What "is" time...?

[Justatruthseeker]

Gerold Schroeder talks about this from an interesting perspective.

His works frequently cite Talmudic, Midrashic and medieval commentaries on Biblical creation accounts, such as commentaries written by the Jewish philosopher Nachmanides. Among other things, Schroeder attempts to reconcile a six-day creation as described in Genesis with the scientific evidence that the world is billions of years old using the idea that the perceived flow of time for a given event in an expanding universe varies with the observer’s perspective of that event. He attempts to reconcile the two perspectives numerically, calculating the effect of the stretching of space-time, based on Einstein's general relativity.[7] wiki

Namely, that from the perspective of the point of origin of the Big Bang, according to Einstein's equations of the 'stretching factor', time dilates by a factor of roughly 1,000,000,000,000, meaning one trillion days on earth would appear to pass as one day from that point, due to the stretching of space. When applied to the estimated age of the universe at 13.8 billion years, from the perspective of the point of origin, the universe today would appear to have just begun its sixth day of existence, or if the universe is 15 billion years old from the perspective of earth, it would appear to have just completed its sixth day.[8] Antony Flew, an academic philosopher who promoted atheism for most of his adult life indicated that the arguments of Gerald Schroeder had influenced his decision to become a deist.[9][10] wiki

Yah, I have tried to get them to see that as God "stretched out the heaves" time would begin to slow. That as one calculates further into the past, one must adjust one's clocks for time dilation effects. Decay happened faster in the past, but since they use the slower clocks of today to calculate the rate of slower decay today - and assume a constant rate, not a rate increasing exponentially the further one goes back in time, they of course arrive at the wrong conclusion about age.

Just as the twin in motion believed nothing had changed, until he returned to the stationary frame and realized he was wrong about everything he believed. That the stationary twins clocks did not slow, that his did when he believed they had not. Once in motion he was unable to perceive anything correctly about time.......

But sadly most still have the mindset of the twin while he was still in motion....

 

[morse86]

This is all unproven garbage falsely so called science.

No one has been to orbit. It's all theoretical CGI Hollywood appeal to authority garbage.

I can't believe that people actually believe that "theoretical time dilation" slows down mechanical clocks. It's pure nonsense. This has NEVER been observed.

The pure garbage "rubbish data" of atomic clocks could be explained away a MANY WAYS (magnetic waves, solar storms..). False $$$ fraud scientists claim that it is proof of time dilation, what a joke.

 

[Everybodyknows]

Like the twin who believed it was the stationary twins clocks which changed, believing his remained the same until he returned to the stationary frame and reality came crashing down. We simply have no stationary frame to return to, to make our error in thought of the consistency of time clear to us.

What exactly is the reality that came crashing down on the traveling twin? The whole point of the twins paradox is that the traveling twin experiences less time than the stationary twin and their clocks no longer match up on his return. Yes there is no absolute stationary frame of reference but the point is that the traveling twin has experienced accelerating frames of reference while the stationary twin has not.

Here is a fairly plain English explanation of the twins paradox

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What exactly is the reality that came crashing down on the traveling twin? The whole point of the twins paradox is that the traveling twin experiences less time than the stationary twin and their clocks no longer match up on his return. Yes there is no absolute stationary frame of reference but the point is that the traveling twin has experienced accelerating frames of reference while the stationary twin has not.

Here is a fairly plain English explanation of the twins paradox

The reality that came crashing down is that the twin in motion believes the stationary twins clocks tick slower. He incorrectly believes it is the stationary twin that should age younger.

There is no paradox at all. The twin in motion is simply unable to perceive the stationary twins rate of time correctly. The paradox only exists in the minds of those that refuse to accept the truth. That once in motion you are unable to perceive time correctly in other frames, unless it is set in motion from your frame, and then only relative to you.

What paradox existed? The stationary twins clocks never changed at all, he is stationary. So the twin in motion was simply wrong, and suddenly this becomes a paradox? That the twin in motion believed they changed is simply error, not a paradox...... the twin in motion can’t even tell his own clocks changed. He can’t get anything right.

There is no paradox, just the simple fact the twin in motion was wrong about everything.....

 

[Everybodyknows]

The reality that came crashing down is that the twin in motion believes the stationary twins clocks tick slower. He incorrectly believes it is the stationary twin that should age younger.

