Does Time Really Exist? Debunking Common Beliefs

[Pergatory]

Your description pertains to the concept of time @ the macroscopic level. John Cramer's transactional interpretation of QM makes extensive use of advanced waves (waves traveling 'back in time') to describe particle interactions. Is time resultant of the CPT asymmetry @ the quantum level (it can't be propagation of causality, as causality is not necessary @ this level; particle interactions are time-symmetric, so the concept of 'forward and backward in time' does not really matter)?

On an additional note - Even without the evaluation of causality, time flows only in one direction. All events have a certain duration and that duration is never negative. I'd be interested to know more about the advanced waves you discussed, are they an observed phenomenon? If so, perhaps I'm entirely wrong.

 

[sol2]

If gravitons pervade the bulk, then "time" might mean something else?

A photon traveling through this space, might encounter distances that might appear to be short, but are every "long" in terms of billions of years, in regards to that time?

The dimensional significance is then played out here, where different degrees of measure might be considered in evidence of monopole directions in regards to that spin?

How else might we, regard the dynamics of this energy if we did not see the greater, and less than? Orbifolds?

If we are in the dynamics of this space, how would such dynamics be revealed? Geometrical considerations then take hold here?

I am open to corrections.

 

[AntiQuarks]

It's depend on what state you are in.

Time is not an independent variable. It is strictly related to space. So if time does not exist then also space would not exist.
Think at "time" as a clock like that one that makes computer CPU run: it is something "orthogonal" to space frame.
What I mean is that time is a fourth dimension whose spatial projection is the center of any mass (from which actually 3d space cohordinates departs). So "time" is not perceivable nor measurable like "space", rather its measurement is in term of "space modification".
I think that a further good question could be:
Does time exist where there are no masses (i.e. in vacuum)?
My point is that "time" exists only where a mass exists beacuse only there "space" exists. Moreover, when we measure time the measuring meter itself is made of matter, so it is modifying vacuum (and it is making time/space frame to exist).

When you say in vacuum, time might not exist because there is no mass. But there are nonzero background energy in vacuum, and there are supposely "particle/antiparticle pairs being created and destroyed on a frequent basis." Those take time to happen, no matter how small the time frame is...

If nothing changes, then there's no methods/need to measure time. In that state, you will say time doesn't exist, but you can't prove time doesn't exist either.

So time both exists and doesn't exist. It's just depends on what state you are in.

 

[paglren]

When you say in vacuum, time might not exist because there is no mass. But there are nonzero background energy in vacuum...

My point is that vacuum background energy depends from masses that are / have been existent since Universe starting time: I.e. energy isn't a vacuum's property. Vacuum ha no property (or it isn't vacuum).

So time both exists and doesn't exist. It's just depends on what state you are in.

I agree. In fact I think that time (like as matter) does "exist" and "non-exist" in an infinite vibration that happens infinite times.
Because of the persistance of some symmetry in "existence" we are concerned with something that we call "space" and "time" which are in constant relation between them (say light speed).
This constant relationship is necessary to allow time to flow and space to be curved and crossed.
Considering spacetime as a fourth dimensional frame in which time has to be "syncronic", space must be variable, otherwise spacetime tissue would be teared or fragmented.

 

[AntiQuarks]

Without commenting on your suggestions about c generating space or the nature of mass, let me point out that the Lorentz transformation, which make time and space relative, are not just valid at high speeds but at all speeds. We don't notice the variations in our daiily lives only because they are so small.

But if you had a super accurate kitchen clock, and also a super accurate wrist watch, and you synchronized them when you went out in the morning, then when you came back in the evening, after moving around at a few dozen feet per second during the day, you would find that your watch showed an earlier time than your clock, by a few nanoseconds.

People have done this with super accurate clocks, moving them at about five miles per second (in orbit), and getting the effect.

About the clock and the watch's difference, can it be because of the relatively "fast" moving causes the watch to "work" slower(I don't mean it's not accurate, it's the nature that it will happen), instead of the "time" that it is measuring is "slower "?

 

[selfAdjoint]

About the clock and the watch's difference, can it be because of the relatively "fast" moving causes the watch to "work" slower(I don't mean it's not accurate, it's the nature that it will happen), instead of the "time" that it is measuring is "slower "?

