Time From a Physics Standpoint is an Illusion

RealityCheck01 · May 15, 2018

Ohj1n37 said:
My answer was that time dilation does not just affect clocks, but all matter.

My answer is:
16 May 2018 Ohj1n37: Repeats an inability to learn what time dilation is.
Time dilation only affects clocks.

15 May 2018 Ohj1n37: The simple fact is that without time there cannot be any movement.

Ohj1n37 · May 16, 2018

RealityCheck01 said:
My answer is:
16 May 2018 Ohj1n37: Repeats an inability to learn what time dilation is.
Time dilation only affects clocks.

Please do not be rude. I understand what you are saying. I do not believe you appear to understand what I am saying. Here is something to think about. In what way are clocks different from any other form of matter?

Here is what I know about clocks,

Ohj1n37 said:
Think about how clocks keep time. They continually "tick" to keep a record of change.

Do clocks have some kind of special connection to time that you know of that I am personally unaware of? If you do know of some special connection between clocks and time, I would please like to know because that would be new to me.

Google astronauts come back from space younger. Time dilation does not just affect clocks, but all matter.

Ohj1n37 said:
I have read astronauts come back a few milliseconds or so younger due to the velocity of which they orbit around the Earth.

Ohj1n37 · May 16, 2018

I am sorry for the double post, but I did not address GrowingSmaller's latest post in the thread.

Most of what your post seems to be is opinion, so I will agree to disagree.

GrowingSmaller said:
"We would be in a nasty position indeed if empirical science were the only kind of science possible." Edmund Husserl (phenomenologist, i.e. a scientist of experience).

I believe that when it comes to our understanding of God's creation, the universe around us, it is logical that the foundation of said understanding should be based on what can be observed.

GrowingSmaller said:
Not that the subjective flow of events is an illusion to be annihilated by the latest theoretical 'discovery'.

I do not understand what you are talking about when you refer to, "a flow of events being annihilated." Although this does reminds me of Stephen King's fiction, The Langoliers. The idea that I am trying to convey destroys nothing; it is just that time never existed in the first place.

Again I think that RockyMidnight1 did a good job describing the concept.

RockyMidnight1 said:
There is only one "time" anything is real, and it is "now". Everything you have ever experienced, everything you have ever imagined is only real in this present instant of awareness. A minute ago, you may think you did something, like start to read this post. You intuitively believe you did this in "real" time, even though it is now a memory of experience. But memories are only real right now.

Petros2015 · May 16, 2018

Time dilation affects only clocks.

But everything is clock

Bobber · May 16, 2018

I'm just curious if anyone can answer this question about time. In a science fiction film, Generations, there was a realm or state of existence called The Nexus where you could go back and see your children born or go ahead and see your grandchildren. When it comes to physics and our understanding of things what would it take for this to be true? Thanks for any replies.

Petros2015 · May 16, 2018

You might enjoy this vid by Brian Green - he talks about space-time and the idea that the passing of time might be an illusion

Petros2015 · May 16, 2018

Bobber said:
there was a realm or state of existence called The Nexus where you could go back and see your children born or go ahead and see your grandchildren.

You might enjoy the vid I posted. In a nutshell, if the passing of time is an illusion, then all moments, past, present and future, exist already and the ones that have passed, still exist. Like in the novel Slaughterhouse 5.

“The most important thing I learnt on Tralfamadore was that when a person dies he only appears to die. He is still very much alive in the past, so it is very silly for people to cry at his funeral. All moments, past, present, and future, always have existed, always will exist. The Tralfamadorians can look at all the different moments just the way we can look at a stretch of the Rocky Mountains, for instance. They can see how permanent all the moments are, and they can look at any moment that interests them. It is an illusion we have here on Earth that one moment follows another one, like beads on a string, and that once a moment is gone it is gone forever. When any Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he thinks is that the dead person is in a bad condition in that particular moment, but that the same person is just fine in plenty of other moments.”
― Kurt Vonnegut, Slaughterhouse-Five

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 16, 2018

Ohj1n37 said:
I am aware that time dilation is relative, but you have taken my comment out of context.
...
My answer was that time dilation does not just affect clocks, but all matter.

Ah, OK. My apologies.

Bobber · May 16, 2018

Petros2015 said:
You might enjoy this vid by Brian Green - he talks about space-time and the idea that the passing of time might be an illusion

Yes interesting video. I believe I've seen it once before too. So he pictures 'time' like a loaf of bread with multiple 'now' moments. So what would be the state of one outside of the loaf altogether looking at the loafs start to finish let's call it at the same time. Would this not be a higher dimensional plane of time?

