Speed of our reality perception…

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the perception of reality in relation to fundamental physical constants, particularly focusing on Planck time and Planck length. The original poster proposes a thought experiment involving an electron traveling at near-light speed and questions how many frames per second (FPS) would be recorded by a hypothetical perfect camera. The conclusion drawn is that human perception is significantly slower than the actual events occurring in the universe, suggesting the possibility of beings existing in a faster time scale, which humans might not perceive. The conversation also critiques misconceptions about electron speeds and the nature of observation in physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Planck time and Planck length
  • Basic knowledge of special relativity
  • Familiarity with wave-particle duality of electrons
  • Concept of discrete versus continuous space-time
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Planck length in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the concept of wave-particle duality in greater detail
  • Study the principles of special relativity and its effects on perception of time
  • Investigate theories on the existence of life forms operating on different time scales
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, philosophers of science, and anyone interested in the intersection of perception, time, and fundamental physics.

  • #31
chingel said:
I think it is a very interesting idea.

What is perception of time? Is it just a perception, an illusion, can this perception change? Or is it something fundamental. I don't really understand it either. Can there be a human to who 1 minute feels like a second? I don't mean that he is actually moving through time faster, running at supernatural speed etc, nothing like that, just the perception.

This would require a 60-fold increase in communication speed between neurons and such in your brain. That simply isn't possible.

The reason why we probably perceive time the way we do, if it is at all something that can change, is that if it feels like a minute just to lift your arm up, it is not very useful, you'd probably lose your attention before you get anything done and longer term goals would suffer, like searching for water, if it would feel like forever. We would have evolved to experience time at a rate that is useful, that feels normal, natural, where you can react to things, but everyday actions run at a comfortable speed.

I disagree. The cells in your nevous system can only operate up to a certain amount in a given period of time. Neurons use Ion pumps and Ion channels to operate and it takes time for these to work and for Ions to be generated and replaced. Increased work by these cells, even if it is possible, would generate more heat, use more energy, have more wear and tear, and etc.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Drakkith said:
This would require a 60-fold increase in communication speed between neurons and such in your brain. That simply isn't possible.
I'd guess that some drugs (e.g. cocaine) and some practices (e.g. yoga, meditation, whatever) can increase state of human awareness/perception, but I'd agree that it's hardly something like 60-fold increase... even increase of two seems difficult, yet I'd say possible.

Since we know how our life style is speeding up, and that brains seems to have more potential than it's currently used, perhaps through natural evolution our brains shall evolve in direction so they work on "higher frequency" than they do today...

So, potential extra-terrestrial beings that might be intelligent and very small in physical size (I'm just guessing that, because in that way higher brain activity can be in better balance with higher body activity) might have a mind which operates at much higher "frequency" than that of a human being. Such mind might not be based on something like physical human brains as we know it but be built in a different manner, maybe something alike computer's CPU (central processing unit)...

Well, nowadays computers are still in some operations, mostly parallel ones, slower than the human brains, but as technology develops I'd say CPUs will become faster and better than a human brain in all aspects (there are already experiments on using quantum states and light communication instead of electricity for much faster computers, which might become available in relatively near future). And of course, CPU is just an example... such "advanced brains" might be based on some completely unknown "construction" to us.

And perhaps when we know enough what consciousness is we might make computers/robots self-aware, and thus create "advanced self-aware intelligent beings". The thing is that such beings might well already exist, yet, we think that they don't because if they did they'd already come in contact with us, but on the other hand, we didn't even consider that they might operate/think at much higher frequency. If that's the case, I'd guess they have no interest in "talking" to us, either for (im)practical reasons (too different time perception) and/or because we are just still too ignorant for them...
 
Last edited:
  • #33
This should really have been posted in the biology section so that we can have a stab at it there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception" . There is clearly a limit to how much perception can change, whilst sleep can sometimes shrink hours to instant this does not happen when one is awake.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
ryan_m_b said:
This should really have been posted in the biology section so that we can have a stab at it there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception" . There is clearly a limit to how much perception can change, whilst sleep can sometimes shrink hours to instant this does not happen when one is awake.
¸
Much thanks for your post with links. If someone can move this over to the biology section please do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
Boy@n said:
¸
Much thanks for your post with links. If someone can move this over to the biology section please do.

No problem. I'm afraid it's unlikely you will get a comprehensive answer as we don't have a good enough understanding of the underlying processes.
 
  • #36
Also, be VERY careful with how you word your question and make sure you are asking the right questions. It helps to start with specific questions about the more basic aspects and build up from there. Otherwise the thread won't get anywhere!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
901
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K