We are tricked by our brains

[Time Traveler]

We humans live in the present but we don't notice the present...what we perceive as the present is actually a mixture of past tenses
In order to understand, some basic notions from classical physics must be recalled
Color perception
White light from the sun is partially reflected (a part is absorbed) from colored objects...for example, only yellow light is reflected from a yellow object while red, orange, green, blue, indigo and violet are absorbed by the yellow object .
The time when the information reaches the eye is:
t= distance divided by the speed of light
An object at 10 m ...t=10 m /(300 000 000m/s)
An object 1 mm away; t=0.001m/(300 000 000m/s)
We notice that the reflected light, the carrier of the image of the object, never reaches the eye simultaneously from two objects. We observe the past but our perceive is we "observe" the present.
From the eye to the brain where the information is coded, the speed of information transfer is the same, a finite speed.
The brain makes a "correction", it lies to us, that we observe the present when in fact we observe a mixture of past tenses

[exchemist]

3 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

We humans live in the present but we don't notice the present...what we perceive as the present is actually a mixture of past tenses
In order to understand, some basic notions from classical physics must be recalled
Color perception
White light from the sun is partially reflected (a part is absorbed) from colored objects...for example, only yellow light is reflected from a yellow object while red, orange, green, blue, indigo and violet are absorbed by the yellow object .
The time when the information reaches the eye is:
t= distance divided by the speed of light
An object at 10 m ...t=10 m /(300 000 000m/s)
An object 1 mm away; t=0.001m/(300 000 000m/s)
We notice that the reflected light, the carrier of the image of the object, never reaches the eye simultaneously from two objects. We observe the past but our perceive is we "observe" the present.
From the eye to the brain where the information is coded, the speed of information transfer is the same, a finite speed.
The brain makes a "correction", it lies to us, that we observe the present when in fact we observe a mixture of past tenses

It seems rather obvious that sensory and mental processes in the nervous system and brain, involving as they do cascades of electrochemical reactions, must take a finite time to take place. 

What has this got to do with physics? 

[Time Traveler]

3 minutes ago, exchemist said:

It seems rather obvious that sensory and mental processes in the nervous system and brain, involving as they do cascades of electrochemical reactions, must take a finite time to take place. 

What has this got to do with physics? 

Physics is proof that our brain "lies" to us. We all humans lie more or less

[Sensei]

Calling it a "lie" to receive correct information with some delay is a serious misuse. The same is true of e-mails, text messages or social networks, where time is counted in milliseconds or even seconds.

Lying, as far as I remember, is receiving incorrect information.

delay in receiving a message does not make the message false.

[Time Traveler]

1 minute ago, Sensei said:

Calling it a "lie" to receive correct information with some delay is a serious misuse. The same is true of e-mails, text messages or social networks, where time is counted in milliseconds or even seconds.

Not really ... almost all people don't know they observe a mix of past times and they think they observe the present ; also almost all people don't identify the lies from omission or well hidden in beautiful words or lies of ' great manipulators'...human brain is guilty by their because we are programmed to survive use sometime lies and we are not programmed and ready to know the absolute true ...the true nature of reality 

[Sensei]

33 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

Not really ... almost all people don't know they observe a mix of past times and they think they observe the present ; also almost all people don't identify the lies from omission or well hidden in beautiful words or lies of ' great manipulators'...human brain is guilty by their because we are programmed to survive use sometime lies and we are not programmed and ready to know the absolute true ...the true nature of reality 

I stick to original definition of a lie as something false. The delay in delivering the message is irrelevant here.

Otherwise, you can call the Sun a lie, because it is 8 minutes late on the Earth. Which will be ridiculous.

[Time Traveler]

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

I stick to original definition of a lie as something false. The delay in delivering the message is irrelevant here.

 

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

I stick to original definition of a lie as something false. The delay in delivering the message is irrelevant here.

Not delay is false , the encoding of information by brain send us to a false interpretation ...we "see" the present (false) not the true reality= a mixture of different times...only physics and my thinking helped me to understand the truth

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, Time Traveler said:

Physics is proof that our brain "lies" to us. We all humans lie more or less

Nonsense. A time delay of a millisecond or so  does not make the information received and interpreted by the brain a "lie" at all.  

If you want to talk about how the brain "lies" to us, you would do better to start a thread on how the brain makes assumptions about the information it receives, which can in some cases prove faulty. 

And neither of these is anything like the delusions experienced by someone undergoing a psychotic episode. 

 

[Time Traveler]

3 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Nonsense. A time delay of a millisecond or so  does not make the information received and interpreted by the brain a "lie" at all.  

If you want to talk about how the brain "lies" to us, you would do better to start a thread on how the brain makes assumptions about the information it receives, which can in some cases prove faulty. 

And neither of these is anything like the delusions experienced by someone undergoing a psychotic episode. 

 

I know nonsenses told of 'great scientists' are accepted of 'community of scientists' and truth told of an unknown is rejected if is not very well argued .I thought that a half-said truth would be completed, not rejected...I was wrong . 

