Why Time Does NOT Exist!

You obviously need to turn on your internal chronometer!

Originally posted by sirnex

I believe I said this before, time is the religious dogma of science, amongst other things.

So now it does exist!

Make your mind up.

And you've been a member for how long?

reply to post by poet1b


Generally accepted should be rephrased to generally assumed. You have to be at the right place at the right time in what context? Right time as measured in force or right time as measured in position of the sun or hands of a clock?

The two concepts are remarkably different from one another. One is measuring not time, but rather the cyclical movements of other physical objects. The other is measuring an actual force we are moving through.

So to say, right place at the right time, you really need to think more carefully on how you get to the right place at the right time.

I have yet to see any evidence of time as a force. GR relies on light being at a constant speed, it not only relies on it, it assumes that it is always at a constant speed. I find it rather odd and humorous that we would claim assumptions to be facts. There are quiet a few articles out there that talk about C not being a constant, and even discuss time being no existent below plank. Motion gets rather fuzzy below plank.

We don't know what gravity is yet, or how it works or is transmitted as a force, but its effects are observable. With time, it is more tricky. You can't look at the day/night cycles and call it a force of time. All your looking at is an objects natural tendency to move.

You talk about me not understanding the scientific method, but how scientific is it to claim an assumption is a fact? You posted the method earlier, yet you failed to mention make an unobserved assumption and base your theory off that to make it fit. Being in tune with the cycles of nature and moving through a force of time are separate entities unless we can conclusively prove that time is an actual force, or that dimensions even exist.

@nerbot:

Reading comprehension. It is a rather useful tool. I wasn't referring to time existing in reality. What I was elaborating at was that time is science's religious crutch. Without a force of time, our current understanding of physics are ultimately wrong. Technically they already are wrong as is because they don't adequatly explain what is being observed. Some thing's appear right, but most appears wrong and relies on a vast amount of assumptions. Very unscientific. It is no different then religion assuming that god(s) exist and that there is an afterlife and that the mind/soul is separate from the flesh.

You must be at the right place, as in position, as in three dimensional space, using the right amount of force, at the right time, which means when the objects and forces are aligned to do what you need to have done. The position of the sun might or might not have anything to do with the situation, and the hands of a clock can only help to guide you to the right moment to act. The world is a very complicated place constantly changing, bodies of matter constantly in motion, and forces constantly in a state of flux. These things do not happen independent of each other, there are patterns, cycles, and rates of change that allow us to predict the outcome of events, and this is what we describe as time, which is something we really do not fully understand yet.

If you claim that you "find it rather odd and humorous that we would claim assumptions to be facts." If proves that you have no grasp of science. In science things are look at in degrees of uncertainty, assumptions are made only have the scientific method has established them to be true within a reasonable degree of uncertainty. Always, there is an understanding in science that we do not understand everything, and that no assumption, no law, no principle can always be assumed to be correct. This is what the scientific method allows science to do. While we don't know everything, the scientific method has allowed us to do some amazing things.

No doubt our understanding of time needs a great deal more development, but the reality is that time and time again, the physical world has demonstrated that it works in a very cyclic manner.

reply to post by poet1b


I think your missing by far one of the biggest assumptions then. The assumption that unexplained things can explain other phenomenon. Like gravity, we have an assumed understanding of an unexplained force, enough so that we rely on this assumption to explain the motions of stars and planets. We have no explanation for what causes gravity, or if the graviton even exists. Gravity is another force that is required by GR.

We assume the the measured cycles and patterns are equivalent to a fundamental force of time that these cycles and patterns move through. Yet we have no explanation for what time is as a force outside of measuring cycle and patterns. Most people even assume that energy is a property of space when it is not.

I would like to note that there are theories out there that can adequatly compete against GR and do indeed explain more, but unfortunately, the dogma of Einstein and GR is just as powerful as the dogma of religion.

Heck, we even had to invent a new form of matter to explain observed phenomenon and yet we have no explanation for what this matter might be or what it's properties are, but without it, current physics and current observations just don't mesh well.

reply to post by sirnex


I pretty sure that all physicist recognize the flaws in the current system, that we really don't know what creates gravity, what the true nature of time actually is, or even what creates electrical force. Many scientists are looking for better answers, but at the current time, quantum mechanics is the best thing we have going so far. Until someone comes up with better theories, that is what we will continue to follow, because it has allowed us to develop atomic energy, launch vehicles into space, land on other planets, and steer spaceships through the solar system.

