Scientists crushed as ‘Big Bang’ evidence evaporates on further analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Exiled_Child
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
EmperorNapoleon said:
Time is a human invention not a law of nature. It is just a subjective unit of measurement used to describe or quantify a change in x in relation to y based on our perception of that change from our relative position in the universe.
Click to expand...
Time is a part of the universe as much as space itself is. Time can be distorted, expanded, slowed and reversed. Time exists entirely independently from human perception, therefore it is not subjective though our perception of it is by definition subjective in many respects.

All ‘measuring’ is is to take a ratio of an objects particular quality and compare it to a standard of that same quality. We can take such comparisons of length, width, color, rate of change, etc. To the extent that ANYTHING can be objectively measured we can measure time as well.

To say that these measurement standards are not natural does not equate to saying that they are therefore subjective at all.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
The difference is that there is no cosmic baseline to consistently measure time. Length and volume are the same no matter how a person views it or where they view it from. Time is not. One of the easiest examples of this is a time measurement of 1 year. That means ~365 days for us on Earth, but it means ~90,500 days if you’re standing on Pluto.
Click to expand...
:confused:

You are talking about two different things, an Earth year vrs a Plutonian year.

Do you think that there cannot be a baseline for three dimensional measurement simply because a yard does not equal a meter?

And no, if you are standing on Pluto the length of an Earth year does not change at all.
 
Darryl1958 said:
That is not the same as saying that time is a human invention.
Click to expand...
Time is not a human invention, but the standards we measure time by are.

Methinks that some of the posters are confusing the measurement standard units for the dimension itself.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
It is the same. Time is measured in accordance with our perception from our position which makes it unique to us. Another example of this is our invention of timezones. If time were a natural law then it would be 11:27PM everywhere in the universe simultaneously.
Click to expand...
That is not true. It is the standard measurement units of time that are relative to a standard, Greenwich Mean time.

The use of time zones is to simply allow for the local rising and setting of the sun to have some relevance to the normal expectation that sun rise is somewhere around 6 am and sun set somewhere around 6 pm, give or take an hour or two.

The standard time is Greenwich Mean time and that is the same no matter where you are in the universe.
 
zz912 said:
If the universe has no beginning, then the problems of infinite time arise.

If time is infinite, how did we reach this exact moment in time? There is an infinite amount of time before this moment. We could never reach this moment in time.
Click to expand...
wibbly wimey timey wimey… stuff

It is strange to consider that if something has been going on for an infinite period of time, no matter when it ends it would have existed for the exact same amount of time. So if the universe ends today, a billion years from now, or a billion years in the past, it would have existed for the exact same amount of time.
 
catholictiger said:
time
legnth
height
weight

etc.

aren’t really actual realities in the world. They are Human concepts that help make sense of the world around us. Now I’m not falling into a Kantian understanding of the world were everything is just what humans make it out to be. The table in front of me really exists as a table, but the 3 feet it spans isn’t really 3 feet. There is no property of feet in it’s being, rather this is just how we understand how wide it is.

Augustine explains it the best.

Time is a concept of our mind and can only exist because of our mind.

The past has no existence because it is no longer here
The present exists but time doesn’t exist in the present because there is no value of present. It is constantly coming in and out of existence.
the future has no existence because it doesn’t exist yet.

If only the present exists and it has no length or value, how can we say time exists?

By our minds.

The past exists in our memories
the future exists anticipation.

Why can I say 10 minutes ago I woke up? Because I have memory of waking up 10 minutes ago.

Why can I say in 3 minuets I will be getting ready for the day, that because I’m anticipating that in 3 minuets I will be getting ready.

Time has no real existence in the world, it only exists in our minds. At-least according to Augustine.
Click to expand...
It has already been demonstrated that objects can move backwards and forwards in time.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel#Time_travel_to_the_future_in_physics
This form of “travel into the future” is theoretically allowed (and has been demonstrated at very small time scales) using the following methods:[30]
Using velocity-based time dilation under the theory of special relativity, for instance: Traveling at almost the speed of light to a distant star, then slowing down, turning around, and traveling at almost the speed of light back to Earth[59] (see the Twin paradox)
Click to expand...
Using gravitational time dilation under the theory of general relativity, for instance: Residing inside of a hollow, high-mass object;
Residing just outside of the event horizon of a black hole, or sufficiently near an object whose mass or density causes the gravitational time dilation near it to be larger than the time dilation factor on Earth.
Click to expand...
Even causality is subject to reverse movements in time.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrocausality#As_physics
 
Burt_Macklin said:
wibbly wimey timey wimey… stuff

It is strange to consider that if something has been going on for an infinite period of time, no matter when it ends it would have existed for the exact same amount of time. So if the universe ends today, a billion years from now, or a billion years in the past, it would have existed for the exact same amount of time.
Click to expand...
Yes, when one introduces irrational assertions like an infinite duration to the universe into the mix, the Meaning wheels going flying off.
 
Darryl1958 said:
It would be a mistake to think that since time does not exist in the same way that a material thing exists, that it is therefore not real.
Click to expand...
True.

But if we drag philosophical semantics into the discussion we have to settle on exactly which kind of Reality we are talking about, and whose perception of it is the norm and if we would even have a norm, etc, etc, and so nothing is ever decided.

The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.
The Second Law of Philosophy: They’re both wrong.
 
RGCheek said:
Time is not a human invention, but the standards we measure time by are.

Methinks that some of the posters are confusing the measurement standard units for the dimension itself.
Click to expand...
The same moment of time that we are experiencing on earth is also being experienced at this very moment on Pluto. It is possible to synchronize our measurements of time over vast distances in order to communicate with Mars, for example.
 