THe time and the space are mathematically related. You are right that it's not the fault of the watch - or the clock!. They are both assumed to be accurate measurers of the "proper times" they experience. But your motions relative to the clock meant that your proper time (measured by your wristwatch) ran slower RELATIVE TO THE CLOCK AT HOME than that clock did.

There is no definition of time deeper than proper time. There is no "secret observer" whose time can be applied to everything. People have actually tried to theorize that God, who is outside time, is the secret observer, but nobody has built a successful, self consistent theory out of that idea. In fact is appears to be self-contradictory when you work through it. It really looks like we have to bend our minds around the unfamiliar facts of relativity.

 

[tabloid]

im tired of measuring time according to what older pple view.im tired of the 24hrr system;the GPS isn't growing fast enough;and if it did my good dream is to be able to relate an organism's location with time.if we can make such a piece of hardware which can clearly predict someone's co-ordinates with regards to time,then we won't need the normal time views we have.if
we can't have a global time;a common referrence point of measuring time so that we can know where every9ne is at?
i don't measure human progress in terms of theories;but what those theories have contributed in making more sophisticated tools that we use.
remember,if we don't participate in human progress,well most likely suffocate ourselves by ourselves right here on earth.well slowly rot and die away,before we even find another life in another world-different from us.

 

[oscar]

This issue about time was already discussed by philosopher Imanuel Kant. He asked if TIME is something that could exist in itself? What are the happenings of the universe without the time or the time without the happenings? He asked if space was something existing in itself and the idea was it was an illusion. How are we going to understand metaphysics if we don't physics? I can set the example of the "dream". It doesn't matter if you put electrods and check the closed eyelids to see the Rapid Movement of the Eyes (RME) measuring mini- cycles of dreams that would accumulate a total of aproximately 2 hours. The fact is that "subjective" experience has another ticking while you are objectivly dreaming and it's completely different from what scientists outsiders are measuring! And ask yourself something not solved by puzzled smart experts in neuron-surgery, the space of the dreams and thoughts. Therefore, I choose to believe ancient wisdom regarding this space-time issue:
www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=22384&page=1&pp=15

 

[selfAdjoint]

Well those smart neurologists aren't baffled by "The space of dreams"; they just don't for a minute believe in it. They believe that dreams are false sensations caused by excitations of the nerves in our sensory systems - principally the visual system. An awful lot is known about the internal workings of the visual system.

 

[oscar]

Wowawaw" Moderator is getting irritated but nop, I don't think is worth it to write the names of HUMBLE specialist who really don't know but make hypothesis of dreams. One thing is the possible meaning of the dreams and other thing is to know how does the brain work to produce them or the "ticking" of the dreams. But, evidently you're not a specialist in that area either so why would I waste my energy convincing YOU of the things they ignore. I know better since I have experience in medical area but I won't present my curriculum vitae to satisfy curiosity. In fact, I don't care what you are or your statements. Something to add about the issue? No? It figures! You're just beginning to be annoyed and are posting particular messages to every post that I make, why would that be Mr. Moderator? Hmm?

 

[tabloid]

arent u guys tired of wearing wrist watches;if you go around the world youll have to carry atleast five watches for the different times of those spots you wan' visit-unless ofcourse,you have a fabulous watch that can adjust itself as you move around.maybe they can try to make such a nice watch;thats what i was trying to say in my previous post above.

 

[The Bob]

What you need to consider about time is if it is in our world, e.g. clocks and the rate at which things happen, or is it independent to our world, e.g. it changes how it likes and we can never tell if it has changed or not because we are in it.

I believe that time is a very misleading factor in any science. Although used as a measurement in our world, time itself must be independent to us. It works with space. As we know space can fold and stretch (and this is a higher dimension than time) why not time? Time can form around us, stop, change speed and we will not notice any change as we are in it. We feel no different. So time is very hard to explain. As in relation to a clock it is a measurement, as itself (well) we really will never fully understand until we step out of time and can wonder around in it. Here is where we need to imgaine 4-Dimensioanl Shapes. Then we can 'Time Travel'. (See another thread).

