Time Does Not Exist - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:49:30 PM

Quote from: kuroman on April 30, 2014, 04:43:05 PM

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

what you are mentioning here is just the relativity of time, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means it's not a constant. Einstein had the swag!

well, my point was that time does not objectively exist.. if it's not objective, the question is.. does it truly exist? factor in the observer effect, and it seems more and more likely that the observer creates "time," but that exact "time" is not necessarily bound to everyone else.

I disagree, for me space and time are related to each other while general and restraint relativity theories explain it pretty well, I have my own interpretation on this mater that doesn't include an observer at all :

For me the a non existence of time requires a static system, a system that never change trough time, and such does not exist in the universe thanks to the second principal of thermodynamic, everything changes and the change can be expressed with a time equation and thus time exist, but where we might agree, is that the time as we perceived in our daily lifes might not be the real or rather the only representation of time as proven by relativity for example

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: kuroman on April 30, 2014, 04:43:05 PM

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

what you are mentioning here is just the relativity of time, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means it's not a constant. Einstein had the swag!

But that doesn't prove anything about the existence of time, it really just asks more questions.

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: tins on April 30, 2014, 04:41:52 PM

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

I forget which book it was, but Kurt Vonnegut wrote one where on one planet time was linear. Those on the outside looking in could see what had been, what was, what was soon to happen. Only those inside, the ones living within, would experience time as it was. I really don't remember all the details, I read it back in high school, roughly 15 years ago. But I remember thinking it was a cool concept at the time.

I am going to start reading more into time-space and relativity. It seems like Physicists are into something we should all know.

acs267

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 500

Time is just a idea for something much larger created by humans, to simplify something unknown. Hey, maybe 'time' is actually something else. But humans didn't necessarily come on the Earth with time as a essential, so who knows?

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

See, that brings even more questions after proving that time as we know it is a lie.

beetcoin

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: kuroman on April 30, 2014, 04:43:05 PM

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

what you are mentioning here is just the relativity of time, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means it's not a constant. Einstein had the swag!

well, my point was that time does not objectively exist.. if it's not objective, the question is.. does it truly exist? factor in the observer effect, and it seems more and more likely that the observer creates "time," but that exact "time" is not necessarily bound to everyone else.

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

what you are mentioning here is just the relativity of time, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means it's not a constant. Einstein had the swag!

tins

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 500

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 04:35:56 PM

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

I forget which book it was, but Kurt Vonnegut wrote one where on one planet time was linear. Those on the outside looking in could see what had been, what was, what was soon to happen. Only those inside, the ones living within, would experience time as it was. I really don't remember all the details, I read it back in high school, roughly 15 years ago. But I remember thinking it was a cool concept at the time.

beetcoin

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

if you were to stand outside an event horizon, and you saw an object get sucked in, it would take what seems like forever for it to go inwards.. on the other hand, if you were the object being sucked in, it would happen within a matter of seconds. so there is no objective time, it's all just relative to the observer.

and then you have the observer effect - through your consciousness, you can affect reality (at the very least) on an atomical level.

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: Hazir on April 30, 2014, 02:29:46 PM

Time exists as a dimension of human reality

See. I can accept that, it is not a constant in the universe though, unless someone is there to experience it.

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

watch this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqzgYRBlslw you might understand what's time from a scientific perspective in theoretical physics

counter

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 500

Time is on our side, yes it is!

I tend to believe time exists but just in the way we try to rationalize it. I think it is one of those things that is beyond or knowledge and understanding.

Hazir

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1005

★Nitrogensports.eu★

Time exists as a dimension of human reality, just as dimensions exist to define the physical space we inhabit. One uses dimensions to determine coordinates (position) within this physical frame of reference, and one uses time as the 4th dimension to measure our relative progress through 3 dimensional space. This is known as "space-time".
The enigmatic nature of space-time is this: if you are stationary (or relatively so) within the 3 physical dimensions, time is not stationary and keeps moving forward in relation to you, so future and past exist but they are only accessible through thought. If you are not stationary but increase your speed within those 3 physical dimensions, time begins to pass more slowly. If you reach the speed of light, your local time stops. If somehow you could ride a wave of light, time for you would halt and past and future would merge with "now". Thought itself would become frozen until you slowed down again.
What I have said so far is in essence what Einstein was on about with his Theory of Relativity. While the mathematics of it can be grasped, the enormity of the meaning behind it hurts the brain. I like to shrink it to something more manageable for my brain which is that time simply exists for me.

beetcoin

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 250

Quote from: Bitcoin-hotep on April 30, 2014, 01:37:16 PM

Quote from: beetcoin on April 30, 2014, 01:35:37 PM

the existence of time is relative, as discovered by albert einstein. there is no objective, true existence of time.