All I can offer are my reasons for believeing that time is actually a force, as much as a dimension, and as an amateur physicist who likes to think about such things. I have to say, I certainly can't rule out the idea that time doesn't exist. It just seems to me that for the reasons I have mentioned, time, or frequency, has a natural force, most likely resulting from the big dance that is our reality, because matter and the forces of this world align up in certain ways, the timing of an application of free will can change the natural motion of the world. The whole concept gets to be fairly philosophical, but isn't that the concept behind keeping an open mind.

reply to post by poet1b


My problem with time being a force is that time is never measured as a force, it is just assumed to be a force that everything moves through. All concepts of time are based upon first, observations of the day/night cycles and today based on the oscillations of atoms. I just don't get or understand how measuring one thing means your measuring something else. That's like demanding you have your cake and get to eat it too.

When you keep bringing up timing, I keep asking you timing based on what. Is this timing based on a force or on other physical objects? The two are separate entities. I understand the use of a concept of time, as being useful in terms of when to go and leave work and such. Yet I don't understand the concept of time as a force we move through when no force has ever been measured nor observed.

The other issue I have is that there are theories out there that don't make use of inventing unobserved things to explain observed things. These theories work quiet well in explaining observed things and even explain things better then the explanations we have. The issue with them however is that they undermine GR, they show that GR is not needed and some do away with the paradox's of GR. GR is a religious dogma.

[edit on 11-8-2008 by sirnex]

reply to post by sirnex


Basically, all measurements, especially measurements of any kind of force, are using one thing to measure another, whether you are talking about voltage, pressure, heat, or what ever, you are measuring something effected by these forces, like two pieces of metal with different expansion rates when exposed to heat.

When I think of timing, as in the baseball bat example, no one is measuring anything, they are observing the ball coming at them, estimating it's speed and trajectory, and at the same time their own ability to swing the bat. Their mind arrives at the moment that the body must physically begin to react, and they set themselves into motion. Now the whole thing might be based on the ability of their mind to put all of these things together, but some people simply allow themselves to react, they feel the moment arrive, and they react with a sense of timing. This might be something you yourself have experienced many times, you recognize a moment that you should do things, but it is not conscious, it is more a response to hidden senses that seem to go beyond some thought process.

Hey, please introduce us to these theories that you feel undermine GR. Also, I forget, what are you refering to with the GR accronym. I'm always looking for new theories that explain things about our world.

I posted this on another website, but it is relevant to this discussion so I will repost it here:

Time is in the eye of the beholder. In that Time was invented by humans as a means to break down the day/night period into quantifiable sections so as to be able to effectively place some sort of control on their day to day lives and to act as a base for being able to accurately determine things like farming seasons, whether to invade the next country for whatever pitiful reason without freezing themselves solid by accidentally invading during the worst winter in history, you know...that kinda thing....

So. Humans have become almost instinctively aware of Time in the eons of evolution of the human species since the advent of the idea of Time. It has evolved and even branched out into different interpretations of it (e.g. the Mayan calender). It has been ingrained into our deepest subconscious somewhere in between the instinct reflex that causes us to breathe and the instinct to want to bash slow walking people in the back of the head. We have an acute sense with us at all times of when to roughly expect the next section of Time to kick over, how long it has been since the last section of Time, and the amount of Time left until the next section of Time. Thus we are able to, for instance, know with almost boring accuracy, how long it will be until you get to leave work.

Throw emotion into the mix. If an individual does not wish to go to work because his job sux, the boss is an a-hole and the secretary is screwing a goat, he will be aware of the time remaining till he can get the hell out of there and will be annoyed and/or sad at the fact that it FEELS like Time is going slower than it SHOULD be and will not speed up for him. If this same individual were to be, say, fishing - an activity he enjoys very much - he will be aware of how much Time he has remaining until he has to go home and be annoyed and/or sad at the fact that it FEELS like Time is going faster than it SHOULD be and will not slow down for him.

But what happens if you were to take Time out of the equation?

Have you ever been so deep in thought that 2 hours go by and you suddenly 'come to' to find you have been staring at the same spot on the wall that looks like a nipple poking out but is actually just a painted over nail?
Chances are that you were accessing some part of another unconscious or deep-seated thought that was over-riding and suppressing your awareness of Time. You became so entrenched with a singular thought process that you could unconsciously manipulate your awareness of Time inside the thought, even totally forget about it. Without your awareness of Time how are you to know how long it is until the next section of Time, whether that be a second, a minute or an hour? Without your perception of Time your memory of how long a 'section' of say 30 seconds takes to tick over could become 35 seconds in actuality, then 40 seconds, then 45 seconds. Time, in your mind, is going faster, not at the rate you would expect it to be, but your mind isn't taking into account the fact that it is incorrectly guessing the space of Time between sections.

