The "Time" thread.

[AV1611VET]

He who? God? Jesus?

People who don't exist aren't anything let alone glad.

What's this then?

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically.

SOURCE

 

[SelfSim]

Given what Green is saying, can one conclude all time is simultaneous or must there be a relation between two moving entities/points of reference for talk of "time" to make sense? Or maybe both thoughts miss the mark of what he's saying?

I think one has to be very careful with what he's saying there. When the alien and the dude at the gas station are both stationary relative to eachother, their clocks tick at the same rate .. therefore they share the same 'now' slices.

'Time' is the non-spatial dimension of his loaf model. Which is exactly the same role an indvidual axis of a graph plays in a graph model.

Also notice that Greene is playing the role of an 'outside' observer and yet, there is no 'outside' of the universe. Its an analogy to explain GR's perspective, where he plays the role of the supposed 'God' character (for theatrical effect I think).

The last part where he argues that all time is real and therefore exists, is a consequence of the reality he argues, of the loaf model.
Hossenfelder's video explores that notion deeper. I don't really like the way she finishes it up .. but that's another story, I think.

 

[SelfSim]

I don't know about being able to see into the future, but with the distances Greene is talking about, the alien is already seeing the past due to however many light years he is away, so if he could see into the future, it might only be a more recent past, etc. But they are both in the "now" both of them are already, but each is already only seeing each others past, however far apart they are from one another, etc. And I don't think, with the distances they would have to be apart from one another to be able to be able to see either each other's future or past, that they would be able to see into one another's futures, but only a more recent past, etc.

He's not talking about them seeing eachother. He's talking about how they can share the same 'now', 'past' or 'future' timeslices of the spacetime 'loaf' model, depending on their motions relative to eachother. That's all. Addressing what you're trying to talk about just makes the whole point more confusing .. and doesn't help understand the relativity effects.

The actual "now" is where both of them are already at. Or in other words, the places in the universe are both the same age, no matter where they at, and that is what the "now" or now time is for both of them, etc, regardless of how long the light from each other's different places takes to travel to where the other one is at, which is why they are seeing each other in the past, etc.

Don't worry about the age of 'the places' in the universe loaf model .. that is irrelevant when it comes to understanding the model and only serves to confuse that purpose.

 

[Neogaia777]

@SelfSim

Let's say they were a billion light years apart, and they were each seeing each other a billion years in the past, then the alien goes as fast as he can toward the other so his "slice" gets as angled as much toward seeing the other one's future as possible, etc, then he would only be able to see into the other ones future, only if that effect would excced the billion light years into the other one's past that he is already seeing, etc, and I don't think that effect would ever excced that, etc. Therefore cannot see into the other one's or another one's future no matter what, but only a more recent past, etc.

God Bless.

I don't think time travel is ever possible, or seeing into another one/places future beyond the past, etc. Everything is the same age everywhere, and that is the "now" or now time, compared to the future and the past, etc. We are always seeing everything in the past, whether your a billion light years away/apart, or only one foot apart, we are always seeing "the past" however many light years/nanoseconds you are always apart from one another no matter what, etc, you are always seeing another places past, etc. You are not in the past, because you are in the now, but are only seeing everything else in the past, and that's only because of the time it takes for the light or light images to reach you where you are at, etc.

God Bless.

 

[SelfSim]

@SelfSim

Let's say they were a billion light years apart, and they were each seeing each other a billion years in the past, then the alien goes as fast as he can toward the other so his "slice" gets as angled as much toward seeing the other one's future as possible, etc, then he would only be able to see into the other ones future, only if that effect would excced the billion light years into the other one's past that he is already seeing, etc, and I don't think that effect would ever excced that, etc. Therefore cannot see into the other one's or another one's future no matter what, but only a more recent past, etc.

God Bless.

Again .. forget them 'seeing' eachother part. The perspective Greene is talking from, is outside the loaf universe model and that's the only 'seeing' going on, and is the only thing relevant in that video.

 

[Neogaia777]

He's not talking about them seeing eachother. He's talking about how they can share the same 'now', 'past' or 'future' timeslices of the spacetime 'loaf' model, depending on their motions relative to eachother. That's all. Addressing what you're trying to talk about just makes the whole point more confusing .. and doesn't help understand the relativity effects.

Don't worry about the age of 'the places' in the universe loaf model .. that is irrelevant when it comes to understanding the model and only serves to confuse that purpose.

The only possible way for them to observe each other in the now, is to be right on top of the other one, or be right exactly in the same place that they are at.

And everything is the same age everywhere, etc. But no one can observe that unless they could be the same person/place/thing in two places at once, etc, due to not being able to directly observe two things/places at once, unless you are right where they are at, etc.

 

[Neogaia777]

Again .. forget them 'seeing' eachother part. The perspective Greene is talking from, is outside the loaf universe model and that's the only 'seeing' going on, and is the only thing relevant in that video.