Can you explain how he thought time could bend? I do not understand that.

to be honest, i'm not smart enough to explain it to you in full detail (or even understand it). but general relativity was his discovery about that time and space are part of the same thing - called timespace. through his equations, he figured out that you could dilate time depending on the speed that you are travelling; it is like a fabric. also, two seemingly simultaneous events are not necessarily simultaneous - it depends on where the two event occur in relation to where your position is.

Quote from: Bitcoin-hotep on April 30, 2014, 01:42:44 PM

Quote from: Josepht on April 30, 2014, 01:40:36 PM

In that case I partially agree with you.
The concept of time just depends on in what way look at it. We made several concepts that everyone uses.

That is the same with length and math. Why do we say that a certain length is one meter? Just agreements everybody uses.

Exactly, meters are not real, but the "time is not real" statement is actually going a step further. Meters are measuring a distance between two things, time is measuring an illusion given to us by light and movement.

spacetime is inseparable.

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: hoewer4what on April 30, 2014, 02:00:44 PM

Definitively universal time clock does not exist, but saying time does not exist is like saying space does not exist.

You are making a straw man argument, Space and Time are not the same.

hoewer4what

full member

Activity: 173

Merit: 100

Definitively universal time clock does not exist, but saying time does not exist is like saying space does not exist.

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: Hazir on April 30, 2014, 01:48:53 PM

Time is simply motion and space, and time can be easily measured. The events that consisted with a particular moment and area in time-space are actual in regards to our own universe. Positive acclimation of time is what makes the world go round, and thus, the transverse (negative acclimation through time) must be present as well. Acceleration of time is possible and has been conclusively proven, and deceleration and reversal of time may be possible too

You are talking about "Space-Time" not "Time"

Hazir

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1005

★Nitrogensports.eu★

Time is simply motion and space, and time can be easily measured. The events that consisted with a particular moment and area in time-space are actual in regards to our own universe. Positive acclimation of time is what makes the world go round, and thus, the transverse (negative acclimation through time) must be present as well. Acceleration of time is possible and has been conclusively proven, and deceleration and reversal of time may be possible too

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: RodeoX on April 30, 2014, 01:41:33 PM

Quote from: Bitcoin-hotep on April 30, 2014, 01:34:14 PM

Quote from: RodeoX on April 30, 2014, 01:27:11 PM

I think of it as time does not exist independent of an observer. If all of us were gone tomorrow then there is no time, as it is only our perception that creates time. To some physicists, everything that has, could, or will happen is there. It is our brain that perceives us as moving through these possibilities and causes the phenomena of time.

Mind blowing stuff.

Again, you are not proving times existence, you are just stating that it "seems to go by" to you. But again, you are acting like your perception of light, distance, etc matter, when all that matters here is "Is there a substance called time, and if not what exactly are we calling time" and what we are calling time is "Movement and change" which is NOT "time".

Oh, I'm not claiming to understand. I'm at a loss. It is weird though how we think of time as movement. Is it that we are moving through the matrix of possibilities held in some kind of superposition? Hell if I know?
I like how Stephen Hawking asks "how do we know time only moves forward? Would you be able to tell if it stood still or went backwards?"

I have been talking to a few people about time, and the idea of infinite time. And there is a guy that says that it has been researched, and if the universe was infinite, and had no beginning or end, we would never reach the present moment. BUT, my question is, what if we AREN'T in the present moment and time has some form of layers. Like it is infinite, but in a circle.

Bitcoin-hotep

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 253

Quote from: Josepht on April 30, 2014, 01:40:36 PM

In that case I partially agree with you.
The concept of time just depends on in what way look at it. We made several concepts that everyone uses.

That is the same with length and math. Why do we say that a certain length is one meter? Just agreements everybody uses.

Exactly, meters are not real, but the "time is not real" statement is actually going a step further. Meters are measuring a distance between two things, time is measuring an illusion given to us by light and movement.

Topic: Time Does Not Exist - page 2. (Read 1461 times)