The Bob (2004 ©)

 

[LeBrok]

what if there is no time?

For a week I'm thinking about what's time. I have an idea that looks good to me so I decided to share with ppl. looking for the answer . What do you think? Here it goes. (can't explain it better, english is my second language)


Imagine there is no time… It’s tough if not impossible. At least you could imagine the room or other place without the movement. And maybe this is it. There is no time dimension, and instead of it there is a movement in space. In our case movement in 3 dimensional space.
Let’s ask a question.
Can there be time without space?
If time is a part of our space and there is no space there is no time. Unless time is a universal thing that exists outside our universe. But then we never know that not being able to exist or measure outside our space. According to most accepted theories there is no time without space.
Let’s ask another question.
Can there be space without time?
I think so, we can have even one-dimensional space with string particle in it but there is no movement at all. No movement of any sort. No moving particles, sub particles, space itself or whatever is the smallest element the world is build of. There is no time or other words the time stopped, the world never changes. The answer is, space can exist without time but not vice versa. The space does not need time to exist.

Consider other possibility. Let’s take for example a motionless world were the Time the 4th dimension does not exist. Visualize handful of small particles (try to imagine more then one, because if there is only one you will not know if it’s moving, relativity principle, remember?). They are not moving, they are in same distances to each other – no time no movement.
Now, what would it take to change the quantum state of theirs? To move the quantum distance, the smallest distance available in space, to make a little “jump” to other quantum state/space. Remember, in quantum world there is nothing in between the quantum states/space. You travel the quantum distance immediately. You cannot measure the time it took the particle to travel the quantum distance because there is no small enough quantum of time to measure it. Other words, the quantum “jump” is instantaneous and we don’t need time to pass to make this quantum move. You are going to see those little particles jumping from one quantum place to the other in space just because the movement in this space is allowed and not because the clock is ticking by.

If you stop the quantum motion/movement in space of the smallest particles that are in your alarm clock, the clock is going to stop and the “time” in clock. If you stop them in your body your life will stop and your perception of time. We can only perceive time because of our memory, because we remember how world looked like some time ago, other words some quantum movements ago.



Time travel.
If you could apply energy to move the tiniest particles beck so they can trays back their movements and states you could create for yourself an illusion of time going backward but for those tiny particles that would be a new set of movements and stats.
And of course to apply energy so precisely to every tiniest particle on bigger scale will always be impossible, so will be the travel in time.

 

[C. Michael Turner]

question?

This is true of non relativistic quantum mechanics, but not of relativity, either kind. In special relativity observers must compare physics using Lorentz transformations, and these mix time and space coordinates in linear transformations. So time can't easily be eliminated or downgraded in SR, or in any theory that dpands on SR, like Dirac's electron theory, quantum electrodynamics, the Standard Model, and all forms of String physics.

In General Relativity, coordinates, and physics, are subject to very general changes. Both time and space become somewhat "elastic" in definition. In both kinds of relativity, the same event, seen by different observers, can have very different time-space relationships.

If all matter were transfering to the gravitational wave would not each discrete matter set its own time and space; and through speed which represents the relationship of discrete gravitational waves affect time and space? Would Gravitational Relativity then be classified as: As a point of origin mass to energy tansfer in wave form?

 

[PoPpAScience]

Time is strictly the incrementation of Evolution. Time is only relative to the viewer. Time never exists, only passes. Time in equations is used to calculate markers in Evolution.

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

"what if time does not exist ?"

Time is natures way of keeping everything from happening at once.
There is a discreet interval between your question and my jest. There is SOME factor at work. Call it what you may. It generally gets slippery when talking about QM and causality , but hey this is just a board , right?

 

[Chronos]

What if 'reality' does not exist? Do the math. If you are correct, we will all disappear. Apologies. Why does anyone entertain this foolishness? Having not seen any valid math [albeit some bunk math], I wonder why this thread has not been moved to the philosophy forum.

 

[The Bob]

Time is strictly the incrementation of Evolution. Time is only relative to the viewer. Time never exists, only passes. Time in equations is used to calculate markers in Evolution.