Greene uses the example of the two people (man and alien) being separated by billions of light years, etc, and says that it is that distance, that has to be present, in order for the effect he is describing to be, etc. You can't see/be at two places at once, unless you could see/be in two places at once, etc, and if you are in the same place, then this effect he is talking about, no longer exists, or can no longer can be, etc. It has to be separated by distance in order to be, and then that's when we have to talk about "seeing" and/or observing, etc. And it is my belief that this effect will never excced the distance they are separated by, etc, and so can't see into the future, but only the past, etc

 

[SelfSim]

The only possible way for them to observe each other in the now, is to be right on top of the other one, or be right exactly in the same place that they are at.

And everything is the same age everywhere, etc. But no one can observe that unless they could be the same person/place/thing in two places at once, etc, due to not being able to directly observe two things/places at once, unless you are right where they are at, etc.

I'll say it again .. forget the points you are trying to make .. they are completely different topics.

The thread is about how we can clearly think about time .. a point underscored and emphasised by the demonstrations of abject confusion in the OP.

 

[Neogaia777]

I'll say it again .. forget the points you are trying to make .. they are completely different topics.

The thread is about how we can clearly think about time .. a point underscored and emphasised by the demonstrations of abject confusion in the OP.

Sorry your confused. I'll try to break it down more, or simplify it more in the future, ok.

And I am very much talking about time, and subjects/topics mentioned in the OP, and they are not different topics.

Take Care/God Bless.

 

[SelfSim]

Greene uses the example of the two people (man and alien) being separated by billions of light years, etc, and says that it is that distance, that has to be present, in order for the effect he is describing to be, etc. You can't see/be at two places at once, unless you could see/be in two places at once, etc, and if you are in the same place, then this effect he is talking about, no longer exists, or can no longer can be, etc. It has to be separated by distance in order to be, and then that's when we have to talk about "seeing" and/or observing, etc. And it is my belief that this effect will never excced the distance they are separated by, etc, and so can't see into the future, but only the past, etc

Groan!
Just stick with the basics, eh? You still don't have them embedded properly.

The model is about the differences perceived in the passing of time when two objects are in motion relative to eachother.

 

[SelfSim]

Sorry your confused. I'll try to break it down more, or simplify it more in the future, ok.

I'm confused? Right ..
The observer projection effect there, methinks.

And I am very much talking about time, and subjects/topics mentioned in the OP, and they are not different topics.

No .. you are hijacking your own thread!

 

[Neogaia777]

Groan!
Just stick with the basics, eh? You still don't have them embedded properly.

The model is about the differences perceived in the passing of time when two objects are in motion relative to eachother.

I'll try, ok.

But unless those objects are separated by vast distances, the differences perceived, no matter what the distance, will never exceed how much they are already seeing/perceiving in the past already, etc.

Now motion slows the passage of time for an object in motion, if that's now what you are wanting to talk about here? But these are somewhat separate issues really, etc. But both having to do with passage of time, or how time is seen/perceived, etc.

 

[Neogaia777]

I'm confused? Right ..
The observer projection effect there, methinks.

No .. you are hijacking your own thread!

You said you were confused, but its whatever I guess really.

And I'm trying to sick with the topic of "time", and also what you are (I think) are trying to talk about here, etc?

 

[Hans Blaster]

I don't think time travel is ever possible, or seeing into another one/places future beyond the past, etc. Everything is the same age everywhere, and that is the "now" or now time, compared to the future and the past, etc. We are always seeing everything in the past, whether your a billion light years away/apart, or only one foot apart, we are always seeing "the past" however many light years/nanoseconds you are always apart from one another no matter what, etc, you are always seeing another places past, etc. You are not in the past, because you are in the now, but are only seeing everything else in the past, and that's only because of the time it takes for the light or light images to reach you where you are at, etc.

God Bless.

Brian Greene's example only has to do with the definition of "now". Light still takes time to propagate from one place to another. Start with his example of the alien 10 billion ly away from the human and not moving relative to each other. The human calls his now "2020". If the alien sends a message to the human it will arrive 10 billion years after 2020. If the alien was moving the alien's "now" would not be the same as 2020 and instead be 200 years before 2020 or 200 years after and the message would arrive 10 billion years after 1820 or 10 billlion years after 2220 (depending on the direction of the motion). That is what the "now" discussion is about. All of the things happening 1 foot apart have the same now, but light still takes 1 nanosecond to propagate between them.

 

[SelfSim]

Brian Greene's example only has to do with the definition of "now". Light still takes time to propagate from one place to another. Start with his example of the alien 10 billion ly away from the human and not moving relative to each other. The human calls his now "2020". If the alien sends a message to the human it will arrive 10 billion years after 2020. If the alien was moving the alien's "now" would not be the same as 2020 and instead be 200 years before 2020 or 200 years after and the message would arrive 10 billion years after 1820 or 10 billlion years after 2220 (depending on the direction of the motion). That is what the "now" discussion is about.

