1 = 10

[Farid7]

Hello,

It's very hard to believe that 1 = 10. But it's actually true and possible.

How so, you may ask. It's based on the principle of time travel. If you travel 10 seconds later into the future, it would have to take you less than 10 seconds. If you travel in 1 seconds. You have traveled 10 seconds later into the future in 1 seconds later. Thus 1 seconds later into the future is 10 seconds later, proving that 1 = 10.

But you might say that time travel is impossible. That's not true. As some of us already know. Time must get skipped for time to exist. Otherwise, it would take infinite steps for 1 second to pass, because the first half of 1 second must pass before 1 second and so on ad infinitum. Thus it would mean that 1 = infinity in that case.

 

[Apple Sky]

Time is a marker we humans use. Time doesn't actually exist; it's not a thing. Thus, your example is simply perception, not reality.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you travel in 1 seconds.

What if you travel 10 seconds into the future in 1 minute?

Then would 60 = 10?

 

[Shemjaza]

Hello,

It's very hard to believe that 1 = 10. But it's actually true and possible.

How so, you may ask. It's based on the principle of time travel. If you travel 10 seconds later into the future, it would have to take you less than 10 seconds. If you travel in 1 seconds. You have traveled 10 seconds later into the future in 1 seconds later. Thus 1 seconds later into the future is 10 seconds later, proving that 1 = 10.

But you might say that time travel is impossible. That's not true. As some of us already know. Time must get skipped for time to exist. Otherwise, it would take infinite steps for 1 second to pass, because the first half of 1 second must pass before 1 second and so on ad infinitum. Thus it would mean that 1 = infinity in that case.

I don't see the logic.

I can walk 6km in an hour or drive 60km in an hour... that doesn't make 6 = 60.\

And that kind of time travel is absolutely possible, just not practical at this time. Accelerate to near the speed of light you can absolutely get to experiencing time 10 times slower than the people you left behind.

 

[Larniavc]

Hello,

It's very hard to believe that 1 = 10. But it's actually true and possible.

How so, you may ask. It's based on the principle of time travel. If you travel 10 seconds later into the future, it would have to take you less than 10 seconds. If you travel in 1 seconds. You have traveled 10 seconds later into the future in 1 seconds later. Thus 1 seconds later into the future is 10 seconds later, proving that 1 = 10.

But you might say that time travel is impossible. That's not true. As some of us already know. Time must get skipped for time to exist. Otherwise, it would take infinite steps for 1 second to pass, because the first half of 1 second must pass before 1 second and so on ad infinitum. Thus it would mean that 1 = infinity in that case.

Time passes at 1s/s within a frame of reference. So 1=1.

Case closed?

 

[durangodawood]

Time is a marker we humans use. Time doesn't actually exist; it's not a thing. Thus, your example is simply perception, not reality.

Does distance exist? Or is it just a marker too?

 

[Farid7]

I don't see the logic.

I can walk 6km in an hour or drive 60km in an hour... that doesn't make 6 = 60.\

And that kind of time travel is absolutely possible, just not practical at this time. Accelerate to near the speed of light you can absolutely get to experiencing time 10 times slower than the people you left behind.

Yes, but can you reach 6km after traveling 2km?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, but can you reach 6km after traveling 2km?

If you travel 4 more kilometres, yes.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, but can you reach 6km after traveling 2km?

Technically yes.

At relativistic speeds space actually contracts from the perspective of the one travelling.

 

[SelfSim]

That set up for a straw man argument ..

Not necessarily .. a straw man conclusion would be a premature conclusion.

The onus would be upon you, to show us how you arrive at your meaning for: 'exists'.
Hint: dictionary definitions are unlikely to convince reasoning scientific thinkers in a Physical and Life Sciences forum.

Observations are models constructed from human perceptions. Our knowledge is updated with new meanings for the word 'exists', by our minds and in science, those updates are on the basis of objectively tested results data. The other way, is by way of just believing something exists. So which way do you prefer?

 

[BeyondET]

Time is a marker we humans use. Time doesn't actually exist; it's not a thing. Thus, your example is simply perception, not reality.

What is aging, going from an infant to an old person. If time didn't exist no one would age thus no one would be born.