Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Perception of time

  1. Apr 30, 2004 #1
    Here's how I think time works.

    Our perception of time is based solely on energy and the rate at which it can be transferred. Taken at its most basic unit, it is the transfer of 1 unit of energy across a distance of 1 Planck Length. The velocity is constant at the speed of light.

    All matter comprises energy. E=mc2 states that all mass is comprised solely of energy.
    Every particle/atom/molecule that we are made of, is solely comprised of energy. These components each have a cycle, for example, the orbit of an electron.
    Due to the similar position we have within our gravity well, all our component parts will have roughly the same cycles, hence we measure time at roughly the same rate.

    If we were to position ourselves in a gravity well with an increased gravitational force, all of our mass would under go compression. Not only is our mass compressed but also space, and with it the space that the electron has to travel in its orbit. A Planck Length, relative to here on earth, is now reduced.
    Basically, the electron would have more space to traverse to complete a single orbit and because the rate that energy is transferred is a constant, it will take a longer period of time.

    If the firing of a neuron in our brain is dependant on the chemical properties, more specifically the orbit of an electron, then it will fire at a reduced rate. Everything would appear normal to us, based on the rate at which our brains work, but we would be experiencing time dilation.

    Taken into a lower gravitational force and space under goes decompression, resulting in faster energy cycles.

    With velocity, you are adding energy to the particles/atoms to move them. This energy is being added into the already existing cycles resulting in a longer period of time for each cycle to complete as there is now more energy to be transferred.

    Whether you increase the amount of space involved (GR) or increase the amount of energy involved (SR) the result is the same, you change the energy cycles and subsequently time.
  2. jcsd
  3. May 1, 2004 #2
    From what you said, can we postulate that force is equivalent to spacetime? The effect of a force such as gravity is to change both space and time. Likewise, if we can detect the changes happening in space and in time then we can conclude the existence of a force.
  4. May 1, 2004 #3
    The effect of the force of gravity is on Space alone.

    Time is inversely proportional to the space that energy is transmitted through.
    Time lengthens or becomes slower the more compressed space becomes.

    If there is no energy being transmitted through a region of space, there is no perception of time. This does not mean that there is no time, just nothing wanting to measure it.

    Essentially, time is sequence and duration. The sequence is the transmission of energy from one point to another. The duration is down to the speed of light and how much space there is between the two points.
    Sending the energy in the reverse direction does not reverse time, but merely creates another sequence.

    This means that time always flows forwards.

    That is true - almost.
    Any distortion in time must be the result in a distortion of space or of the mass (velocity), which in turn must be due to the existance of a force.
    With velocity the force is easilly visible. Distortions of space are bit more difficult to detect.
  5. May 1, 2004 #4
    It is the warpage of space (spacetime) that moves the planets, stars, and galaxies.
    Einstein field equations.

    [tex]G_{\mu \nu} = 8 \pi T_{\mu \nu} [/tex]

    Leftside is spacetime curvature. Rightside is energy momentum tensor.
  6. May 1, 2004 #5
    The interesting thing about warping space (space time) is that it is a very convenient method of describing the graviational force associated with any mass.
    The principle being that the warpage causes a well, which planets and other mass fall into.
    The question is : if it's gravity that creates the well, what is the force that causes the planets and other mass to fall into it.
    Fall, as in gravity ? Gravity created the well, how can it also pull planets and other mass into it ?

    There is no force that would cause an object to deviate from its course within the well, because that force has already been used to create the well.

    I hope that made sense.
  7. May 1, 2004 #6
    Well is caused by the presence of mass. If there no mass anywhere in the universe then spacetime will appear as flat Euclidean 4 dimensional. But what is in the mass that creates the well? The answer has to be the existence of local acceleration inside the mass. So that mass is defined as the inverse of the time rate of change of local acceleration.

    [tex] mass = \frac{1}{\frac{da}{dt}} [/tex]
  8. May 1, 2004 #7
    Acceleration of what? The local acceleration of one dimensional space.
  9. May 1, 2004 #8
    If, by one dimensional space, you are referring to the straightline between two points across which energy can be transmitted, then it could be we are talking about the same thing.

    As I explained previously, the greater the compression of space, the longer the cycle, using the example of the electron orbit.
    In this case an increase in compression would increase the time taken for the electron to complete one orbit. Effectively the electron has been decelerated.