Coma patients don't know how long they have been unconscious for because their ability to perceive Time isn't able to be processed by an actively conscious mind.

reply to post by Kryties


I agree, if anything, over use of the clock causes us to lose our sense of time and timing. I think real time fluxes a great deal more than science recognizes.

reply to post by Mysteri


I watched a special on the Discovery Channel recently that focused on the Human body and mind and its operations. At one point an experiment was conducted with some firemen who responded to a call. When the building reached the point of collapse, the firemen who were apparently wired for vitals, turned and ran out of the building. Observers noted that when the flames "should" have reached the firemen they were able to "slow time" to allow them to reach a safe point beyond the flames. It occurred to me that would be possible if time were NOT a property of the material universe but might have been used to avoid someone saying "i dont know" in much the same was that the explanation of the atmosphere was due, at one time anyway, to the presence of an ether. I agree with you

ps Dr Johnny Fever on "WKRP in Cincinatti" once said "everybody IS out to get you. Paranoia is just good planning.

Robert

Something to consider along these same lines is an historical fact. The division of the planet into time zones was the result of businessmen to allow them to co ordinate their activities in different geographical areas.

Time is control. Without time to control what happenes and when, everything would be happening at once. Yes time demands change, and you are constantly changing. You are not the same you as you were 3 minutes ago. the blood cells in your veins and arteries are in a different position, you probably have more digested food in your intestines, and your thought process has changed several times. Time exists. Minutes, seconds, and hours are just mere measurements just like inches or meters.

reply to post by shiman


From en.wikipedia.org...

Among prominent philosophers, there are two distinct viewpoints on time.

To which definition of 'time' are you referring to?
This one....

One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Time travel, in this view, becomes a possibility as other "times" persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line.

or this one...

The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz and Immanuel Kant,holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be traveled.

sorry, didn´t read the hole thread, but:

I believe that time is here, there and in eternity.
Only our minds can´t see it as the hole thing it is (the time).

There will be a time without time? maybe...

this are speculations from me,
but: i know that time can travel too.
means, we can travel thruth the time.
with "OOBE" its possible...


Nia

Well, the thing about heat is that it is just excited particles moving really fast. There is no real heat force, nor is any claimed to exist thankfully! When measuring how hot or cold an object is, your just measuring how fast its particles are moving.

With the baseball example, no 'moment' is being calculated or measured by the brain. Yes, it does seem hard and complex to grasp, but the brain has no need to measure a non-existent force to calculate at which point to physically swing to hit the ball. Do you also need to calculate a proper 'moment or time' to strike a stationary object also?

GR= General Relativity.

Modified Newtonian dynamics is able to explain large structures in space, unlike GR which needs to invent unobserved and unexplained forms of matter and energy (dark matter/energy).

Quantum Aether Dynamics is able to explain the universe without all those pesky paradox's the Einstein introduced in todays standard model.

There are many more out there that explain without a need to invent unobservable phenomenon. Even though I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that any single theory is fully right in and of itself. Perhaps a meshing of sorts is needed rather then all this competition BS.

Hmm, heat is more than measuring how fast particles are moving, and actually it is how quickly they are vibrating, and with what force. If you understood how thr refrigerant cycle works, you would realize that heat is alot more complicated than you realize. Hot always flows towards cold. compression creates heat, while expansion pulls heat away from the environment around it.

There is a HUGE, HUGE difference between hitting an object that is stationary, or moving in sync with you, and hitting an object moving rapidly. Have you ever taken calculus? Do you understand the correlation between the summation of an object moving over a distance, rate or speed, and acceleration.

General Relativity still hasn't been proven, only special relativity is considered to be a highly likely law of physics. GR is one of many theories getting kicked around in the scientific community.

I am by no means an expert on this subject, so perhaps someone who is could clarify what I'm trying to say here, but many years ago I heard of an example of how time cannot exist.

It goes along the lines of firing an arrow at an apple. Now if one were to take a picture of the position of the arrow position at a particular millisecond and then take another in the very next millisecond, it appears as if the arrow has travelled a certain distance but virtually no time has elapsed.

I have probably butchered that example, but it gives you an idea of what Im talking about (and even then I could still be completely wrong )

reply to post by Mysteri
Wow thanks for clearing that up. I'll sleep better tonight knowing that the next time I lose my interstellar soccer ball and I go into hibernation for a little while I'll be able to find it again.Awesome.Thanks again.