Is time in essence - constant?

[Zula110100100]

Except what is 2010 and 2020 other than names that are arbitrarily defined to some points in time that are exactly 10 years apart. So the whole thing about a clock in frame B would measure 1 year passing so to person B HIS year would be 2011 a point defined as exactly 1 year past 2010. So arriving in frame A after their clocks had ticked for 10 years and it is 2020 there, person B arrives having past 1 not 10 years past 2010 in HIS time, but upon arrival everyone in frame A agrees it's 2020 and he has traveled forward in time...which is a funny phrase to "travel forward in time" as something special, everything does it(except photons and whatever may come from other theories not in question right now, everything going less than light speed i guess..I don't know about all that) people in frame A actually traveled forward in time MORE efficiently if they traversed 10 years as frame B traveled 1...much more slowly through time. Making time not constant, EVENTS are constant perhaps. the event that they met back up was definitively 10 years elapsed in frame A so anyone who was in frame A the whole time and called the starting point 2010 it would be 2020, and I guess whoever has more people to back them up is right...and it's their year?

 

[dewaite]

Yes, Time is Constant. Time doesn't change but All things change IN time...Even light changes IN time - it has a frequency and a speed, both of which are based on Time. One can NOT use light to measure time, Time must be used to measure Light. TIME is as fundamental as Space - which is also Constant. Space doesn't move, but all things move "Through" space.

 

[darkhorror]

Fluke and dewaite you really should learn about relativity before you try to make these claims. Learning about this will clear up much of what you are talking about.

If time is constant and something happens in the universe does it happen at the same time for every frame of reference?

 

[Shackleford]

Fluke and dewaite you really should learn about relativity before you try to make these claims. Learning about this will clear up much of what you are talking about.

If time is constant and something happens in the universe does it happen at the same time for every frame of reference?

Sorry. I wanted to jump in on this last question.

If you have a moving inertial frame A relative to a frame on the Earth B, the rate of time and the time designation (e.g. noon, 1 PM, etc.) will of course differ in the application of special relativity. The difference in the calculations is still the same regardless of your reference frame. However, there is an absolute time in the sense that as I kick a ball on Earth there is an instant in time that coincides with an instant in time in the moving inertial frame when I kicked the ball in the stationary frame B on Earth. Naturally, observing this with a light beam, clock, and so forth is left to be desired. I've just recently been seriously asking myself what is time. There is only the present, my instantaneous consciousness. My cognitive ability of memory gives rise to a notion of time and measuring it by some arbitrary interval of an event. However, it's not simply illusory, as nature/matter undergo specific and predictable changes, such as nuclear decay, aging, and so forth.

 

[yuiop]

Time is constant at the speed of light.

Someone explain to me how light can travel in anything other then a vacuum when it is soooo small that it travels between the elementary particles where everything is vacuum.

When light travels through water it is still traveling at full speed it just takes longer to get from one end to the other because it does not take a direct route as it is bouncing all over the place.

You are forgetting the wave-particle duality of a photon. When passing through a medium a photon does not necessarily behave like a bullet that slips between the gaps of the atoms. It can behave as a wave that interacts with the electromagntic fields of the electrons in the medium and that is why it slows down. Massive particle can pass through the medium like bullets and can get through quicker than the photons, effectively breaking the "speed of light barrier" in the medium. This results in something similar to the sonic boom of a jet aircraft breaking the "speed of sound barrier". This phenomenon is observed in some nuclear reactors and is known as Cherenkov radiation.

 

[filegraphy]

Why can't time be constant? It moves regularly and is slowed by speed. Time allows movement, and movement slows time. Am I correct or have I made a mistake?

 

[Shackleford]

Why can't time be constant? It moves regularly and is slowed by speed. Time allows movement, and movement slows time. Am I correct or have I made a mistake?

Well, it's only variable with respect to a moving inertial frame. An observer in an inertial frame at rest with respect to a clock experiences a constant rate of time, which incidentally is the maximum. I would observe a clock in a moving frame to be running at a "slower" rate of time, i.e. more time would elapse in my frame than in the moving frame. The word relativity is a really accurate term in describing such observed phenomena. lol. Einstein showed it's utterly useless to assign some sort of absolute solar, galactic, or universal standard of time since we would all experience, or rather observe, different rates of time depending on our relative inertial frames. I'm discovering that I think relativity is something I'd want to study more at the graduate level. I've been trying to figure out something in which to specialize beyond my undergrad.

 

[filegraphy]

Yeah that makes more sense now. Well put. Thanks.

 

[TCS]

What we perceive as time varies with energy density/velocity. However, our rate of time could just be a one dimensional projection of a multi-dimensional concept, where the magnitude of multi-dimensional time is constant.

 

[King Wildog]

First, hello, all! I hope I am at home here.

I, as well, firmly believe time is constant. Someone likened it unto a scale previously- and that is exactly what it is. Time only exists in that we have concieved it as a measuring scale for comparison of places or events. That is- it is a figment of our imagination. Perception of time is so easily confused with true time which is the duration of an event or object in its environment acted on by the sum of all vectors. --King Wildog

 

[Scizyr]

*performs thread necromancy ritual*

Perception of time is so easily confused with true time which is the duration of an event or object in its environment acted on by the sum of all vectors. --King Wildog

I disagree with your definition of "true time" because it uses the term duration which implies a perception of time. Don't worry I'm not calling you out, I am just using your post as the segue to my argument of the thread's topic.

All time is relative. There is no objective reference that we can point to and say it is how we can measure time as a constant. In effect it really doesn't exist.

How can we then be sure that anything we measure is accurate? Is the speed of light constant in a vacuum? You cannot accurately measure the speed of anything because speed is the measurement of distance traveled through time. Since we don't have accurate/constant time, we can't have accurate speed.

All equations involving time are thus negated.

SR becomes CR(Circular Relativity)

Am I missing something? Please tell me I'm wrong about this.