Understanding Time: Is it Real or Fictional?

[prasannapakkiam]

I have come to a personal conclusion that time cannot be defined as it is an SI Unit. I mean try defining length for example. These units only are defined by relating it to each other. I say that these units are things we as humans have taken for granted...

 

[petm1]

Time is the dimensionless point that everything exists within.

 

[Rade]

Sounds circular, to prove me wrong try to define 'moment' without reference to another time concept. And what do you mean 'in between', is that just a metaphor?

As I see it, "time" is defined by "moments", time is not composed of moments, thus "moments" are outside of time but are the bounds of time, and the bounds of time are the "nows" (outside time). This must be true because time is divisible (continuous) but moments are not divisible. So, suppose two discrete moments A & C and also some continuous time [E-G]. Now A and C are not in motion (nor in rest) but they form the begin and end of the time [E-G]. Now, since A and C are contrary things (begin and end), like black and white, they can contain something intermediate between them, and that which is intermediate between the two discrete moments A (begin) and C (end) is [E-G] = time, just as that which is intermediate between black and white = grey. Now by "between" it means that time [E-G], after the moment A, must first reach some B before C, thus time must always be "between" the two moments A (begin) and C (end), for there is nowhere else for it to be since it is neither at A nor C. Thus the reason I stated: That which is intermediate between moments IS TIME.. fyi--this argument derived from my understanding of concept of time of Aristotle.

Edit: From another thread I made this claim:

If, following Aristotle on time, we consider that "that which is intermediate between existents is space", then perhaps "that which is intermediate between moments of existents is space-time" ? To which the reply by Plastic Photon: And if 'is intermediate between existents' is taken to mean 'on a closed interval', time never ends, thus, space-time never ends.

 

[David Burke]

You have complicated the issue far to much. Time is change. We require a way to measure everything in science and the universal property of change is not excluded from this human desire. Time is the answer, a means by which to measure change in the universe and thereby compare observations as time provides us with a unit of measure.

All other properties of time are theoretical points of the overlaying framework. Yes they may help us to discover truths about the way change occures in the universe but when you do that you are really talking about change, not time. Time is not a fundamental property of the universe but change is.

 

[rocketman83]

Is "time" something that is a real thing, or is it just a standard/belief of something to guide us humans for a day to day basis, that humans have come to accept as a fictional word, but does not really exist?

This is something I've pondered myself. Time is a man made believe created to help us in our daily lives, to keep things organized. Time exists because we make it exist, we can't touch Time like we can touch a rock or sand. Its a mental object rather then a physical one. At least, that's what I think.

 

[Langbein]

Is it fore sure that time is only one thing and that it can be defined in only one way ?

What will/could the definition of time eventually be, something like the time itself ?

If one ask "what is time" what will then the meaning of the word "is" be ?

 

[Tosh]

As we lose time, we lose a part of ourselves that we can never get back. Unless it is used for good, it is wasted.

 

[Langbein]

As we lose time, we lose a part of ourselves that we can never get back. Unless it is used for good, it is wasted.

But if we are losing time, then time have to be "something" ?

If not, how can we loose "nothing" ?

Are you sure that it is "the time" you are loosing ?

Could it be some objects more important not to loose in this world than this "unclear if it exist object time".

Could the answer to the question: "What is time ?" be something like "Time is not" ?

On the other hand there might be some other more or less important situations to take care about in this world while doing all this "time" ?

Does "time" has a meaning ?

 

[setAI]

one of Einstein's main arguments for relativity is that it is better to express the universe as a 4D structure that simply is- rather than a 3D structure that evolves-

 

[jiohdi]

time is the mental dimension of event space. we create it by having memories and anticipations. we gauge the distance between events by means of repeating countable events. In my experience space there are objects which never seem to grow nor shrink in total number, but move about relative to each other and I can keep track of these relative motions by means of cycling systems called clocks. I can anticipate where they may be headed by the same means, yet these objects for me always and only exist in what can be called the present moment.

 

[AbouNart]

I don't know how to say in English but:
I think that time is not a thing, a prameter or a variable. It is not something we could catch, see. It is not a thing, it does not exist.
I think we could say that time is the toal movements of every single nano thing in the univers.
Time passing depends on the total movements in the universe.
when something moves from a place to another, then it will be time.

 

[castlegates]

Time is the non-event between events. So our sense of time is a sense of nothing at all, brought to you by that which does exist. This is a sort of reading between the lines ... works the same way.