Darryl1958 said:
It would be a mistake to think that since time does not exist in the same way that a material thing exists, that it is therefore not real.
Click to expand...
I didn’t imply this. Time has existence in our minds and no-where else.
 
RGCheek said:
True.

But if we drag philosophical semantics into the discussion we have to settle on exactly which kind of Reality we are talking about, and whose perception of it is the norm and if we would even have a norm, etc, etc, and so nothing is ever decided.

The First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.
The Second Law of Philosophy: They’re both wrong.
Click to expand...
It is an interesting logical paradox to contemplate how long it would take along an infinitely long timeline to arrive at the moment of time which we all find ourselves at the time
Methinks it cannot be done.
The solution to that is to either state that time is imaginary, or that infinity is an imaginary number.
I don’t think that mathematicians have a problem with stating that infinity is an imaginary number, and physicist follow the Second Law of Philosophy when philosophers disagree with them on the reality of time.
It makes good logical sense therefore for amateurs to cede to mainstream opinion when it comes to the laws of physics and time.
 
Darryl1958 said:
That is a rather whimsical statement.
How much time do you imagine it to formulate it in your mind?
Click to expand...
Not long I’ve dealt with this issue before at length. It was actually one of my papers for Metaphysics in minor seminary.

Pretty much what I argued is that time in the philosophical sense only had mental existence, as in it has no existence in the outside world. C.F. Augustine

In science time is real, but the problem is that time in philosophy and time in science are two different things, and that doesn’t really matter because science and philosophy are two different areas of study. This means they actually don’t contradict each other.

Time in philosophy doesn’t have any real existence, rather just mental existence.

Time in science seems to be effected by gravity by a lot.

But these are two different subjects.

Now I don’t have much background in physics, but I think it is possible that time is still a measurement of how things change. We are looking into the past when we see light, because it takes “time” to travel to us, but that doesn’t team time is necessarily real. It just means light doesn’t move from one spot to another spot instantaneous. Meaning a person on planet a 1 light year from a star will see it sooner than person b 10 light years from the star.

But this is a very elementary understand of these things. I just know in philosophy time has no real existence outside of our minds.

I’ll restate the argument.

The past has no existence, as in it no longer exists. My being at 3pm doesn’t exist anymore, it is no my existence at 3:11pm.
present exists but it has no value no length so time which necessarily needs length to exist can’t exist in the present.
the future doesn’t exist.

So where does time come in?

Well in our minds

I’m singing a note with 4 beats. I’m on beat 3 how do I know to stop the note in one beat?

My memory tells me I’ve held it for 2 beats, I’m experiencing beat 3 and anticipating beat 4.

the time of 4 beats has no real existence in the outside world, but it does in my mind. Upheld by memory, experience, and anticipation.

How do I know that I had had lunch 2 hours ago, because of memory.
how do I know that I’m tying this message, because I’m experience it now.
how do I know that in about 10 minutes I’ll be working on home work, because I’m anticipating that.

2 hours doesn’t exist but rather is my mind using memory and experience to put a value on the passing of the present.
 
catholictiger said:
you’re going to have to explain this in your own words. I just don’t trust wikipedia to talk about this.
Click to expand...
Speeds approaching light cause time to slow for those on the vehicle. So if twins were separated with one going say ten light years away at .9 times the speed of light, then on getting back the twin that left would be much younger than the twin that stayed behind.

In QM there are cases where effects of events have been observed just prior to the event itself. Positrons travel backwards in time under certain circumstances.

So the past does exist, since it can be reached from the present, and the flow of time is malleable.

Time exists independent of mankind’s perception of it.
 
RGCheek said:
Speeds approaching light cause time to slow for those on the vehicle. So if twins were separated with one going say ten light years away at .9 times the speed of light, then on getting back the twin that left would be much younger than the twin that stayed behind.

In QM there are cases where effects of events have been observed just prior to the event itself. Positrons travel backwards in time under certain circumstances.

So the past does exist, since it can be reached from the present, and the flow of time is malleable.

Time exists independent of mankind’s perception of it.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard these before, I don’t know enough about this to refute it.
 
RGCheek said:
Speeds approaching light cause time to slow for those on the vehicle. So if twins were separated with one going say ten light years away at .9 times the speed of light, then on getting back the twin that left would be much younger than the twin that stayed behind.

In QM there are cases where effects of events have been observed just prior to the event itself. Positrons travel backwards in time under certain circumstances.

So the past does exist, since it can be reached from the present, and the flow of time is malleable.

Time exists independent of mankind’s perception of it.
Click to expand...
Yes, as one approaches the speed of light, time passes more slowly, mass increases, and length in the direction of travel diminishes. So in theory, I suppose, at the point where a physical object reached the speed of light, time would stop, it’s length would be zero, and its mass infinite.

Extrapolating from there, it would seem that at speeds exceeding the speed of light, time would go backwards, and length would go negative.
 
JimG said:
Yes, as one approaches the speed of light, time passes more slowly, mass increases, and length in the direction of travel diminishes. So in theory, I suppose, at the point where a physical object reached the speed of light, time would stop, it’s length would be zero, and its mass infinite.

Extrapolating from there, it would seem that at speeds exceeding the speed of light, time would go backwards, and length would go negative.
Click to expand...
But infinite mass kind of rules out actual faster than light speeds, don’t you think?

Best I have seen is some idea on warping space-time to get effective faster than light travel, kind of like Star Trek, but a constant 1G acceleration is pretty fast also without so much of the time dilation harshness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top