Yes .. the 'existence' slices defining the 'now' of the block universe, can't have any observable consequences, otherwise it would violate the "all observers viewpoints are equally valid" assumption of SR, but its a model and other models wouldn't have this issue, I think(?)
(Aka: it becomes a different conversation under a different model ..)

All of the things happening 1 foot apart have the same now, but light still takes 1 nanosecond to propagate between them.

So only things which exist now and here (locally) then and we're not then worried about making statements about things existing in non-local parts of the universe .. so we're now not talking about the block model(?)

 

[Neogaia777]

Brian Greene's example only has to do with the definition of "now". Light still takes time to propagate from one place to another. Start with his example of the alien 10 billion ly away from the human and not moving relative to each other. The human calls his now "2020". If the alien sends a message to the human it will arrive 10 billion years after 2020. If the alien was moving the alien's "now" would not be the same as 2020 and instead be 200 years before 2020 or 200 years after and the message would arrive 10 billion years after 1820 or 10 billlion years after 2220 (depending on the direction of the motion). That is what the "now" discussion is about. All of the things happening 1 foot apart have the same now, but light still takes 1 nanosecond to propagate between them.

The alien is seeing 10 billion ly into the other man's past no matter what when the alien is at rest, and if he were moving, then he would see either a little bit more into the future of the 10 billion light years old man's past, or further back into his past than that, or the 10 billion ly old picture the alien was already seeing, etc, but I don't think ever enough to be able to see into the man's future maybe, etc? I don't think the effect would ever be of the correct or high enough magnitude to be able to ever do that maybe, etc?

Trying to send something there, or get there though is an interesting concept though, but I wonder if the effect would just close up or catch up or close the gap eventually, as you or the message, or whatever, was on it's way there, or was trying to get there I wonder?

Take Care.

 

[Neogaia777]

Brian Greene's example only has to do with the definition of "now". Light still takes time to propagate from one place to another. Start with his example of the alien 10 billion ly away from the human and not moving relative to each other. The human calls his now "2020". If the alien sends a message to the human it will arrive 10 billion years after 2020. If the alien was moving the alien's "now" would not be the same as 2020 and instead be 200 years before 2020 or 200 years after and the message would arrive 10 billion years after 1820 or 10 billlion years after 2220 (depending on the direction of the motion). That is what the "now" discussion is about. All of the things happening 1 foot apart have the same now, but light still takes 1 nanosecond to propagate between them.

@SelfSim also.

I don't think the effect would last, but I think it would just close that gap as it was going there, or was getting there maybe, so it would still arrive at exactly the time from how many light years it was away from you always, if you sent it at the speed of light, etc.

It doesn't at all change either ones "now" either way, etc, but this effect that were talking about here could maybe only at best be described as being akin to that of an "optical illusion", etc, that would get less, or would lessen, or would close that gap, of that illusion or whatever, as whatever it was that was going there, or was being sent there, eventually got there maybe, etc.

Take Care.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The alien is seeing 10 billion ly into the other man's past no matter what when the alien is at rest, and if he were moving, then he would see either a little bit more into the future of the 10 billion light years old man's past, or further back into his past than that, or the 10 billion ly old picture the alien was already seeing, etc, but I don't think ever enough to be able to see into the man's future maybe, etc? I don't think the effect would ever be of the correct or high enough magnitude to be able to ever do that maybe, etc?

Trying to send something there, or get there though is an interesting concept though, but I wonder if the effect would just close up or catch up or close the gap eventually, as you or the message, or whatever, was on it's way there, or was trying to get there I wonder?

Take Care.

Greene's video isn't about what can be seen. It is about what is "now".

 

[Neogaia777]

Greene's video isn't about what can be seen. It is about what is "now".

He's talking about two people, an alien and a man, being separated by billions of light years, and as one is moving towards or away from the other one from where he is at, what he then is able to see from where he is at changing, nothing more, etc.

Unless I missed something in that video, etc.

And like I said, it's no more than something akin to an "optical illusion", etc, because if he tried to go there, or send something there, that gap, or picture would change, or would close completely eventually, most definitely by the time he, or whatever he was sending there, got there, so that it, or he, or whatever, would arrive right when it would, or right when it was supposed to, regardless of what he could see or saw when he was away from there, or as he or it was on it's way there, or was approaching there, etc.

None of it changes anyone or anything's now, etc.

Take Care/God Bless.

 

[SelfSim]

He's talking about two people, an alien and a man, being separated by billions of light years, and as one is moving towards or away from the other one from where he is at, what he then is able to see from where he is at changing, nothing more, etc.

Unless I missed something in that video, etc.

Take Care/God Bless.

I'll repost what @Hans Blaster just said: Greene's video isn't about what can be seen. It is about what "is now".
You're trying to mix two concepts together .. so you need a model other than the Block Universe one.