It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Help ATS via PayPal:

Does the passage of time exists?

page: 1
9
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 03:35 AM
This isn't asking does time exists. This is asking is there a passage of time. When you think about the billions of years that has passed or has supposed to have passed since the "big bang" the question is did billions of years really pass or is the passage of time just our perception of the order of events?

So I go to the store and I buy a a bag of chips and then go and buy a tea out of the cooler did any time really pass between the time I picked out a bag of chips and the time I went to the cooler to grab a tea?

Maybe time is really just what keeps track of events in space. So all of space and time exists at the moment of the "big bang" and their isn't any passage of time just a perception of a passage of time because we order events.

So I pick out a back of chips at 10:00 and buy a tea at 10:03. I would just assume that time passed between 10:00 and 10:03 because I remember that I picked out a back of chips and after that grabbed a tea from the cooler. So my perception says time passed.

So 10:00 and 10:03 would be space-time coordinates. It would be a way of saying at 10:00 you were at a point in space time at 10:03 you were at a point in space-time.

So what we call time and the 4th dimension really is saying, a three dimensional object in space is located at point A, a three dimensional object in space is located at point B.....

All of these points make up what we call time. You experience these points based on motion.

So 13 billion years could be a billion years to someone experiencing different motion. So there isn't any passage of time just motion which allows us to perceive different points of space-time at different and an ordered way and we perceive that order as a "passage of time."

So you can say I was going 30 miles per hour for a mile and I perceived a mile of space-time points. You can say I was going 100 miles per hour and I perceived a mile of space time points.

Those space-time points exist whether you perceive them at 30 miles and hour or 100 miles per hour. So going 30 MPH is a measure of motion not a measure of the passage of time.
edit on 16-12-2014 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 03:57 AM

So there isn't any passage of time just motion which allows us to perceive different points of space-time at different and an ordered way and we perceive that order as a "passage of time."

Yup, time is relative.

The smaller an animal is, and the faster its metabolic rate, the slower time passes for it, scientists found.

What does this tell us?

Not much probably.. But it is still fun to think about.

edit on 16-12-2014 by Skaffa because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 03:58 AM

originally posted by: neoholographic
So 13 billion years could be a billion years to someone experiencing different motion.
Yes according to the special theory of relativity.

So there isn't any passage of time just motion which allows us to perceive different points of space-time at different and an ordered way and we perceive that order as a "passage of time."
I wouldn't say "just motion", though certainly motion is one thing that can be related to the passage of time. Another would be the half-life of decay of a radioactive element. In this case you wouldn't use motion to relate to the passage of time, but the amount of radioactive decay.

There is a field of science based on this called Radiometric dating, which allows us to determine how much time has passed using radioactive decay rates rather than motion.

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 04:30 AM

Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute

Part of me thinks we have no real knowledge of time, we just shape it in a way that we can understand it.

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 04:48 AM
I think all things and all possibilities of things happen all at once and time is illusion or a perception our soul receives through the filters of our meat sacks to put it simply.

Take our eyes for instance, we can only see through a very finite wavelength. We don't see infrared or many others, they are filtered out. We can't hear what dogs hear. We can't sense/taste/smell/detect magnetism like birds do when they migrate. If we were capable of doing all these things our senses would be bombarded and we would go into overload and incapable of moving. That's just comparing us to animals around us, now, add concepts on quantum mechanics and allow us to see all possibilities prior to observation.

No, I think we are, or rather, I think our bodies are like computers capable of reading universal code and receiving the data as you would looking at your computer screen. Otherwise you'd be like Neo.

As above so below. Nothing exists that hasn't existed already. That includes computers....they've always been here. Catch my drift?
edit on 16-12-2014 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 05:24 AM

Yep. I think of it like this, we created time and simply use it to fold energy/matter around space.

Its our way of understanding a concept we can't physically see.

Just like we can't see in 4D, so we have to create things in order for us to be able to understand it.

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 06:53 AM

originally posted by: neoholographic
This isn't asking does time exists. This is asking is there a passage of time.

I don't really see the difference, I think you're asking if time passes in an equal matter for each perceiving subject.

originally posted by: neoholographic
So 13 billion years could be a billion years to someone experiencing different motion. So there isn't any passage of time just motion which allows us to perceive different points of space-time at different and an ordered way and we perceive that order as a "passage of time."

And indeed the passage of time is relatively perceived by each subject.

This doesn't imply however that there is no passage of time, only that it is perceived differently.

To be able to be perceived I'd say the passage of time has to exist. Each of us perceive the world differently but i wouldn't want to go as far as saying that the world doesn't exist.

originally posted by: neoholographic
Those space-time points exist whether you perceive them at 30 miles and hour or 100 miles per hour. So going 30 MPH is a measure of motion not a measure of the passage of time.

