Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary table

Posted By: Arathas

Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary table - 07/17/07 12:41

Hi together,

just found this forum and instantly fell in love with its topics.

Is it better to post in english or in german here? Are there more english readers around?

I wanted to share some thoughts with you regarding "time". Some theories I had and some questions as well.

So ... if we take "Schrödinger's Cat" for example: It's said that you don't know whether the cat's dead or alive. And you only can see it when you open the box and look at the cat (which, at this time, you should hope to be dead, otherwise you'll have some serious claws-in-flesh-incident in your near future).

But - all of this theory depends upon the flow of time. Time *must* flow straightforward to make this theory work. But DOES it flow straightforward?

If time's just another dimension just as 2D and 3D, it's not that straightforward, because there's no end you could point to and say: "Hey, that's the end of time and there's the beginning."
It's as if some cartoon-character in 2D would claim that there's world's end in front of him, but the person who drew the cartoon knows it's just the edge of the page.

It's just us humans who see time as a flow into one direction. If we could look upon Schrödinger's Cat as we can look upon several comic-book pages at once, we'd see the cat going into the box as well as the closed box AND the opened box. All at the same time. So there wouldn't be any uncertaincy at all.

Question is: IS time straighforward? Or isn't it? AFAIK they know by now that time is not a straight line, it's bent. So ... isn't it all a question of *how much* it's bent?

I think all this theory-stuff is strongly connected to the question whether the universe is infinite or not. If it's infinite, time'd be infinite, too. And since there's no beginning or end to something infinite, that would prove right the theory that it's just us humans who are too dimension-restricted ...

BTW, are there any publications about this issue? Some books that try to explain time somehow?
Posted By: Joozey

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 13:26

First of all: English plz! There are alot of german people in here but like 99% does read english, whileas the english people mostly do not read german .
I hope I interpreted 'straightforward' the right way in the following explanations/theories, else my blabla is kinda pointless .

IMO time is the dimension before 1D, 2D and 3D. There are theories that you can go back or forward in time but does that mean that time is not straightforward? Or is there something else they found out that time cannot be straightforward? If being able to go back and forth in time means time is not straight, I put a questionmark for this statement.

I don't know too much about time, but I thought that you could only go forth in time, and not back, that is, not back in time and be on the same place. If you go back, your position would be at a point as far away as you went back in time. So it would take time to go back and when going with the speed of light you'd end up at the same time as you left there. So, in this theory, going back does not mean that time is not straightforward.

Does going forth imply that time is not straightforward? If you go forward in time, it could, and this is just a wild speculation of me, be the case that not only time is bended, but all dimensions are bended at that place. (seems logical to me: when you shrink a 1D line, you'd make a rectangle out of the square, and if you shrink the square, you'd deform the cube, so why not deforming the dimensions when deforming time?). Goes for vice versa as well, and this probably is the case too. When you shrink the cube, you shrink the square, the line and time as well. If we have a lot of gravity at one place, so much that even light can not escape (a black hole), maybe the cube is deformed by the gravity and causing a deformation in the timeline as well. But this doesn't mean time is not straightforward. When everything is bended there, time would relative be straight again, eventhough it looks like bended from the outside. (Like the person who falls into the black hole falls with a constantly increasing speed, whileas the person who looks at it sees the person falling with a decreasing speed).

So maybe this was one big bullpoo talk, and maybe I said something usefull . But this is how I see time atm. (Though I didn't involve movement-slows-down-time)
Posted By: Puppeteer

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:05

Quote:

I don't know too much about time, but I thought that you could only go forth in time, and not back, that is, not back in time and be on the same place.


We only can get forward because it is an physical constraint for us to go "forward" you can call it a way of seeing things too:
We see out of our sight in time-"forward" direction. This may sounds weird but it makes sense:
Take a look at this example:

This is you: *

You are moving forward:
* 0sec |
* 1sec |
* 2sec |
* 3sec |
* 4sec |
* 5sec |
* 6sec |x-dimension

Now we add the time dimension:
Code:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
________________ time
|*
|  *
|    *
|      *
|        *
|          *
|            *
|x-dimension

So this is a picture of you how an 4-dimensional thing or animal would see it.

