Time

[rrw4rusty]

Hello,

 

The Big Bang supposedly set matter and energy (the four known forces) in ‘motion’ causing ‘events’. A simple example: elements of the electroweak force holds an egg on the surface of a table while the mass of the Earth warps space and accelerates the egg while pulling it towards the center of the Earth. The sun warms the air which causes wind which pushes the egg off the table and it splats on the floor. Or something like that… you get the idea. These events take place because of physics.

 

The longer I study cosmology and quantum physics and despite reading a growing amount of material on the subject… the more that I see… no reason, value, proof or purpose for overlaying what seems more and more like an imaginary construct over the natural procession of events. Perhaps someone can help me out here for I’ve lost my belief in ‘time’. Now wait… there’s more…

 

I’ve read that ‘time’ proceeds slower and faster depending on speed or the warping of space – no, the physical events of the universe proceed at different speeds. I’ve read that physics is transparent to the ‘arrow’ of time – that if the atoms of that spattered egg could be sent back at the exact reversed angle and speed that the egg would come back together, rise to the table edge and roll back to where it started. This is probably mostly a true statement but what physical law would launch those atoms (or does ‘gravity’s force reverse with the so called reversal time’s arrow) and what law of physics would bind the broken shell back together?

 

In fact it seems to me that if ‘time’ did exist, then physics would not exist because if time does exist that means that there is the possibility that it can stop and what physical laws and forces would we have then? None! It means that there is the possibility that times direction can reverse and as discussed above, that means that our physical laws go whacko and broken symmetries can rebind -- not to mention that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is reversed and broken.

 

The physical forces move forward on their own, they don’t need time. However…

 

Every ‘far better mind’ than my own absolutely believes that ‘time’ exists so, I must be missing something. Help me out here. Give me one reason, test, or principle that indicates that there is such a thing as TIME.

 

Cheers,

Rusty

[Tau Meson]

Have you ever heard of a Non-Sequitor?

 

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean that they don't exist or aren't real.

[toastywombel]

Hello,

 

The Big Bang supposedly set matter and energy (the four known forces) in ‘motion’ causing ‘events’. A simple example: elements of the electroweak force holds an egg on the surface of a table while the mass of the Earth warps space and accelerates the egg while pulling it towards the center of the Earth. The sun warms the air which causes wind which pushes the egg off the table and it splats on the floor. Or something like that… you get the idea. These events take place because of physics.

 

The longer I study cosmology and quantum physics and despite reading a growing amount of material on the subject… the more that I see… no reason, value, proof or purpose for overlaying what seems more and more like an imaginary construct over the natural procession of events. Perhaps someone can help me out here for I’ve lost my belief in ‘time’. Now wait… there’s more…

 

I’ve read that ‘time’ proceeds slower and faster depending on speed or the warping of space – no, the physical events of the universe proceed at different speeds. I’ve read that physics is transparent to the ‘arrow’ of time – that if the atoms of that spattered egg could be sent back at the exact reversed angle and speed that the egg would come back together, rise to the table edge and roll back to where it started. This is probably mostly a true statement but what physical law would launch those atoms (or does ‘gravity’s force reverse with the so called reversal time’s arrow) and what law of physics would bind the broken shell back together?

 

In fact it seems to me that if ‘time’ did exist, then physics would not exist because if time does exist that means that there is the possibility that it can stop and what physical laws and forces would we have then? None! It means that there is the possibility that times direction can reverse and as discussed above, that means that our physical laws go whacko and broken symmetries can rebind -- not to mention that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is reversed and broken.

 

The physical forces move forward on their own, they don’t need time. However…

 

Every ‘far better mind’ than my own absolutely believes that ‘time’ exists so, I must be missing something. Help me out here. Give me one reason, test, or principle that indicates that there is such a thing as TIME.

 

Cheers,

Rusty

 

Two atomic clocks were synchronised, put on separate planes and flown around the world in opposite directions. According to relativity the clocks should be a little off. When the planes landed, the clocks were a little off, when they were synchronised before. I would look into the Hafele and Keating Experiment. Here

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Here's some reading for you:

 

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/08/arrow-of-time-no-longer-double-ended.ars

[Tau Meson]

Time also differs in a gravitational field; the further away you are from it, the faster your clock ticks. Also read up on the Pound-Rebka experiment, in which they measured the gravitational red-shift of photons at different floors of the building.

