Hijack from Universal Concept of Time (Is the Big Bang wrong?)

[Cagedbird]

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  Humans count  86400 seconds (1440 minutes or 24 hours) to make up one day and that is what is called time. Time is just numbers people give to different moments of the existential plane. So you cannot really talk about  the age of the universe or whatever when really time as we know it is an illusion. I think that there is another concept beyond our reach in this dimension that would be more suited to talk about what you people call time. 

Secondly, time did not come into existence. Think about what people call time travel. You are different from what you were 10 years ago physiologically not because of time but because its a physiological process. Time is an illusion. I like to think of it as an adjective rather than a noun. I see it as a description of something rather than something in its self. So you're wrong when you talk about 13.7 billion or whatever. That is a concept that is still miles away from human understanding. 

[Phi for All]

9 minutes ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  Humans count  86400 seconds (1440 minutes or 24 hours) to make up one day and that is what is called time. Time is just numbers people give to different moments of the existential plane. So you cannot really talk about  the age of the universe or whatever when really time as we know it is an illusion. I think that there is another concept beyond our reach in this dimension that would be more suited to talk about what you people call time. 

!

Moderator Note

This is in the mainstream science sections, so time is part of a coordinate system, and extremely useful, not an illusion at all. If you want to post philosophy, or wild guesswork, don't do it in mainstream, OK? Thanks for understanding.

 

12 minutes ago, Cagedbird said:

So you're wrong when you talk about 13.7 billion or whatever. 

Oh my gosh, read a book, please.

[Cagedbird]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

!

Moderator Note

This is in the mainstream science sections, so time is part of a coordinate system, and extremely useful, not an illusion at all. If you want to post philosophy, or wild guesswork, don't do it in mainstream, OK? Thanks for understanding.

 

Oh my gosh, read a book, please.

I'm a medical student. I read way more than you can imagine and understand the human physiological processes deeply. I don't need to read a book to understand that time is just numbers. What you(humans) are trying and have been trying to conceptualize is something miles and miles away from your grasp but unfortunately the so called books that you're asking me to read cannot help you understand that. 

[Phi for All]

2 minutes ago, Cagedbird said:

I'm a medical student. I read way more than you can imagine and understand the human physiological processes deeply. I don't need to read a book to understand that time is just numbers. What you(humans) are trying and have been trying to conceptualize is something miles and miles away from your grasp but unfortunately the so called books that you're asking me to read cannot help you understand that. 

"Miles and miles away from your grasp"? Our modern concepts of spacetime allow us to successfully land a craft on an asteroid 200,000,000 miles and miles away. I'll take that over your understanding, no offense intended.

[swansont]

53 minutes ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  Humans count  86400 seconds (1440 minutes or 24 hours) to make up one day and that is what is called time. Time is just numbers people give to different moments of the existential plane. So you cannot really talk about  the age of the universe or whatever when really time as we know it is an illusion.

But you admit these are different moments. How is that an illusion?

[beecee]

59 minutes ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  Humans count  86400 seconds (1440 minutes or 24 hours) to make up one day and that is what is called time. Time is just numbers people give to different moments of the existential plane. So you cannot really talk about  the age of the universe or whatever when really time as we know it is an illusion. I think that there is another concept beyond our reach in this dimension that would be more suited to talk about what you people call time. 

Secondly, time did not come into existence. Think about what people call time travel. You are different from what you were 10 years ago physiologically not because of time but because its a physiological process. Time is an illusion. I like to think of it as an adjective rather than a noun. I see it as a description of something rather than something in its self. So you're wrong when you talk about 13.7 billion or whatever. That is a concept that is still miles away from human understanding. 

Our best model according to the evidence, tells us that time [as we know it] came into existence, along with space [as we know it] at t+10-43 seconds. Time is also a interchangeable quantity with space. 

The age of the universe of course is calculated by observational data of the oldest stars and the expansion rate.

The following may help in your misunderstanding of time and the universe....

 

1 hour ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  

Secondly, time did not come into existence.

 So you're wrong when you talk about 13.7 billion or whatever. That is a concept that is still miles away from human understanding. 

You seem so certain about your claims, and yet you are not a cosmologist. Secondly, even our scientific theories, are just our best estimations at any particular time, that do grow in certainty over time, as they continue to align with observational data and make correct predictions. eg: GR predicted a 100 years ago, that gravitational waves would be a result of a catastrophic collision/merger. Also to alleviate your misunderstanding, the BB applies to the observable universe only. Whether the universe is finite or infinite is unknown at this time.

[Markus Hanke]

11 hours ago, Cagedbird said:

I don't need to read a book to understand that time is just numbers.

It is the outcomes of measurements of time that are numbers, being the readings on idealised clocks. That is a subtle but important difference.
Also, just because something can be quantified does not imply that it is an illusion - that’s a non-sequitur.

12 hours ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion.  

The reason we know that time isn’t just an “illusion” is first and foremost the existence of gravity, specifically the tidal aspects of gravity. If you had only three spatial dimensions, but no time, it can be formally shown that tidal gravity as we observe and experience it could not exist. But since it evidently does, we know that time (as the concept is used in physics) is quite real, at least in the classical domain. On quantum scales on the other hand, the issue is more subtle and rather less straightforward - a case could potentially be made for time to not be fundamental on small enough scales. However, that would make it emergent, and still not an “illusion”; again, an important difference.

[dimreepr]

19 hours ago, Cagedbird said:

Firstly, understand that time is an illusion. 

Lunchtime. doubly so...