    How is this local acceleration inside the mass transmitted to the exterior of the mass ? If the effect is restricted to the interior of the mass, then the gravity well will not extend beyond the surface of the mass.
  10. May 2, 2004 #9
    Materials being digested will reply as soon as possible.
  11. May 2, 2004 #10
    Using a spacetime diagram, an object such as an electron can move independently along the time axis or along the space axis. The combined motion along these axes always equal the speed of light.

    A photon always move along the space axis at speed c (~186,000 mi/s). When a photon moves exactly along the space axis, its motion along the time axis is zero. The photon did not age and time stands still.

    The local acceleration of one space is made of two components. A timelike component and a spacelike component. These components are in a dynamic equilibrium. The result is that space and time or spacetime appears to vanish but instead it created two kinds of mass, the potential and the kinetic. The check and balance between these masses give the experimentally determined mass of particles.
    Each of these components of the acceleration gave two types of force, a timelike force and a spacelike force. The timelike force is equivalent to the magnetic force and the spacelike force is equivalent to the electric force. The scalar product of the vector products of these forces and each respective quantum of length gave square of energy and there are two distinct squares of energy. One is for potential mass and the other is for kinetic mass.

    Gravity is the vector difference between timelike force and spacelike force.
    When the timelike force dominates the situation of the resulting gravity is repulsive. When the spacelike force dominates the situation is attractive. With these two components of the local acceleration of one-space, both gravity and antigravity can be accounted for.
    Last edited: May 2, 2004
  12. May 3, 2004 #11
    If the electron is stationary, then the time axis will show 1. This will decrease the faster the electron travels, time will slow relative to velocity.
    The velocity may show the speed of light, but time at this point will have slowed to zero.

    [tex]t_1 = \frac{t}{\sqrt{1 - \frac{ v^2}{ c^2}}}[/tex]

    This implies that the photon can move from one point to another instanteously. Speed = distance / time. If you have no time, you cannot determine the speed other than it is infinite.
  13. May 3, 2004 #12
    The spacetime interval is

    [tex] ds^2 = \vec {dr}^2 - cdt^2[/tex]

    speed = sqrt(spacetime interval)/time always less than c. Time has a double meanings. One is locki=-in inside spacetime and one is used as the derivative of time in rate of change.
  14. May 5, 2004 #13
    I like your line of thought, Awolf.
    Time seems nice and clear at the macro scale, so it's natural to assume its an independant variable.
    Except it bends in the presense of high mass or energy, ( SR ) which is interesting. What is going on at the quantum scale while this is going on?
    Everythings fuzzy at the quantum scale, and time is no exception.
    Could time actually be absolutly dependant on things such as energy transfer?
    And if so, relative to what metric?

    energy transfer over space?

    It annoys me that physicists don`t seem to have much regard for this interesting line of thought.

    Showing time to actually be a function of energy transfer would undoubtably yield all kinds of interesting stuff.
  15. May 5, 2004 #14


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The 4-velocity of any object in spacetime is c, photons don't however have a refernce frame so it's incorrect to say they travel from one pooint to the other instanteously, you can say that the spacetime interval between any events on the worldline of a photon is zero tho'.
  16. May 5, 2004 #15
    At the quantum level, every particle with mass is still only energy.
    The only particle with no mass, that we can verify, is the photon.

    A gamma ray (photon) has approximately the same amount of energy as an electron, except it has no mass. If both particles are made up entirely of energy, then the difference between them is the configuration of the energy.

    If the electron comprises numerous massless energy packets. The transfer of these packets of energy, at the speed of light, and their interaction is what provides the electron with structure and mass.
    This structure is then governed by the same rules as at the macro level.

    This concept does simplify SpaceTime by making it just Space.
  17. May 8, 2004 #16
    Time doesn't bend.
    GR implies that there is a warping of SpaceTime, a Gravity Well, which gives the impression of Time bending.

    Imagine you are wading through a tank of oil - strange thought, but stay with it.
    When the oil is warm, you can move through it fairly easily. The molecules are well spaced, but still provide some resistance.
    When the oil is colder, the molecules are more densly packed, providing more resistance and using the same amount of energy, you move through it at a reduced velocity.

    Compare this to Time in Space. As the density of Space increases the closer you get to a high mass, the slower time appears because it encounters more Space across a set distance.

    So Space (and Time) doesn't bend, it has variations in its density.

    A similar example can be seen on weather charts. They comprise areas of high and low pressure. The high pressure areas are equivalent to regions around high mass objects.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Perception of time
  1. Light Perception (Replies: 1)

  2. Light and Perception (Replies: 3)

  3. Perception of colors (Replies: 4)