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the Universe. Under this theory, space and time originated together 13.799 ± 0.021 billion years ago, with a fixed amount of energy and matter that became less dense as the Universe expanded. If something small is extended everywhere then in the Universe is  there is a center ...that means we have an absolute coordinate system ... or not is the truth ?

[exchemist]

30 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

I know nonsenses told of 'great scientists' are accepted of 'community of scientists' and truth told of an unknown is rejected if is not very well argued .I thought that a half-said truth would be completed, not rejected...I was wrong . 

The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of the Universe. Under this theory, space and time originated together 13.799 ± 0.021 billion years ago, with a fixed amount of energy and matter that became less dense as the Universe expanded. If something small is extended everywhere then in the Universe is  there is a center ...that means we have an absolute coordinate system ... or not is the truth ?

It is not the truth. There is no centre, according to the Big Bang theory: https://www.astronomy.com/science/ask-astro-where-is-the-center-of-the-universe/

 

[Time Traveler]

6 minutes ago, exchemist said:

It is not the truth. There is no centre, according to the Big Bang theory: https://www.astronomy.com/science/ask-astro-where-is-the-center-of-the-universe/

 

I am trying to understand ( my humble opinion is that  Big Bang theory is a nonsense) if someone smarter than me could explain if our universe was infinite all the time or was finite or wasn't at all  13.8 billions years ago . After that explanation I have other ask

[swansont]

11 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

I am trying to understand ( my humble opinion is that  Big Bang theory is a nonsense) if someone smarter than me could explain if our universe was infinite all the time or was finite or wasn't at all  13.8 billions years ago . After that explanation I have other ask

!

Moderator Note

This isn’t the topic of the thread; you made claims about the Big Bang that are incorrect, so your objections are based on a straw man.

Feel free to ask question in another thread to clear up your misconceptions

 

2 hours ago, Time Traveler said:

We humans live in the present but we don't notice the present...what we perceive as the present is actually a mixture of past tenses
In order to understand, some basic notions from classical physics must be recalled
Color perception
White light from the sun is partially reflected (a part is absorbed) from colored objects...for example, only yellow light is reflected from a yellow object while red, orange, green, blue, indigo and violet are absorbed by the yellow object .
The time when the information reaches the eye is:
t= distance divided by the speed of light
An object at 10 m ...t=10 m /(300 000 000m/s)
An object 1 mm away; t=0.001m/(300 000 000m/s)
We notice that the reflected light, the carrier of the image of the object, never reaches the eye simultaneously from two objects. We observe the past but our perceive is we "observe" the present.
From the eye to the brain where the information is coded, the speed of information transfer is the same, a finite speed.
The brain makes a "correction", it lies to us, that we observe the present when in fact we observe a mixture of past tenses

This isn’t an issue of color perception.

Your body can’t process information at the nanosecond level, and your brain’s processing is meant to keep you alive so you can reproduce. The notion that it will tell you the “truth” is a straw man

[Time Traveler]

23 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This isn’t the topic of the thread; you made claims about the Big Bang that are incorrect, so your objections are based on a straw man.

Feel free to ask question in another thread to clear up your misconceptions

 

This isn’t an issue of color perception.

Your body can’t process information at the nanosecond level, and your brain’s processing is meant to keep you alive so you can reproduce. The notion that it will tell you the “truth” is a straw man

I

 

27 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This isn’t the topic of the thread; you made claims about the Big Bang that are incorrect, so your objections are based on a straw man.

Feel free to ask question in another thread to clear up your misconceptions

 

This isn’t an issue of color perception.

Your body can’t process information at the nanosecond level, and your brain’s processing is meant to keep you alive so you can reproduce. The notion that it will tell you the “truth” is a straw man

I am feeling here is not a real intention of finding together the truth ... you want to someone tell you the truth and you only to reject or aprove...a wrong way ...sometime when you have no arguments you use an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument .Sometimes we can't see the forest because of the trees

[iNow]

Your claims don’t even rise to the threshold of being wrong. They’re not even wrong. They’re ridiculous. 

[Sensei]

Scientists have spent decades on this, a lifetime, and you want us to explain everything to you from scratch.

Start from learning how to measure distance to distant stars..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_parallax

Once you know how to measure distances to near stars, move on to farther stars, then to galaxies, and then to distant galaxies..

 

If a galaxy is farther away tomorrow than it is today, the obvious conclusion will be that we are receding away..

All this is based on the finite and constant speed of light.

[Time Traveler]

29 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Scientists have spent decades on this, a lifetime, and you want us to explain everything to you from scratch.

Start from learning how to measure distance to distant stars..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_parallax

Once you know how to measure distances to near stars, move on to farther stars, then to galaxies, and then to distant galaxies..

 

If a galaxy is farther away tomorrow than it is today, the obvious conclusion will be that we are receding away..

All this is based on the finite and constant speed of light.

Ok ..Finally an argument ....My ridiculous mind tells me that there must be a center of expansion...maybe not in the observable universe  

[Bufofrog]

10 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

My ridiculous mind tells me that there must be a center of expansion

This is where learning about the actual evidence and not relying on your 'hunches' is a good idea.

