Is Time Perception Similar to Browsing the Web?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pBrane
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the concept of time perception, particularly in relation to gravitational effects and how they might influence the aging and decay of objects at different elevations, such as the top and bottom of tall structures. Participants draw analogies to web browsing and challenge the implications of time measurement in various contexts, including theoretical and speculative frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the difference in time passage between the top and bottom of tall structures, questioning why objects do not gradually disappear over time.
  • Others argue that the top and bottom of a structure are not in the same location in space-time, referencing concepts from Riemannian geometry.
  • There are inquiries about the nature of existence over time, with suggestions that objects are extended in time rather than existing solely at a single point.
  • Some participants propose that if time passes faster at higher elevations, it might imply that those locations age or decay differently, leading to speculative conclusions about future disappearance.
  • A contrasting viewpoint suggests that time itself does not change, but rather that gravity and other forces affect measuring instruments, not the passage of time itself.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the mainstream understanding of time, indicating a desire to challenge established views and explore unanswered questions.
  • Another participant critiques the understanding of decay and time, suggesting that some arguments presented are flawed or poorly expressed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of competing views regarding the nature of time, its measurement, and the implications of gravitational effects. There is no consensus on the interpretations or implications of these concepts, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying interpretations of time and decay, dependence on definitions of time, and unresolved mathematical or theoretical assumptions regarding gravitational effects.

pBrane
Messages
22
Reaction score
4
You've heard about the difference measured in clocks at the top and bottom of a tall building.

The Great Pyramid of Khufu 139 meters high. The top has been experiencing a slower passage of time than the bottom for some 5,000 years. Yet they are in the same location in space-time. Mount Everest is 8,848 metres and is even more old.

What is going on? Why don't things gradually disappear?

A browser takes components from all over web and packages them as a web-page.
Is 'our time' view taking components from a range of time and packaging them as a NOW?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pBrane said:
Yet they are in the same location in space-time.
No they are not.

Also consider the following example from Riemannian geometry: Rotate a sphere. There will be points on the sphere that are nearby, yet travel different distances, even if the rotation is completely rigid.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest
pBrane said:
Why don't things gradually disappear?
Why do you think that they should disappear?
 
How would such a disappearance even look like?
The top of Mount Everest was there 10, 100, .. years ago, and will (probably) still be there in 10, 100, ... years, independent of the precise amount of time a clock on top will measure there.

I don't see how this would be related to a browser.
 
I'm sensing perhaps a sci-fi popularization issue...
In Back to the Future, when McFly starts to disappear, that's due to him altering the time line to one where he doesn't exist, not a mismatch in times.

In Star Trek, when people "phase" out of view, that's tecnobabble; gibberish.
 
Does the OP think that an object only exists at one point in time? And it moves forward in time, leaving the past vacant? (Like in the Langoliers)

No, objects are extended in the time direction. It's probably more correct to view things in terms of world lines, which stretch out into the past and future.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale and mfb
Presumably the OP has read that time passes faster in weaker gravitational fields and assumes that means the top of mount Everest ages and erodes faster than the bottom?
 
CWatters said:
Presumably the OP has read that time passes faster in weaker gravitational fields and assumes that means the top of mount Everest ages and erodes faster than the bottom?
My take was some kind of "if time up top is passing faster than at the bottom then the top must be receding into the future and will eventually disappear".

Untrained intuitions can come up with that kind of stuff.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
Heres a far out theory for you. Time travels at the same speed everywhere. It is the same time now over at the edge of the known universe or in the centre of a black hole as it is here. It is now and it will be tomorrow. Gravity and other energies affects the measuring instruments, not time. Gravity causes decay, it does not change time. Makes perfect sense to me, is that not what Einsteins theory of relativity says?
 
  • #10
I think @Khashishi found the right point.

tkyoung75 said:
Gravity and other energies affects the measuring instruments, not time.
There is no difference between those. If everything runs slower, then time passes slower - by the definition of "passage of time". You can invent a new parameter that does something different, but then you should not call it time, and it also has no particular application in our universe.

Please keep in mind that physicsforum is not a place for personal speculations beyond mainstream science.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pBrane and 1oldman2
  • #11
As mainstream physics said to ... everybody who was ever proven them wrong.
Honestly, I am not trying to make enemies or cause trouble on the forum, and I apologise for confronting the status quo. I am just searching for answers to unanswered questions.
No difference between what? Time and decay? Time and the clock?
I tried to respond but i'll have to put it off for another time (he), perhaps in another discussion. For now, let's just say I see flaws in the argument that time is variable.
 
  • #12
tkyoung75 said:
As mainstream physics said to ... everybody who was ever proven them wrong.
Honestly, I am not trying to make enemies or cause trouble on the forum, and I apologise for confronting the status quo. I am just searching for answers to unanswered questions.
No difference between what? Time and decay? Time and the clock?
I tried to respond but i'll have to put it off for another time (he), perhaps in another discussion. For now, let's just say I see flaws in the argument that time is variable.
It's great that you want to learn, but you may want to consider that a whole lot of people put a whole lot of time and effort into figuring out this thing that you are just starting to dip a toe into - and that the best course of action is probably just to be a sponge and absorb what is already very well understood.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Evo and 1oldman2
  • #13
pBrane said:
You've heard about the difference measured in clocks at the top and bottom of a tall building.

The Great Pyramid of Khufu 139 meters high. The top has been experiencing a slower passage of time than the bottom for some 5,000 years. Yet they are in the same location in space-time. Mount Everest is 8,848 metres and is even more old.

What is going on? Why don't things gradually disappear?

A browser takes components from all over web and packages them as a web-page.
Is 'our time' view taking components from a range of time and packaging them as a NOW?

I expect that the elements at the bottom of the pyramid will decay faster than those at the top, not only because of the static load of the rock and atmosphere above, but also minus to a lesser degree due to the forces of gravity, and furthermore how it 'bends' around the solar bodies and gets it its orbital velocity and solar wind.
 
  • #14
tkyoung75 said:
I expect that the elements at the bottom of the pyramid will decay faster than those at the top, not only because of the static load of the rock and atmosphere above, but also minus to a lesser degree due to the forces of gravity, and furthermore how it 'bends' around the solar bodies and gets it its orbital velocity and solar wind.
This strikes me as a mish-mosh of misunderstandings so poorly expressed as to not even be wrong. I suggest you do some reading on the fundamentals of the concepts before posting further. Follow the rule of "when you realize you dug yourself into a hole, stop digging."
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, Evo, 1oldman2 and 1 other person
  • #15
Thread closed temporarily for Moderation...
 
  • #16
Thread will remain closed per the PF rules.
 

Similar threads

High School Clocks Vanishing into Thin Air - Gravitational Time Dilation
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
High School Time Dilation, Interstellar Travel, and "The Forever War"
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
High School Is Time's Flow Affected by Cosmic and Quantum Scales?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Graduate Perception of Time: How Energy & Gravity Affect Our View of Time
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Schools University Physics without high school preparation
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Graduate BRS: PKI Cryptosystems for SA/Ms: A Tutorial
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
High School Infrared Detectors & The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
Requesting suggestions for languages, libraries, and architectures for parallel (and sometimes non parallel) numerical and scientific computations
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Electromagnetics: Non-Symetrical coil with external iron
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
How does our understanding of time shape our perception of reality?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K