There is no paradox at all. The twin in motion is simply unable to perceive the stationary twins rate of time correctly. The paradox only exists in the minds of those that refuse to accept the truth. That once in motion you are unable to perceive time correctly in other frames, unless it is set in motion from your frame, and then only relative to you.

What paradox existed? The stationary twins clocks never changed at all, he is stationary. So the twin in motion was simply wrong, and suddenly this becomes a paradox? That the twin in motion believed they changed is simply error, not a paradox...... the twin in motion can’t even tell his own clocks changed. He can’t get anything right.

There is no paradox, just the simple fact the twin in motion was wrong about everything.....

But the clocks don't match up when he comes back. That is the paradox that needs to be resolved. It's not a problem of beliefs. It appears you don't really understand the problem, leading you to faulty conclusions.

 

[Everybodyknows]

Deleted

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Time is movement, specifically it is a second measurement of distance.

No. You might as well claim space is movement. In classical physics, time is a dimension of spacetime and movement is a translation through spacetime; i.e. a spatial translation that takes time, or a temporal translation that covers a distance.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

But the clocks don't match up when he comes back. That is the paradox that needs to be resolved. It's not a problem of beliefs.

Like most 'paradoxes' in physics, it's not really a paradox - if the maths of Special Relativity is applied correctly, it's straightforward. The travelling twin ages more slowly because he changes inertial frames whereas the other twin doesn't. See Twins Paradox.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The reality that came crashing down is that the twin in motion believes the stationary twins clocks tick slower. He incorrectly believes it is the stationary twin that should age younger.

On the outward journey, each twin sees the other's clock running slow, and during the return journey each twin sees the other's clock run fast. This is due to the relativistic Doppler Shift.

There is no paradox at all.

That's true.

The twin in motion is simply unable to perceive the stationary twins rate of time correctly.

That's false - there is no 'correct' rate of time; there is only the time relative to some frame of reference. The each twin's time in his own reference frame is called his 'proper' time. Each twin can calculate the other's proper time, but as far as any interaction between them is concerned, from each twin's reference frame the other twin's time really does run slower when the distance between them is increasing, and faster when the the distance between them is decreasing. That's why each will see signals between them red-shifted (when separating) or blue-shifted (when coming together).

The stationary twins clocks never changed at all, he is stationary. So the twin in motion was simply wrong, and suddenly this becomes a paradox? That the twin in motion believed they changed is simply error, not a paradox...... the twin in motion can’t even tell his own clocks changed. He can’t get anything right.

This is wrong; the experiments have been done, the data is in, Einstein was right.

 

[Everybodyknows]

Like most 'paradoxes' in physics, it's not really a paradox - if the maths of Special Relativity is applied correctly, it's straightforward. The travelling twin ages more slowly because he changes inertial frames whereas the other twin doesn't. See Twins Paradox.

Sure, it's perfectly resolved under special relativity. I use the term paradox loosely in the sense of something that seems illogical or counter intuitive at face value.

 

[joinfree]

Time is what is required for change and movement. Without it everything would just remain exactly the same.

Without it everything would just remain exactly the same throughout the run of time. Time is what the clock measures, and clock is what measures the time.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Sure, it's perfectly resolved under special relativity. I use the term paradox loosely in the sense of something that seems illogical or counter intuitive at face value.

Yes; I was just trying to make sure there was no confusion about whether it really is a paradox.

 

[Radagast]

No one has been to orbit. It's all theoretical CGI Hollywood appeal to authority garbage.

You really believe that?

 

[Divide]

 

[Divide]

You really believe that?

I think they have been to orbit, but it's a serious possibility that they didn't get to the moon. The van allyn belts.

 

[Edison Trent]

Time is merely an element of measurement that God gave humans.

Indeed, a Inside out Caesium 133 atom, one flash creates Godzillion amount of atom balls of inward ticking Caesium 133, the most important measurement to get the ball rolling "the Big Ben" it is the bases of time of the universe, and the chicken did come before the egg.

 

[Divide]

 

[Larniavc]

What "is" time...?

Comments...?

God Bless!

One of the dimensions in a four dimensional manifold?

 

[drjean]

I personally believe there are more than 4 dimensions

God created all things with the appearance of age. (Truly as Edison Trent reminded above...chicken before egg).

Here's a thought: what if time only exists where mankind is/goes?

 

[Divide]

Maybe. Here's another thought...what if all this is an illusion, and the only real thing that we have is our thoughts and our mind?