Ohj1n37 · May 16, 2018

Petros2015 said:
Time dilation affects only clocks.

But everything is clock

Everything could be thought of as clock in a way because everything changes, but the term clock is commonly used to refer to an object that continually changes at a set pace, so that it can be used as a reference point.

Bobber said:
In a science fiction film, Generations, there was a realm or state of existence called The Nexus where you could go back and see your children born or go ahead and see your grandchildren. When it comes to physics and our understanding of things what would it take for this to be true?

I don't want to get too off topic, but I like the concept of the Omega 13 from the movie Galaxy Quest. The problem is to change everything back 13 seconds it would have to be able to affect all existence and keep a constant record of where all existence was 13 seconds ago, which is physically impossible, at least to my understanding.

As for the video that Petros2015 posted. The loaf of bread example is under the assumption that time actually exists in the first place. To my understanding time dilation has been observed to only slow time(rate of change) when matter is being affected by an accelerative or gravitational force.

I believe the loaf of bread example is just a mathematical model or an abstraction of reality not reality itself. The extrapolations in time when the loaf of bread is being sliced at different angles are based on a record of time not time itself. I disagree with the video after analyzing it. Below I explain what I believe is actually happening.

At 5:40 in the video what is actually happening is when the alien is moving away from the man on the bench, the alien's time(rate of change) is slower compared to the man on the bench simply because they previously had the same time(rate of change),as stated at 5:15, but now the alien is experiencing a greater accelerative force which then causes his time(rate of change) to slow. This is time time dilation.

The alien is not time traveling to the past, the alien is simply changing slower. If somehow the alien was instantly transported to the man's location, no traveling to the past would take place regardless of how far or fast the alien moves in the opposite direction.

At 7:00 in the video what is actually happening is when the alien is moving towards the man on the bench, the alien's time(rate of change) is being slowed compared to the man on the bench due to experiencing a greater accelerative force. Again this is time dilation.

The slowing of the aliens time(rate of change) will also slow the processes in which the alien ages, meaning that when the alien finally does reach Earth the alien will have aged more slowly than the man on the bench, and more time(rate of change) will have occurred on Earth than in the alien's space ship. This might seem like time travel, but to me is similar to cryogenic freezing.

I have edited this post several times to improve readability and because the video was thought provoking, but in my opinion the time as a loaf of bread is nothing more than a construct of imagination.

Ohj1n37 · May 16, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Ah, OK. My apologies.

No worries.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 16, 2018

Petros2015 said:
You might enjoy the vid I posted. In a nutshell, if the passing of time is an illusion, then all moments, past, present and future, exist already and the ones that have passed, still exist.

This is the 'block universe' view, generally called 'eternalism', which spatializes time to create a 4D block, and seems to be the most popular among scientists, probably because of Einsteinian relativity.

On the other hand, there's presentism, where only the present is real, but which has problems with defining the present for practical purposes, both because of the time required for perception and thought, and lack of absolute time (my present is not necessarily your present) due to relativity.

There is a halfway house called the 'evolving block universe', where the past and present exist, and the present 'grows' into the future, which doesn't exist.

Ohj1n37 · May 16, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
This is the 'block universe' view, generally called 'eternalism'

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
On the other hand, there's presentism, where only the present is real

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
There is a halfway house called the 'evolving block universe', where the past and present exist, and the present 'grows' into the future, which doesn't exist.

All three in my opinion seem to just be ways for people to try to understand time, which again I do not believe even exists. In a way the present does, as I stated previously, but not really (when concerning time.)

Another way to think about what I am trying to convey is as follows.

Do not even think about time. Just assume that everything is just matter moving through space.

Now does that change anything that we already can observe to be true?

To my understanding it does the exact opposite, it removes all time paradoxes which contradict causality. I believe causality is what pretty much all our understanding of physics is based upon.

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 16, 2018

Ohj1n37 said:
All three in my opinion seem to just be ways for people to try to understand time, which again I do not believe even exists.

If time doesn't exist, what do memories represent?

... Just assume that everything is just matter moving through space.

Now does that change anything that we already can observe to be true?

It seems to me that if you want to do anything useful with movement (i.e. a continuing spatial displacement) you need a concept - implicit or explicit - of time. Consider how you know that movement has occurred or is occurring; if two objects move from A to B, what is it about the movement of one object from A to B that enables it to reach B before (oops, time crept in there) the other?