Every step you ever did and will do in only one frame or however you want to call it!
That means there is somekind of desteny because a 4-dimensional-creature can see what you will do, what you are doing, what have done....
maybe god is such a creature....
Posted By: Arathas

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:11

Hey, that's exactly what I meant! Nice graphical display, couldn't have done it better.
Posted By: inFusion

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:24

In my oppinion "time" is based on motion. If there is no motion, there is no time.
Because time is something subjective, created by humans - think about this: If nothing would move, not

even the electrons in your brain, then noone would realize that everything stopped (you wouldn't be able

to think without electron movement in your brain) and nothing would change. There would still be matter,

but there would be no time.
So in a black hole, because of the strong gravity that stops everything, even light, time stands still.

If you know a little bit more about physics you could even explain the phenomenon of time slowing down

at greater speeds, eventually stoping at light-speed.

Imagen electrons revolving around nucleons. You know that moving in circles is a movement that requires constant acceleration. You also know that the energy required to accelerate something depends on the on its current speed (because of its inertia).

Now imagen you are flying at nearly the speed of light and the electrons are revolving around your nucleon, partly in the SAME direction as you are flying and thus would have to got FASTER than light to get around the nucleon if they would travel at a constant speed.

As we all know this is not possible, so the electron movement is slowed down aswell as any other movement inside the spacecraft -> slower movement of the electrical impulses in your brain = slower thinking -> "time" is slowed down.

Having a pretty hard time to explain what I mean in english, but there you go...
Posted By: Puppeteer

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:26

There's still somethings moveing:
You are always moving through the time:
Code:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
________________ time
|* * * * * * *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|x-dimension

Posted By: Joozey

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:47

Quote:


We only can get forward because it is an physical constraint for us to go "forward".



Though in a different thread someone explained that theoretically going back in time would be possible, using a strong rotating gravity field. You just appear on a place away from your startpoint depending on how far you got back in time.

Quote:


There's still somethings moveing:
You are always moving through the time:



Time is slowed down when moving, this has been proven with clocks on earth and in space circling our planet, in the end the time was slowed down on the clock which had been circling with high speed in space. Time will stand still when moving with light speed.

I understand that what you say, a 4 dimensional being would see us doing everything at the same time. But in the last graphic you drew, you are actually saying that every dimension is moving through time. Time is the first dimension here and everyone in every other dimension would then experience time as the same thing, so a 4 dimensional being would not see time different than we do (I mean, we see a line as a line, and I'm pretty sure mr square would see a line as a line as well)
Posted By: zazang

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 14:52

Time is just a measurement of any change.Without change,there is
no idea of time.The change could be chemical,mechanical,emotional
and wot not..but the key is that its a change.Thinking of it like
an arrow is just an intuitive perception that the change is taking
place from one state to the other.
Posted By: inFusion

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 17:15

Quote:

Time is just a measurement of any change.Without change,there is
no idea of time.The change could be chemical,mechanical,emotional
and wot not..but the key is that its a change.Thinking of it like
an arrow is just an intuitive perception that the change is taking
place from one state to the other.



Exactly. That's what I was trying to explain
Thus if there is no motion (no "change") "time" stands still.
Posted By: Joozey

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 17:22

Quote:


Thus if there is no motion (no "change") "time" stands still



Yes this is absolute zero, so I guess time stands still at lightspeed and at absolute zero this is getting odd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_zero
Pretty cool
Posted By: inFusion

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 17:39

Quote:

Yes this is absolute zero, so I guess time stands still at lightspeed and at absolute zero



I doubt that because the electrons are still spinning around the nucleons, so there still is change
Posted By: PHeMoX

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 19:50

Quote:

Time is just a measurement of any change.Without change,there is no idea of time.



I don't think it's ever possible to have absolutely no change and thus effectively 'freezing time'. I think even when infinitely small there will always be a change because of the way all things seem to be linked to eachother. Apart from that personally it seems to me that 'time' itself is artificial. Perhaps in our view it makes sense that an infinite universe indicates infinite time, but if we define our universe as 'constantly expanding', then 'time' itself doesn't have to be infinite. On the other hand I believe it makes sense to assume that there could also have been a lot of time before our universe 'came into existence' in whichever way. My point is, I don't think time's possible infinite nature excludes our universe from possibly being finite. Not sure about the other way around scenario. Is it even possible to have no time when something is infinitely big? That would assume there's absolutely no change, which like I said at the beginning seems rather strange to me. It's still a theoretical possibility, but we know for a fact that the world hasn't 'frozen in time' yet off course.