That is what I have been trying to say.

Thanks.

Time may move differently to use but humans have set markers oni it that may not be accurate to time.

The Bob (2004 ©)

 

[Chronos]

Crap = crap. Time and space are inseparable, yet clearly observable participants in the universe we live in. They do not insist upon or require independent or absolute reference frames. Get used to it. Logic compares poorly to the solid math we have that does make sense and works.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

Time and space are inseparable, uhmm, that was established by Minkowski, but if we take into account that complex wave equation which was the beginning of QM, don´t we have that time and space are decoupled by the complex symbol, the so-called "imaginary" symbol? Don't we have then a different point of view about time and space when dealing with QM objects such as the electron?
Regards
EP

Time and space are inseparable...

 

[Antonio Lao]

At the infinitesimal 1D region of spacetime, space and time cannot be distinguished and both are curved by the very strong orthogonal forces as absolute constant localized angular accelerations. Because of the extreme forces, the constant change of directions of these accelerations, once started, are very difficult to vary hence the changing direction is conserved and these can become a principle of directional invariance.

 

[The Bob]

Basically time exists but we made the measurement time not time itself. If time didn't exist then all events would be simultanious and there would be no define points. Also Space curves with events in time so it must exist.

The Bob (2004 ©)

 

[donnie]

Basically time exists but we made the measurement time not time itself.

Good point

If time didn't exist then all events would be simultanious

Events are simultaneous and also in succession. Cause and effect. It boggles the mind to think back to what could have started the first event that caused this 'simultaneous succession'. Could we even consider that there could BE such a naming phrase?

 

[what_are_electrons]

Book titled "Does Time Exist?" by Henri Salles

Just bought a book a few weeks back with this title: "Does Time Exist?" It's a paperback from 1st Books Library (ISBN 1-4107-1057-2). Has anyone had a chance to read it? What do you think?

 

[The Bob]

Events are simultaneous and also in succession. Cause and effect. It boggles the mind to think back to what could have started the first event that caused this 'simultaneous succession'. Could we even consider that there could BE such a naming phrase?

AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH. I can understand that all events in the world in a second are simultaneous but not every event ever (<----- Alliteration ).

Does my mind in because I am on MSN and I get the flashing message to say that I have a reply or a message but it was written earlier to me receiving it. But what you are saying is that the writing, sending, receiving and reading are happening all at the same time?! :surprise: That does your mind in.

The Bob (2004 ©)

 

[Epsilon Pi]

-In fact if quantum theory is right,"time" and "space" exist only in classical physics just as we see trajectories and particles have momentum but is nothing but an ilusion,in quantum world there is no space-time.

But is it not the concept of particle as is defined in classical physics the one that is askew?
Is not the point of view of an "illusion" due precisely to the Copenhagen school of thought initiated by Heinsenberg?
Are not time and space decoupled precisely due to that other school of thought initiated by Schrödinger and its well-known complex wave equation?

-Sahoshant:=perhaps you can use some kind of geometric transform to make an interval of space being an interval of time...there are many books who proposed that one of this is "El caballo de Troya" (Trojan Horse) by J.J Benitez who tells us about time travel and a new geometric conception of space time.

Have you read the Urantia Book from which most of the basic proposal of "El caballo de Troya"(and other books by J.J. Benitez) was taken?... there, we certainly have a quite different cosmology, and as a matter of fact it says that an electron is constituted by 100 ultimatons. Does this give reason of that inherent polarity conformed by 50 and 50 ultimatons?
Regards
EP

 

[kurious]

If time did not exist then the arrow of time - entropy - wouldn't either.

 

[kurious]

If time did not exist then the arrow of time - entropy - wouldn't either.
Experiment shows that entropy does exist and changes with time.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

Yes, good point, and the arrow of time does not have to do with a concept of time not symmetrical, not of the space-like type? At QM levels it is definitively decoupled.
Regards
EP

If time did not exist then the arrow of time - entropy - wouldn't either.
Experiment shows that entropy does exist and changes with time.

 

[kurious]

Epsilon Pi:
At QM levels it is definitively decoupled

Kurious:
If you can find a truly isolated QM system independent of its environment.