[swansont]

if time does exist that means that there is the possibility that it can stop

 

Why?

[rrw4rusty]

Why?

 

Well... I could just reply with the next paragraph. However, if time is more then just the progression of physical events at various speeds based on circumstances (and if it is just this I have no problem with it) then that means that it has to do something beyond this (otherwise... I have no problem with it). The only things that I can think of that it could do is go backward or stop.

 

But more to the point, how can anyone (besides God) question a 'possibility' about time? Just as well ask why would there be no 'possibility' of time stopping?

 

Rusty

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Time also differs in a gravitational field; the further away you are from it, the faster your clock ticks. Also read up on the Pound-Rebka experiment, in which they measured the gravitational red-shift of photons at different floors of the building.

 

The speed of events differ.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Have you ever heard of a Non-Sequitor?

 

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean that they don't exist or aren't real.

 

Nor that they do exist or, are real. Thanks for the reference!!

 

r

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Two atomic clocks were synchronised, put on separate planes and flown around the world in opposite directions. According to relativity the clocks should be a little off. When the planes landed, the clocks were a little off, when they were synchronised before. I would look into the Hafele and Keating Experiment. Here

 

Thanks for the reference! I've already (and easily) accounted for this (I think) but I'll certainly look again!

 

r

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Here's some reading for you:

 

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/08/arrow-of-time-no-longer-double-ended.ars

 

Thanks!

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Time also differs in a gravitational field; the further away you are from it, the faster your clock ticks. Also read up on the Pound-Rebka experiment, in which they measured the gravitational red-shift of photons at different floors of the building.

 

Oh, thanks for the reference!!

 

r

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Two atomic clocks were synchronised, put on separate planes and flown around the world in opposite directions. According to relativity the clocks should be a little off. When the planes landed, the clocks were a little off, when they were synchronised before. I would look into the Hafele and Keating Experiment. Here

 

As far as I can tell, this is simply a matter of events progressing slower or faster not due to time but do to the change in distance. Actually the event progresses at the same speed, it just has further to travel. If that doesn't make sense I can elaborate.

 

r

Edited February 16, 2010 by rrw4rusty
Consecutive posts merged.

[swansont]

Well... I could just reply with the next paragraph. However, if time is more then just the progression of physical events at various speeds based on circumstances (and if it is just this I have no problem with it) then that means that it has to do something beyond this (otherwise... I have no problem with it). The only things that I can think of that it could do is go backward or stop.

 

But more to the point, how can anyone (besides God) question a 'possibility' about time? Just as well ask why would there be no 'possibility' of time stopping?

 

Rusty

 

Time and speed share a relationship; the velocity four-vector is an invariant. What this means is that the length of the vector representing your speed through space and speed through time is a nonzero constant. Time can't stop, since we can't travel at c.

[Mr Skeptic]

As to the "arrow of time", that is based on statistics. Given something ordered, shake it up and you get something disordered. While it is possible to shake something disordered and get something ordered out of it, it is much less likely. This is simply because there are more disordered states than there are ordered states. So, while each force acting can be time-reversed, the cumulative effects tend toward increasing disorder, which, statistically, cannot be time-reversed.

 

Some theories say anti-matter is matter moving backwards in time. However, if you drop an antimatter egg off an antimatter table onto an antimatter floor, it will still break and not get put together again. The same laws of statistics apply.

[Sisyphus]

I’ve read that physics is transparent to the ‘arrow’ of time – that if the atoms of that spattered egg could be sent back at the exact reversed angle and speed that the egg would come back together, rise to the table edge and roll back to where it started. This is probably mostly a true statement but what physical law would launch those atoms (or does ‘gravity’s force reverse with the so called reversal time’s arrow) and what law of physics would bind the broken shell back together?

 

You don't need any different or "reversed" physical laws for the egg to reform itself and be tossed back up onto the table. Every force involved is time symmetrical. It's just that combination of forces and events is many, many orders of magnitude less likely an event than the egg falling off the table and breaking. There is nothing physically impossible in "forward time" about a series of tiny shock waves converging from the depths of the Earth to toss all the bits of egg together and into the air, reforming all the chemical bonds or whatever that were released, and coming to rest on a table. But it requires many, many things to happen, which individually might not be unlikely, but collectively, for them alll to happen, is almost guaranteed not to.

[rrw4rusty]

Time and speed share a relationship; the velocity four-vector is an invariant. What this means is that the length of the vector representing your speed through space and speed through time is a nonzero constant. Time can't stop, since we can't travel at c.

