Is Distance Just an Illusion? The Philosophical Perspective

  • Thread starter RapidRick
  • Start date
In summary: Universe. Humans are situated somewhere within the scale which goes from the infinitely large to the infinitely small, neither of which are obtainable.
  • #1
RapidRick
3
0
I'm not familiar with the format of the forum, but could someone straighten me out on a question about distance and as to whether or not distance is only an illusion? How is it that the human body and the immediate physical world JUST HAPPENS TO BE on a scale of size that is so close to what we consider zero length, when you can look out a universe with apparently no end. That is, a 6 feet tall man is only 6 feet larger than zero length. A man can put his two index fngers together and say "that's zero length", but he can't even fathom the distance to the nearest star. So, is zero length even attainable, after all, it is infinitely small. If a human were the size of the apparent size of an electron ( 2 x 10 -15 meters) then 6 feet distance would be(if may calculations are correct) about 1/4 light year away. So for an electron at our toes, the top of our head would be 1/4 light year away. So the human body is huge compared to an observer on an electron. I think our perspective of the world around us is only a point in space afterall. This is more philosophical than hard science obviously. To summarize, how does the size of a human JUST HAPPEN to be so close to one end of the distance "yardstick" (6 feet from zero) and so seemingly infinitely far from the other end of the distance "yardstick". Is our seeming proximity to zero length only an illusion or are we situated somehere within the scale which goes from the infinitely large to the infinitely small, neither of which are obtainable.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Not sure but Zeno ' s paradox may be of interest to you.
 
  • #3
MidgetDwarf said:
Not sure but Zeno ' s paradox may be of interest to you.
Thanks. I did look over this. Distance is probably interpreted in terms of how long it takes to reach the distance. If we had arms that could reach out and grab a nearby galaxy( in addition to scaling up size, you would have to scale up the speed at which you could extend your arm which would exceed the speed of light which I'm not sure is theoretically possible), then I guess that galaxy would not be so far away.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
6 feet would take light approx. 6 nanoseconds to travel. What's your thinking on why it would take 1/4 l.y.?
 
  • #5
artyb said:
6 feet would take light approx. 6 nanoseconds to travel. What's your thinking on why it would take 1/4 l.y.?
If you consider relative distance and velocity: So, a 2 meter tall person running 2 meters per second would be equivalent to a
2x10^-15 meter "tall" electron "running" 2x10^-15meter/second. So the "speed of light" in the electron's realm would be about
3x10^-7m/secThat is, the distance of 2.98x10^8 meters(distance light travels in one second) would be to a 2 meter tall human what
3X10^-7meters would be to a 2X10^-15meter "tall" electron. Kind of a silly concept, and don't want to bore you. Still seems that distance is a relative concept.Thanks for entertaining the question.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
RapidRick said:
I'm not familiar with the format of the forum, but could someone straighten me out on a question about distance and as to whether or not distance is only an illusion? How is it that the human body and the immediate physical world JUST HAPPENS TO BE on a scale of size that is so close to what we consider zero length, when you can look out a universe with apparently no end. That is, a 6 feet tall man is only 6 feet larger than zero length. A man can put his two index fngers together and say "that's zero length", but he can't even fathom the distance to the nearest star. So, is zero length even attainable, after all, it is infinitely small. If a human were the size of the apparent size of an electron ( 2 x 10 -15 meters) then 6 feet distance would be(if may calculations are correct) about 1/4 light year away. So for an electron at our toes, the top of our head would be 1/4 light year away. So the human body is huge compared to an observer on an electron. I think our perspective of the world around us is only a point in space afterall. This is more philosophical than hard science obviously. To summarize, how does the size of a human JUST HAPPEN to be so close to one end of the distance "yardstick" (6 feet from zero) and so seemingly infinitely far from the other end of the distance "yardstick". Is our seeming proximity to zero length only an illusion or are we situated somehere within the scale which goes from the infinitely large to the infinitely small, neither of which are obtainable.

Sounds like you are simply referring to that it is strange that particles tend to stick together which is not only a property of space but due to the properties of particles, such as their relation to the cause of forces.

In fact this length is very far from your example of holding two fingers together. The force fields won't even let the molecules come this close: 1 Planck length =
1.61619926 × 10-35 meters.

Why do we need to reach intermediate positions if everything is just one dot, at the same place? Distance is obviously not an illusion. Perhaps in the case of relativity it is according to how we predict other frames of references.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
RapidRick said:
To summarize, how does the size of a human JUST HAPPEN to be so close to one end of the distance "yardstick" (6 feet from zero) and so seemingly infinitely far from the other end of the distance "yardstick". Is our seeming proximity to zero length only an illusion or are we situated somehere within the scale which goes from the infinitely large to the infinitely small, neither of which are obtainable.

Humans are not at all closer to one end of the scale than the other. We are very close to the middle.
 
  • #8
RapidRick said:
This is more philosophical than hard science obviously.
You are indeed correct. And since this isn't a philosophy forum, thread locked.
 

1. Is distance real or just an illusion?

Distance is both a real and perceived concept. In physics, distance is defined as the amount of space between two points. However, our perception of distance can be influenced by various factors such as lighting, depth perception, and motion.

2. How does our brain perceive distance?

Our brain uses various visual cues to perceive distance, such as relative size, texture gradient, and convergence of objects. These cues help our brain determine the distance between objects in our environment.

3. Can distance be manipulated or altered?

Yes, distance can be manipulated or altered through various optical illusions. These illusions can create the illusion of objects being closer or farther away than they actually are, thus distorting our perception of distance.

4. Is distance always constant?

No, distance can vary depending on the context. For example, the distance between two objects may appear different when viewed from different angles or in different lighting conditions. Additionally, the concept of distance can vary between different individuals based on their unique perception.

5. Is distance the same in all dimensions?

The concept of distance can differ in different dimensions. In Euclidean geometry, distance is defined as the straight line between two points. However, in non-Euclidean geometries, such as spherical or hyperbolic geometry, the concept of distance is different and can vary depending on the curvature of the space.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • DIY Projects
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
0
Views
988
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
9
Views
2K
Back
Top