RockyMidnight1 · May 16, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
If time doesn't exist, what do memories represent?

Consider this.
Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time

Cheers

FrumiousBandersnatch · May 16, 2018

RockyMidnight1 said:
Consider this.
Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time

Pretty much what we've been talking about - with added media hyperbole; although the idea at the end is a more immediate version of 'Last Thursdayism', or Boltzmann brains - the idea that we might have been created 'out of the blue', complete with memories of a life which never happened.

In the case of Boltzmann brains, they are destroyed by the vacuum after a fleeting moment of awareness... hardly seems worth it.

It's a variation on solipsism, and as such, is rather a philosophical dead-end.

RealityCheck01 · May 16, 2018

Ohj1n37 said:
In what way are clocks different from any other form of matter?

Clocks tick !

We make clocks out of matter. That does not mean all matter is clocks. A proton just sits there doing nothing as a clock.

ETA: We calculate that an astronaut comes back from Earth orbit milliseconds younger than their twin on the ground using clocks. One travels with the astronaut. One stays on the ground.

RockyMidnight1 · May 16, 2018

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
In the case of Boltzmann brains, they are destroyed by the vacuum after a fleeting moment of awareness... hardly seems worth it.

Except when you can consider there is no "fleeting moment of awareness". "Now" is ever present, not fleeting. Contemplate you direct experience with any event, imagined or perceived as real, including memories. The only really "real" connection you have with these is only, and can ever only be "only" right now. This is not solipsism or any philosophical point of view. It is actual reality, and we all have the above direct experience of it in this incomprehensible ever present "now". Try to experience a moment ago, or a moment from now. You can only do it from wither memory or imagination, and only right now.
Cheers

Ohj1n37 · May 17, 2018

To better explain my viewpoint at 1:00 in the video Petros2015 posted, the narrator states it can also be helpful to think of time as a series of snap shots. My question is that at the moment astronauts start going back in "time" due to time dilation, why don't they collide with their previous snap shot?

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
If time doesn't exist, what do memories represent?

Your memories are physical structures within your brain that you can internally observe now.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
It seems to me that if you want to do anything useful with movement (i.e. a continuing spatial displacement) you need a concept - implicit or explicit - of time.

Time is useful for measurement, but does not cause the actual movement. "Time" recorded from clocks are useful as reference points because they change at a set pace.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
It seems to me that if you want to do anything useful with movement (i.e. a continuing spatial displacement) you need a concept - implicit or explicit - of time.

Time does not cause anything to move, energy does. Time is used for the measurement of movement. I recommend googling energy.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Consider how you know that movement has occurred or is occurring;

I personally can observe when many objects move; I would think others can too.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
if two objects move from A to B, what is it about the movement of one object from A to B that enables it to reach B before (oops, time crept in there) the other?

A would get there before B because it would presumably have greater energy. The use of the word before is just semantics.

RockyMidnight1 said:
Consider this.
Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time

I disagree with this. I do not believe there is even an entity of time in the first place.

RealityCheck01 said:
Clocks tick !

Let me know if this is wrong. Are you suggesting that just because clocks tick they have some special connection with the "entity of time", and that this special connection causes them to be affected by time dilation while other matter is not? Is the ticking of a clock any different from the movement of any other matter?

I recommend doing more research on time dilation. You will find out that time dilation affects more than just clocks.

RockyMidnight1 said:
This is not solipsism or any philosophical point of view. It is actual reality, and we all have the above direct experience of it in this incomprehensible ever present "now". Try to experience a moment ago, or a moment from now. You can only do it from wither memory or imagination, and only right now.

I pretty much agree with the idea expressed in this quote, specifically the recalling of memories.

RockyMidnight1 · May 17, 2018

Ohj1n37 said:
I disagree with this. I do not believe there is even an entity of time in the first place.

Hello Ohj1n37,
The article is suggesting that scientifically, time does not exist. You have stated you believe that. What exactly are you disagreeing with then?

Per Max Tegmark of MIT, "
“We have the illusion, at any given moment, that the past already happened and the future doesn't yet exist, and that things are changing.
“But all I'm ever aware of is my brain state right now. The only reason I feel like I have a past is that my brain contains memories.”

Albert Einstein once said: “Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”
and
Albert Einstein concluded in his later years that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. (sorry RealityCheck01. Yes, I know he is dead ))

Time From a Physics Standpoint is an Illusion

Newbie

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Member

Active Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency