This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
What Is Time? (Physics Continued)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
L33tsauce
Time is nothing more than a unit we measure with. that's all I use it for :)
It's also a delicious seasoning.
Post by
Artinz
Forgive me for not reading through seven pages of this stuf, and kind of like what bigfoot252 said, time is a unit made to measure the speed at which energy is expended, regardless of place.
Well... reading this over again I see the flaws in that. Diffusion takes "time" but expends no energy... so time is a unit made to measure the speed at which something is accomplished. Meh.
Post by
74218
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Aratheras
The universe is (supposedly) infinite.
The human race is quite finite in the majority of its aspects.
Finity ÷ Infinity = 0
Thus, I do not believe that humans can ever fully understand the universe. It's just my theory, of course.
Ehm, something is wrong in your math... You can't get 0 by dividing. No matter what you divide by... If you assume that finite can be any number and infinite is infinite, you will get a number, that is infinitely close to 0, when you divided finite by infinite. If you assume that finite is anything, and infinite is it's opposite (although this does not fit with the definitions, as I see them, at all), you will get 1 by dividing them.
Also it seems like a really weird way to put it. You're comparing the size of the universe to the traits of the human being.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Artinz
The universe is (supposedly) infinite.
The human race is quite finite in the majority of its aspects.
Finity ÷ Infinity = 0
Thus, I do not believe that humans can ever fully understand the universe. It's just my theory, of course.
Ehm, something is wrong in your math... You can't get 0 by dividing. No matter what you divide by... If you assume that finite can be any number and infinite is infinite, you will get a number, that is infinitely close to 0, when you divided finite by infinite. If you assume that finite is anything, and infinite is it's opposite (although this does not fit with the definitions, as I see them, at all), you will get 1 by dividing them.
Also it seems like a really weird way to put it. You're comparing the size of the universe to the traits of the human being.
Assuming that F (finite) = (-∞, 0)U(0, ∞), that equation is impossible.
Post by
Random0098
Does it? Matter converting may instigate the temporal dimension. Is that plausible?
Interesting idea, but (just reading up on the Spacetime Continuum) I think we're getting the issue confused.
the temporal dimension is really just a way to measure where you are time-wise in the spacetime continuum
But if you mean that energy/matter conversion (such as the big bang) could have created the temporal dimension - You may be right. I really have to do more research on that.
It brings up the question: "did time exist before the big bang?"
EDIT: I can't use the computer for a while now, but I like this thread, I'll be back.
Ok, so I said this a while back in the thread. I think it's back though.
The dimension of time isn't some "alternate dimension" that moves and changes and does stuff independant of the universe. It's a dimension. You know, like length, width, etc.
Now, when I'm asking if time doesn't exist when there is no matter, I'm not talking about when there is an absence of matter somewhere in space, I'm talking about before matter existed (if there was a time for that), like before the big bang.
Post by
Skyfire
The universe is (supposedly) infinite.
The human race is quite finite in the majority of its aspects.
Finity ÷ Infinity = 0
Thus, I do not believe that humans can ever fully understand the universe. It's just my theory, of course.
Ehm, something is wrong in your math... You can't get 0 by dividing. No matter what you divide by... If you assume that finite can be any number and infinite is infinite, you will get a number, that is infinitely close to 0, when you divided finite by infinite. If you assume that finite is anything, and infinite is it's opposite (although this does not fit with the definitions, as I see them, at all), you will get 1 by dividing them.
Also it seems like a really weird way to put it. You're comparing the size of the universe to the traits of the human being.
Assuming that F (finite) = (-∞, 0)U(0, ∞), that equation is impossible.
You guys didn't read my reply, did you?
Post by
123022
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
You guys didn't read my reply, did you?
And you are?
Ehm, something is wrong in your math... You can't get 0 by dividing. No matter what you divide by... If you assume that finite can be any number and infinite is infinite, you will get a number, that is infinitely close to 0, when you divided finite by infinite. If you assume that finite is anything, and infinite is it's opposite (although this does not fit with the definitions, as I see them, at all), you will get 1 by dividing them.
Also it seems like a really weird way to put it. You're comparing the size of the universe to the traits of the human being.
I love the way your mind works. Incredible logic, and expert communication skills. A+!
Post by
Skyfire
What reply?
Finity ÷ Infinity = 0
Incorrect. The
limit
of Finity
÷
Infinity = 0. Your product on the other hand is incomprehensible.
That one
.
And you are?
Your friendly neighborhood
Spiderman
Moderator
!
Post by
108385
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skyfire
Time is what happens when man utilizes changes as a tool for progression.
Time exists when man doesn't.
Post by
MyTie
I'd like to start by saying hello, and welcome to this thread. It is quite fun. Now what it seems you're trying to do is give time a physical embodiment, even if its in the form of energy and or wavelengths.
And if that's the case, you should also try giving language a physical embodiment. I see what you are trying to say, but it is a very bad example. Language is not how an individual percieves it, but rather, how everyone who uses that language percieves it. It is a socicognitive tool, not some theoretical force in physics, like time is. So I think what i'm saying, language is what happens when man utilizes sounds as a tool for progression.
Time is what happens when man utilizes changes as a tool for progression.
By this rational, if I do not utilize it as a tool for progression, time would cease to be. If every human being were to die right now, we can safely assume time would not stop, even though human language would. Time is very independant of us.
This thread seems to be clogged with people who confuse time with the
perception
of time. We are speaking about the former, and trying to define it without relying on the latter.
Post by
Lusky
Hows about we let some
time
pass and let this thread die for christ sake.
Post by
Random0098
Time is what happens when man utilizes changes as a tool for progression.
That's a little too egocentric a definition to be viable, though.
Why is "time", something that exists the whole universe-over, defined by what "man" perceives?
I think we all need to step back from what we think time is for a second (pun intended).
Time is relative to US, but that doesn't mean that it's relative to everything. Consider an imaginary being that doesn't rely on light or sound or touch to sense what is going on around him. This being instantaneously knows what is happening all over the universe at any particular moment.
We can choose to imagine that he is bound by the temporal dimension too, and like the rest of the universe, he can only sense what is happening as "time" progresses - In this case he would have a clear picture of the true sequence of events in the universe, and not Man's altered perception of it (depending on speed, light, etc).
Or, we can choose to imagine that the being is not bound by the temporal dimension, and instead specifically knows all past, present, and future events and their exact locations and "times" in the Spacetime continuum.
This being would see that time is not just something that is made up by humans to gauge what is making them get older, but would instead see time as a constantly present coordinate system tied directly to the makeup of the universe.
Post by
MyTie
Boottspurr, trying to picture myself as that imaginary being is frying a few fuzes in my head.
Post by
Random0098
Yeah, I know what you mean.
It sure sucks being bound by time and having a severely limited brain, doesn't it? (Not you MyTie. Humans in general).
Post by
Lusky
It's 18% right?
Post by
108385
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.