 

Good point. As I recall it is SR that says that objects travel in two ways: through space and through time. If you add how fast you are traveling through each it will always equal the speed of light. On track with your reply so far?

 

It has been 30 years since I studied Einstein's works. I will search for audio files which talk about SR/GR and listen to them on the treadmill. I'm over due for a refresher.

 

This in and of itself probably does not prove time exists but if I want proof I guess Einstein or experiments testing Einstein's theories is a good place to start.

 

Thanks!

Rusty

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

As to the "arrow of time", that is based on statistics. Given something ordered, shake it up and you get something disordered. While it is possible to shake something disordered and get something ordered out of it, it is much less likely. This is simply because there are more disordered states than there are ordered states. So, while each force acting can be time-reversed, the cumulative effects tend toward increasing disorder, which, statistically, cannot be time-reversed.

 

Some theories say anti-matter is matter moving backwards in time. However, if you drop an antimatter egg off an antimatter table onto an antimatter floor, it will still break and not get put together again. The same laws of statistics apply.

 

The second law of thermodynamics (the universal principle of entropy) is one of the reasons that I don't believe that time exists. And entropy doesn't need time, only the procession of events caused by the forces and laws of physics. We would still need to coordinate our actions by speaking of an abstract entity of time (past time/future time). There is no past time (only a record or memory of it) and future time is a point in the procession of physical events that has not yet happened. The small machine with springs and gears that we ware on arms and our calendars are merely devices used by us to overlay this procession with an abstract idea which gives order to the progression. Entropy is not a proof for the existence of time as far as I can see.

 

Thanks!

Rusty

[swansont]

All of that is metaphysics.

 

I can measure it, and it behaves in a scientifically predictable way.

[Mr Skeptic]

Isn't a procession of events, exactly what time is?

[Sisyphus]

The word "procession" and "event" both imply time.

[rrw4rusty]

You don't need any different or "reversed" physical laws for the egg to reform itself and be tossed back up onto the table. Every force involved is time symmetrical. It's just that combination of forces and events is many, many orders of magnitude less likely an event than the egg falling off the table and breaking. There is nothing physically impossible in "forward time" about a series of tiny shock waves converging from the depths of the Earth to toss all the bits of egg together and into the air, reforming all the chemical bonds or whatever that were released, and coming to rest on a table. But it requires many, many things to happen, which individually might not be unlikely, but collectively, for them alll to happen, is almost guaranteed not to.

 

You are discussing the reversal of events while time is going forward. An actual reversal of time would replay the events exactly using the same forces and laws of physics and those forces and laws can not work that way. Seemingly the progression of events caused by physics goes forward on its own 'and' time is running forward as a dimension. Time is redundant.

 

Rusty

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

All of that is metaphysics.

 

I can measure it, and it behaves in a scientifically predictable way.

 

Give an example please.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Isn't a procession of events, exactly what time is?

 

As I've stated, if the progression of events 'is all' that time is I'm okay with that. The idea that it is a 'something' that can be reversed or stopped or, that the supposed arrow 'could' have been set to travel in the reversed direction when the universe was created is what I don't buy into.

 

There is only the progression of events playing out -- nothing more. If that's called time I'm okay with that.

 

Rusty

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

The word "procession" and "event" both imply time.

 

See above.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Thanks for all of the help!! I need to reread SR and GR... its been over 30 years. Perhaps I've been fooled into thinking that time is more then it really is.

 

Rusty

[Sisyphus]

You are discussing the reversal of events while time is going forward. An actual reversal of time would replay the events exactly using the same forces and laws of physics and those forces and laws can not work that way. Seemingly the progression of events caused by physics goes forward on its own 'and' time is running forward as a dimension. Time is redundant.

 

It is exactly the same forces, forwards or backwards. That's the point. There would be no way to prove that a video of the event shown in reverse is not forward, except that it would be depicting very unlikely (but not impossible) events.

 

As I've stated, if the progression of events 'is all' that time is I'm okay with that. The idea that it is a 'something' that can be reversed or stopped or, that the supposed arrow 'could' have been set to travel in the reversed direction when the universe was created is what I don't buy into.

 

There is only the progression of events playing out -- nothing more. If that's called time I'm okay with that.

 

Depends what you mean by "only" a progression of events. Is distance only an ordering of objects? In a way, yes. But that doesn't mean it can't expand, contract, or bend.

