dissolved in 5ml of distilled, heated water. Of a sample of 53 vic...oulinteers (23 M, 30F, mean age 32.4) twelve had an out of body experience noting that time appeared to slow considerably. Of the rest; nine entered a catatonic state; seventeen noted that the mean time between toliet breaks seemed to significantly reduce (attributed to both violent vomiting and an inability to retain water). The remaining fifteen subjects (and the catatonic patients) have yet to report anything coherently.

We are currently seeking ethical approval to expand the trials to include consumption of an excessive amount of chewing gum, the narcotic speed and the prescription drug Ritalin.

[splintered]

time is merely a man-made concept, it doesent realy exist if you think about it, i mean stoneage people didn't have clocks n stuff.
alright they had stonehenge which i think was a calendar or sorts, but whatever, my point remains valid

[Mash89]

Did they not do things one before the other then?

[crab]

Time doesn't pass relative to time.
As far as we can conceive, it doesn't pass relative to anything, except us.
If I walk forward, How am I moving relative to myself? I'm not. So, time?
I dunno, this is stupid. Video games!
but over what time do we pass this time, if we simply move relatively? If there is no timeframe for us to pass within time within, then we logically have no velocity within time - velocity is distance over time, so what is this time time? Of course, we pass within time time time... but quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[CoX]

Some people just can't let things be.

[tom93]

What?
the time we move within is the time we move within, we don't move within time within time.
We aren't 'within time', we are 'with time'.

[Mash89]

Some people just can't let things be.

Agreed. Agnosticism/apatheticism FTW.

[Lyricaus]

Time can't exist, as time is ever infinite. We only have the future and the past. Everying happens too quickly to be classed as the present. Aod for someone to time travel (not at all possible) they would have to had time finished. To travel through time, it has to exist. Its like having a book its only half finished. You can read all the stuff that's there, then you get to the last page. Turning to a blank page at the back won't have anything, as it doesn't exist. The same applies to time. but to me, time is a paradox, not existing. Its just a mathematical theory to help us stay sane, and apply our daily actives to. Without time, we'd assign activities to the suns position, which is too in-exact. [/babble]

[Macca]

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/time-travel-wormhole2.jpg

http://www.space.com/images/coneexpand_i0109c_02,1.jpg

[feeshy]

Let's just say nobody has the foggiest idea about anything at all, so lets all go out for a drink.

[Mash89]

Let's just say nobody has the foggiest idea about anything at all, so lets all go out for a drink.

Hear hear!

[crab]

What?
the time we move within is the time we move within, we don't move within time within time.
We aren't 'within time', we are 'with time'.
But across which time do we move within this time?

We perceive the time passing. It takes time to perceive this, but it cannot take the lowest level of time because then the time would be recursing and passing within itself. Therefore, we pass within a second tier of time, but here we have the same problem - it's like Hindu turtles.

[Zhyl]

Theory or relativity states that if you travel at the speed of light, you will always pass something travelling at the speed of light at the speed of light. If you turn around and you race towards each other you should be doubling the speed of light relative to each other, but you will pass each other with a relative speed of the speed of light. There must be something that gives in order to achieve this, and that variable is time.

Also!! Don't forget that we can alter our own perception of time, depending on how we use our little internal clock. Experiments have been done and apparrently you can actually slow down your perception of time. I think the experiment involved tennis, as that's where the slowing of time would be most useful :D But I suppose time is still moving normally, all you've really done is sped up your mind secretivley while not telling your concious self about the change of pace.

When your mind is occupied it puts less "markers" onto time so it appears to be passing quickly, when you are bored there is the adverse effect. When you play tennis at first you immediately want to hit the ball, but when you get better at tennis you realise you have the time it takes for you to hit the ball, it to travel over the net, your opponent to hit the ball, it to travel back over the net and bounce before you have to hit it yourself. This gives you time to plan your position and how hard to hit the ball etc.

This is why hypnotism pwns psychology.

[Fraek]

Time does not pass; it is we who pass through time. When we have left one moment it does not simply disappear, much as Connecticut does not simply go away when you go to the Bahamas.Theory or relativity states that if you travel at the speed of light, you will always pass something travelling at the speed of light at the speed of light. If you turn around and you race towards each other you should be doubling the speed of light relative to each other, but you will pass each other with a relative speed of the speed of light. There must be something that gives in order to achieve this, and that variable is time.Actually, when you travel at the speed of time you travel along your own line of coherence, so I believe you would perceive it as though another object passing at the speed of light would be everywhere at all times (feel free to correct me if this is wrong; I'm kind of a special relativity n00b).