Time; do you believe in it?

Recommended Videos

Infernai

New member
Apr 14, 2009
2,605
0
0
Most people think Time is like a river, flowing swift and sure in one direction. But i have seen the face of time, and i can tell you...they are wrong. Time is like an ocean in the middle of a storm. You may wander who i am, and where i came from: Sit down, and i will tell you a story unlike any you have ever heard before.
 

Sean951

New member
Mar 30, 2011
650
0
0
James Joseph Emerald said:
Sean951 said:
James Joseph Emerald said:
Sean951 said:
This [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_information] is the specific theory that we are talking about. It was used to disprove Hawking on his theory of black holes, and he conceded defeat on the subject, so I would assume it is widely accepted as true.

Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information#As_a_property_in_physics] is another way to define information in the way it is used in the above.
Nowhere in either of those articles does it say that information cannot be destroyed.
In fact, it specifically states "it is impossible to destroy information without increasing the entropy of a system". In other words, when information is destroyed, the system it is apart of increases in entropy, making it an irreversible process [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy#Thermodynamical_and_statistical_descriptions]. So, the information would completely cease to exist.
The fact that Hawking's "Hawking Radiation" could not exist without destroying information causing a "war" to be declared by Susskind doesn't imply that? Susskind attempted to explain information in The History Channels "The Universe" with the red dye example provided above. It may be impossible for us to decipher it, but the information is still there.
I'm way out of my element when it comes to discussing quantum mechanics, I'll admit.
But how can you possibly call something "information", if it is virtually impossible for anyone to actually make any sort of sense out of it? If information is "scrambled", and you didn't specifically witness its scrambling, the only way of obtaining that information in its original form is by reversing time. Simply put, how can you call that information?

Additionally, if you have a sink with red dye in it, you could rearrange those molecules into a virtually infinite number of permutations to encode almost any message. Does that mean the sink contains an infinite amount of information, scrambled up?
We don't have the computational ability to decode information once it gets that scrambled, but we may some day. Who knows, there may be an alien race who already can. But since it can't travel faster than the speed of light, much of our history would never have reached.
 

A Shadows Age

New member
Mar 30, 2011
165
0
0
putowtin said:
wow, deep, and here's me full of beer, chillin' in my back garden and enjoying my birthday!
But yeah time, time has to run and we jump in and out of it (either that or the last 31 years were for nothing!)
Now your getting it. The last part I mean.
 

Sharpiez

New member
Jun 9, 2010
37
0
0
I guess I agree in that we have no real way of perceiving time. We have to design devices to portray time accurately. Without the sun/moon cycles I don't believe we would perceive it the same way, if you and I were locked in the same empty room, and had to sit in silence for two days, we would come out with totally different ideas on how long we had been stuck in there.

My opinion is:

Time is relative... (ho ho)

To us.
 

Daggedawg

New member
Dec 8, 2010
202
0
0
"Time" as we perceive it, doesn't exist, is what I believe. It's all because of matter in motion. As long as something is moving, "time" will "pass".
 

xan_shaw

New member
Nov 6, 2010
11
0
0
Even if humans didn't exist, the Earth would still rotate around the Sun. So yes, hours, minutes and seconds are things that we've come up with in order to mark that passing, but in reality, time does exist. Aliens from Blargon 7 may not measure time in the same way that we do, or at all, but to us there is solid undeniable proof of the passage of time. Mainly the Earth's rotation.

And to question whether or not time would exist without humans is... well... kind rhetorical. I mean, if we weren't around to experiance it or question it, would it matter in any way? Not really.
 

GraveeKing

New member
Nov 15, 2009
621
0
0
I MENTIONED the possibility that I don't believe in evolution the other day and got a hammering for that, the fact you're disagreeing with time may get you killed xD

Anywho, rofltrolls aside. Time, to me is like a set of pictures, just insanely fast. Without time we'd just be a still picture, I do believe in time as a universal concept, in the fact without it we wouldn't be moving....
Although I can see where you're coming from - since we can't measure planetary time due to the fact the planets orbiting becoming closer to the sun etc. But true time? Yeah we can measure that sure. If I said 10seconds ago it's still 10 seconds ago - no matter whenever or wherever I say it, so Universally there is a time of sorts.
 

The Geek Lord

New member
Apr 15, 2009
597
0
0
XHolySmokesX said:
Time is a man made concept, it is not a natural phenomenon.
I stopped reading right there. I hope you're talking about the measurement of time, because if you're not I'll have to pull a Linkara on you, good sir. (I AM A MAN etc)

Time is not "man made." If time was man made, then you would've created a time paradox. Without time man would have never existed, since without time nothing would move. Everything would be at a stand still. Get what I'm saying here?