[dimreepr]

4 hours ago, Time Traveler said:

The brain makes a "correction", it lies to us, that we observe the present when in fact we observe a mixture of past tenses

Of course it lies assumes certain thing's, it can't possibly process reality in real time, as tremendous a tool as it clearly is, reality takes a little time to think about... 😉

43 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

Ok ..Finally an argument ....My ridiculous mind tells me that there must be a center of expansion...maybe not in the observable universe  

That certainly is a ridiculous statement, did your brain lie to you again?

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Time Traveler said:

I am feeling here is not a real intention of finding together the truth ... you want to someone tell you the truth and you only to reject or aprove...a wrong way ...sometime when you have no arguments you use an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument .Sometimes we can't see the forest because of the trees

Wasn’t the notion that the brain does a bad job of assessing simultaneity below some level of precision your argument?

If not, perhaps you can clarify what your argument is. My point is that your brain is only giving you as much truth as you need to have a chance to stay alive, as a result of evolution and within the limits of biology, chemistry and physics. We know it “lies” to us. It doesn’t seem to matter with regard to simultaneity, and we have imaginations and dreams, which are probably a positive rather than a negative.

If you think it should give you more truth, you would need to explain how that would happen within the constraints we have.

[MigL]

I think you need to discuss this with  @Maartenn100 .
He claims there is no past.
At least one of you must be wrong.

I'm going to edge my bets and say you both are.

[exchemist]

18 minutes ago, MigL said:

I think you need to discuss this with  @Maartenn100 .
He claims there is no past.
At least one of you must be wrong.

I'm going to edge my bets and say you both are.

......thereby bringing in Edge Theory and @NeptuneSeven into the discussion as well?....................

[Time Traveler]

16 minutes ago, MigL said:

I think you need to discuss this with  @Maartenn100 .
He claims there is no past.
At least one of you must be wrong.

I'm going to edge my bets and say you both are.

If you have arguments put them "on the table"...Sarcasm not give something good for our debate...I like to think here will be a debate ...

[Time Traveler]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Wasn’t the notion that the brain does a bad job of assessing simultaneity below some level of precision your argument?

If not, perhaps you can clarify what your argument is. My point is that your brain is only giving you as much truth as you need to have a chance to stay alive, as a result of evolution and within the limits of biology, chemistry and physics. We know it “lies” to us. It doesn’t seem to matter with regard to simultaneity, and we have imaginations and dreams, which are probably a positive rather than a negative.

If you think it should give you more truth, you would need to explain how that would happen within the constraints we have.

My point is that we will never observe simultaneity, even if the observed objects are at different distances of 1 Planck length one closer by us .That is why I said that we observe a mixture of different past times and not the same past time. In order to observe the present, the information carrier (light) should have infinite speed, and the transmission speeds from the eye to the brain and the speed of processing and coding of visual information to be infinite. ...and you are right we not need 'more truth' to survive and be observers and discover some nature's secrets. I didn't say our brain make a bad job for survive but our brain don't have capability of discover  all nature secrets.

About time , we live in present , we perceive a mixture of past different times , our brain makes a "correction" and we perceive the present and simultaneity ( a good trick of our brain) , we remember the past ,and travel into the future 1s/1s.Time is only a measure of changes ...remember all units of time are a fraction of a periodic change of something....Clocks are devices to compare who measure the change like a ruler who measure distances ...1 meter=1 unit from a change in position.With clocks we compare any change who has a speed of change . ( not all changes have a speed of change) . We can't travel in the past : Imagine a rock formed billion years ago who we " send" in the past ,  millions years ago...that rock will be there twice in same time and same Universe ...absurd
Arrow of time is given of causality ...why we need complications with Entropy ...? 

[swansont]

14 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

My point is that we will never observe simultaneity, even if the observed objects are at different distances of 1 Planck length one closer by us .That is why I said that we observe a mixture of different past times and not the same past time. In order to observe the present, the information carrier (light) should have infinite speed, and the transmission speeds from the eye to the brain and the speed of processing and coding of visual information to be infinite. ...and you are right we not need 'more truth' to survive and be observers and discover some nature's secrets. I didn't say our brain make a bad job for survive but our brain don't have capability of discover  all nature secrets.

In physics we use instrumentation when it’s needed, which avoids the issue. Eyesight is exceedingly nonlinear and not easily calibrated. In areas where eyesight is used it’s generally where delay issues have no impact. 

 

14 minutes ago, Time Traveler said:

About time , we live in present , we perceive a mixture of past different times , our brain makes a "correction" and we perceive the present and simultaneity ( a good trick of our brain) , we remember the past ,and travel into the future 1s/1s.Time is only a measure of changes ...remember all units of time are a fraction of a periodic change of something....Clocks are devices to compare who measure the change like a ruler who measure distances ...1 meter=1 unit from a change in position.With clocks we compare any change who has a speed of change . ( not all changes have a speed of change) . We can't travel in the past : Imagine a rock formed billion years ago who we " send" in the past ,  millions years ago...that rock will be there twice in same time and same Universe ...absurd

None of this is unknown, nor unaccounted for. 

[Time Traveler]

It seems I have disturbed many 'scientists' here. My apologies. I'll quit