A simplified picture;


( I really wonder how they determined time is a bend curve in other words change of movement with a 'constant speed' is in fact not constant but fluctuating? Got any links? )

Cheers
Posted By: Shadow969

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/17/07 21:20

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you're all speaking about time like it's a global value. What about the black holes and super high speeds? Those things prove that time is relative. And it can be 'frozen', f.e. teoretically inside of a black hole there's no time at all(not sure, read about it long ago). So my 4-dimesnional model of world looks like this - at any spot of 3dimensional space there's an unique 'time_factor', not essentionally equal to 1. If we assume this, i think that this 'time_factor' can also be negative, producing reversed time effect. Enough of this, i'm starting to feel weird
Posted By: zazang

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/18/07 03:51

Quote:

So my 4-dimesnional model of world looks like this - at any spot of 3dimensional space there's an unique 'time_factor', not essentionally equal to 1. If we assume this, i think that this 'time_factor' can also be negative, producing reversed time effect. Enough of this, i'm starting to feel weird



well but its not necessary that it can have a negative value.Like if X is the amount of apples then can it be -ve ?(but I did get -ve values when I used to solve equations as a kid )

Quote:


( I really wonder how they determined time is a bend curve in other words change of movement with a 'constant speed' is in fact not constant but fluctuating? Got any links? )




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime

I haven't read it in detail,but it sure requires a little more abstract thinking.
I'll give it a shot later today ;-)
Posted By: PHeMoX

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/18/07 09:57

Quote:


Correct me if i'm wrong, but you're all speaking about time like it's a global value.



No, only when it comes to it's start and end or the possible infiniteness. I agree that the experience of time is very relative, but when it comes to 'true time' I have to say that I don't know much about it. My guess is that it's by far not as absolute as we or some of us might think, but that's mainly because I do not think there are any real absolutes, I don't know much about the theoretical background and current consensus on 'time' and all that's closely related (high or maximum possible speeds, black holes etc.)...

Cheers
Posted By: AlbertoT

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary table - 07/20/07 18:33

Quote:



Question is: IS time straighforward?





The theory of relativity claims that time and space are basically the same stuff

Everybody knows that two events , A and B, can happen at the same time for an observer but at different times for an other one
Most people suppose that this is evident just in case the relative speed is close to the speed of the light
Actually the two observers could experience the same situation, in theory of course, even though their relative speed is quite low provide their distance is huge

In other words , there is a perfect simmetry : Space-Time

Consequently the Space_Time is , so to speak : Frozen

This is the theory:
Easy to say , impossible to grasp
Posted By: AlbertoT

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary table - 07/20/07 19:14

by the way , the Schrödinger's Cat has nothing to do with the mistery of time
Quantum physics is not realitivistic
Posted By: PHeMoX

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/26/07 00:09

Quote:

Everybody knows that two events , A and B, can happen at the same time for an observer but at different times for an other one



I'm by no means an expert, but there might be a difference between experiencing time (and our theoretical ideas) and what actually happens, because this doesn't sound that obvious. Basically it comes down to time stretching at extremely high speeds? Does it really 'stretch' or are we experiencing it as if it's stretching? According to Einstein time is relative, but does this mean time "itself" (time-space symmetry) or the experience of it? He always seem to have given examples of the latter.

Quote:

Most people suppose that this is evident just in case the relative speed is close to the speed of the light
Actually the two observers could experience the same situation, in theory of course, even though their relative speed is quite low provide their distance is huge



I think the problem with high speeds and huge distances is that measurements become very inaccurate pretty quickly. Perhaps it's simply the equivalent of an 'optical illusion' (but a truly physical one), but then one that has to do with the time-space symmetry instead of visual things?

Cheers
Posted By: AlbertoT

Re: Time destroys it's plans at the reactionary ta - 07/27/07 18:17

Quote:

Quote:


Does it really 'stretch' or are we experiencing it as if it's stretching?





Time does really "stretch"
Consider a satellite orbiting around the earth
The clocks on board and the ones on the earth are not syncronized
Of course they are perfectly working , time is different



Quote:



Perhaps it's simply the equivalent of an 'optical illusion' (but a truly physical one





Of course it is not a simply "optical illusion" like effect
Do you think that thousand and thousand super brains would have wasted their time with the theory of relativity, if so ?
© 2024 lite-C Forums