Let me put it this way. I don't have a degree in physics or any scientific field, or anything at all for that matter, being 16 kind of does that, but I don't think it's that hard to figure out. Move your hand in front of you. Now just sway your hand back and forth. If time was not natural, you wouldn't be doing this, because nothing would be natural, because nothing could be. Nothing would exist. Nothing would happen, nothing could work. And fuck I'm starting to ramble on about this. So I'll just leave you with this.


Good day, sir!​
 

ScoopMeister

New member
Mar 12, 2011
651
0
0
TimeLord said:
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
Props for getting that in there mate. This should be the final word on the matter.
 

Zack Alklazaris

New member
Oct 6, 2011
1,938
0
0
Your right, time is a unit of measurement, not an entity. However, time travel itself is possible. I will try and go into some specifics, but I really don't have the time (no I wasn't trying to be funny). So I'll give you what I know off the top of my head.

Satellites such as the global positioning satellites need their eternal clocks periodically adjusted because they all go faster than the ones on earth.

(I show my work) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
"For GPS satellites, GR predicts that the atomic clocks at GPS orbital altitudes will tick faster by about 45,900 ns/day because they are in a weaker gravitational field than atomic clocks on Earth's surface. Special Relativity (SR) predicts that atomic clocks moving at GPS orbital speeds will tick slower by about 7,200 ns/day than stationary ground clocks. Rather than have clocks with such large rate differences, the satellite clocks are reset in rate before launch to compensate for these predicted effects. In practice, simply changing the international definition of the number of atomic transitions that constitute a one-second interval accomplishes this goal. Therefore, we observe the clocks running at their offset rates before launch. Then we observe the clocks running after launch and compare their rates with the predictions of relativity, both GR and SR combined. If the predictions are right, we should see the clocks run again at nearly the same rates as ground clocks, despite using an offset definition for the length of one second."


This is in the most simplistic of terms caused by gravity. You may of heard the documentary say "Space Time" as in space and time are virtually the same thing. This is right, but I can understand the confusion. You see, objects such as the Earth actually bend space around it. This is proven through good old Einstein. Since space and time are one it actually bends time when you introduce a large gravity affecting object.

This is the best picture I could find that represents this

Now as you get closer to the Earth time slows down compared to the time on earth.

You also have to remember that speed also is a factor of time. As a body moves closer and closer to the speed of light time on and in it slows down. Once again more Einstein. Remember that the Earth isn't just moving on its own, its moving around a solar system that in itself is moving around a galaxy. So in reality the Earth is moving at 550,000 miles per hour or about 152.7 miles a second. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second. Now that may seem like a huge difference, but it is still enough to affect time around the Earth. Now I am unaware if this last part has been proven or not. I do believe scientist are currently trying to study black holes to prove this theory as they tend to pull things in at around the speed of light.

Now you may be thinking, bullshit. Astronauts go up in space all the time. Spending months at a time in space yet visually their age remains the same. Well you are correct. While indeed they have "gone in time" the amount of it is tiny, only a few milliseconds if even.

Hope this helps
 

Adventurer2626

New member
Jan 21, 2010
713
0
0
Ooh thanks for the topic. Well I believe that time exists but more as a quantitative thing-a-ma-jigger like velocity, gravity, etc. than some river or tunnel that you can travel up and down. It's yet another function of change. As far as I'm concerned, to time travel you would first have to record the exact configuration of the universe at the time you're interested in, find someway to account for the atoms you're using for yourself and your time machine, then build said time machine powerful enough to rearrange the ENTIRE universe to its previous configuration.
 

Batou667

New member
Oct 5, 2011
2,238
0
0
I've heard the "time is a human invention" argument before. I didn't understand it then and for the life of me I don't understand it now.

Time isn't "just in the mind". I can press snooze on my alarm clock and time will carry on ticking forward regardless of whether I lay there staring at the numbers, whether I fall asleep, knock the batteries out, or take out a shotgun and blow my head clean off.

Time is linked to fundamental scientific ideas like entropy, and oscillation time for a given pendulum in a given gravity, and so on. Just because we can't reach out and touch it doesn't make it any less "real" than the concepts of length and speed.

I'd honestly be very interested in hearing how anybody can justify "there is no time, it's just that the present changes". Where's that beer I drank yesterday, then? How did I manage to set my alarm clock to a point in the future that doesn't exist?