Is Time a Vector, Scalar, or Something Else Entirely?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the nature of time, questioning whether it is a scalar or vector and how it can be defined. Time is identified as a scalar quantity that can be measured in various units, similar to length. The complexity of defining time is highlighted, as it is a fundamental concept that resists simpler definitions. Additionally, the conversation touches on the idea that time is what a clock measures, suggesting a subjective element to its measurement. The philosophical implications of time, including its acceleration and the role it plays in the universe, are also explored.
unscientific
Messages
1,728
Reaction score
13
Greetings, I have pondered over this question for what seemed ages. I dared not ask for opinions of my fellow classmates for they may mock at me for being a moron.
My question is:
1) What exactly is time? ( scalar? vector? units? force? )


2) How does time past?

( Before 1s passes.. 0.0001s...0.0000000000001s...etc. ) Does time even past or begin?


2 b) State the acceleration of time.

Nothing could be more wonderful than an intellectual discussion. :rolleyes:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your first question alone could be pondered for quite awhile. Time is most definitely a scalar, and can be measured in whatever units you like (just as length can be measured in inches, meters, cubits, etc.). But it's interesting to ask what time really is. I remember my very first physics class, in which our instructor posed the question of how we should define time. But she then asked us to write our own individual definitions, which proved to be a somewhat challenging task. The problem with the most basic units, such as time, length, mass, and electric charge, is that they are so simple that they can't easily be defined in any simpler terms.
 
Operational: time is what a clock measures.

What does a clock measure? What we want it to measure.

So why does the universe seem to be so obsessed about working according to something we have defined? Easy: we were inspired to build a clock to measure something that we knew would be periodic, regular etc.
 
unscientific said:
2 b) State the acceleration of time.
I'll have a go at this one for fun.

dt = dt.
dt/dt = 1.
d^2t/dt^2 = d/dt(1) = 0.

As logic dictates it ought to be.

Claude.
 
John Wheeler (a famous physicist) was famous for saying that time is what prevents everything from happenging together.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top