It is a measure of motion, which is a measure of space through time, hence the miles per hour.
edit on 16-12-2014 by ArieBombarie because: typo

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 07:06 AM
I always thought it was human way of measuring change.....

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 07:09 AM
To me, the measurement of the passage of time is what I perceive, time cannot be touched, seen, heard, tasted, or smelled.

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 10:00 AM
time is stranger than you can think

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 04:49 PM

Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute

Marry her and it will seem like an eternity.

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 05:14 PM

Its not just perception. At high speeds atoms actually slow. An atom will decay faster at slower speeds. This means speed actually changes reality. So does gravity. You literally age slower at higher speeds.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 05:55 AM

Okay, so there's an intricate connection between motion and time.

But does this also mean that the passage of time doesn't exist?
I was trying to argue that the passage of time has to exist.

You are right that time dilation actually changes reality in a non-relative to perception manner, but time still passes right?
Motion can only be measured in relation to some kind of landmark, and because of the connection, between motion and time, i would say that time also only can be measured in relation to some kind of landmark, hence the 'it's-just-perception'.

But, even when atoms reach absolute zero, quantum mechanics state that there is something called 'quantum vacuum zero-point energy', which are the fluctuations quantum mechanical system undergo even in their ground state.
So, even when atoms reach absolute zero there is still motion, thus passage of time.

I'm way out of my comfort zone here for I'm usually just studying philosophical literature, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 06:06 AM

What are the periodic oscillations of quantum time crystals in their ground state?

phys.org...

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 06:36 AM

Well, according to that article (and again, correct me if I'm wrong) periodic oscillations of quantum time crystals would be impossible because quantum time crystals cannot exist.
The way I interpret that is that the ground state cannot exist, as the researcher states at the end of the article:

"However, considerations based upon the energy conservation objection suggest that time-crystal behavior, i.e., the nonstationary ground state, is generally impossible."
( phys.org...)

So that only strengthens the argument that the passage of time has to exist, right?
One of his arguments against the "proof" of time crystals is that they are not, and cannot be, in their ground state. so the absolute zero cannot be reached in this reality, no matter how fast you go; you cannot stop the passage of time.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 06:52 AM

Back in college I studied thermodynamics and conservation of energy.
Therefore I would probably try to explain the apparent oscillations (within a true ground state) as an artifact of the detector.

The oscillations are quite stable as can be ascertained by NIST documents that describe the "currently declassified" level of atomic clock technology..

We allowed to present classified information on ATS?

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 07:29 AM
I would say all times are actually the same time similar to the double slit expiriment, however our programed perception of one timeline or time gives us the illusion of time flowing and existing, one moment being seperate from the next when in fact all is one.

Consider the BIG BANG which is said to have a mirror universe which is said to collapse the universe in on itself into a singularity after its created by the reversal of time itself.

Ask yourself has the universe ever been anything other than the BIG BANG and a singularity the whole time?

So to summarize all time is one time, and any and all perceptions of time are nothing more than illusions.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 07:35 AM

So you are saying that the ground state exists and that atoms in this state oscillate, but that these fluctuations occur, not only in, but because of the eyes of the beholder?

This would mean that the passage of time is created by the ones that observe it. Wether it really exists is than a matter of semantics.
What can be ascertained however, is that it not neccesarly has to exist for all of "reality". It does have to exist for our reality, atleast the one we are "creating".

I quite like the "reality-is-a-hologram"-idea but im not quite sure what it means for us.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 07:40 AM

originally posted by: ArieBombarie

So you are saying that the ground state exists and that atoms in this state oscillate, but that these fluctuations occur, not only in, but because of the eyes of the beholder?

This would mean that the passage of time is created by the ones that observe it. Wether it really exists is than a matter of semantics.

What can be ascertained however, is that it not neccesarly has to exist for all of "reality". It does have to exist for our reality, atleast the one we are "creating".

I quite like the "reality-is-a-hologram"-idea but im not quite sure what it means for us.

Consider that while in a timestream it looks seperate due to our perception. However from another point of view the singularity its just one always has been and always will be.

For example the BIG BANG may be happening at an atomic level in every single particle with time and such we just dont see it.

posted on Dec, 17 2014 @ 08:11 AM

Fair enough, i can imagine that.

But I wouldn't want to be too quick about dismissing the "timestream" as non-existent.

As stated, it would be a matter of semantics. For if the singularity is only perceived by us, and is an illusion created by our own perception, there still exists this singularity in which we are hopelessly deceived or deceiving ourselves.
the passage of time still would be existent as a framework for us to make sense of this singularity, which would be the "real reality".
To be able to perceive this "real reality" we would need to be something other than ourselves.

Unicorns might not be "real", they do exist.

Plato's cave exists but it's not the "real reality"

new topics

top topics

9