[Mr Skeptic]

As I've stated, if the progression of events 'is all' that time is I'm okay with that. The idea that it is a 'something' that can be reversed or stopped or, that the supposed arrow 'could' have been set to travel in the reversed direction when the universe was created is what I don't buy into.

 

There is only the progression of events playing out -- nothing more. If that's called time I'm okay with that.

 

But what then of evidence that time can be "slowed"? What else to call when less events happen in one reference frame than happen in another?

 

No one is saying about reversing or stopping time... the observation that forces are the same forward or backward is a simple observation. This is evident wherever there is no entropy: play planets orbiting backward, for example, and no one will tell the difference. Show a billiard ball bouncing off another, and again no one can tell whether it is going forward or backward. Show an inelastic collision, billiard balls slowing due to friction, or coming together in a triangle shape to throw the cue ball really fast, and suddenly people are going to claim that it is being showed backward.

 

As for time itself going backward (rather than being rewound), how would you notice?

[swansont]

Give an example please.

 

A clock. Which is precise enough that it can measure time dilation effects.

[rrw4rusty]

But what then of evidence that time can be "slowed"? What else to call when less events happen in one reference frame than happen in another?

 

Hi Mr Skeptic!

 

Gads... the problem with posting stuff on a lot of forums is having to deal with the same stuff over and over. Need to refine my system so answers to issues like the ones you present here are stored and indexed for easy cut/paste, lol.

 

So far no one has disputed my answers to these. To my knowledge, the so called 'time distortion' is due to a physical explanation which is nothing mysterious and does not need a 'flowing time dimension'. I'll bet in the distant past you saw the cartoon example of a ping pong ball bouncing in a box. In a parked sports car the ball bounces up 3" and down 3". The car takes off and gets up to 50% the speed of light (fast car). No change from the perspective of the people in the car: the ball is bouncing just like it was before (its important to remember that everything happening to the bouncing ball is happening to every thing and person in that car). However to an observer standing on the curb who has X-Ray vision and can see that bouncing ball in the speeding car there is a huge difference. To this dude the ball is not only traveling from the bottom of the box to the top, its also traveling forward at 50% of c so it comes up say .5 inches but also travels forward many thousands of miles. This effect slows everything in the car down so the people within the car notice nothing.

 

No one is saying about reversing or stopping time... the observation that forces are the same forward or backward is a simple observation. This is evident wherever there is no entropy: play planets orbiting backward, for example, and no one will tell the difference. Show a billiard ball bouncing off another, and again no one can tell whether it is going forward or backward. Show an inelastic collision, billiard balls slowing due to friction, or coming together in a triangle shape to throw the cue ball really fast, and suddenly people are going to claim that it is being showed backward.

 

As for time itself going backward (rather than being rewound), how would you notice?

 

If time traveled backward it would mean that events 'rewind'. How to notice? Actually I cover this one above (or maybe you disagree with my reasoning). Almost everything has forward/backward symmetry. And 'I'm' the one saying 'reversing time'. I'm saying that despite this apparent f/b symmetry of physics (I just read all about this and it surprised me), the reversal of time (if it existed) will not work. Why? Because, like you say, it would have to be an 'exact' reverse play -- using the same forces and gravity will not (or should not) reverse directions pulling the spattered pieces of egg from the floor and putting them back on the table and no force or law of physics will bind the cracked egg shell back together. Not all events will replay exactly. (And if you want to say 'well, gravity would work backward in a time reversal' then count on the table floating upward.) You'd notice the cracked egg staying on cracked on the floor.

 

I hope that makes sense because instead of retyping all this I could be in bed with my wife!!

 

Cheers,

r

[Mr Skeptic]

Hi Mr Skeptic!

 

Gads... the problem with posting stuff on a lot of forums is having to deal with the same stuff over and over. Need to refine my system so answers to issues like the ones you present here are stored and indexed for easy cut/paste, lol.

 

So far no one has disputed my answers to these. To my knowledge, the so called 'time distortion' is due to a physical explanation which is nothing mysterious and does not need a 'flowing time dimension'. I'll bet in the distant past you saw the cartoon example of a ping pong ball bouncing in a box. In a parked sports car the ball bounces up 3" and down 3". The car takes off and gets up to 50% the speed of light (fast car). No change from the perspective of the people in the car: the ball is bouncing just like it was before (its important to remember that everything happening to the bouncing ball is happening to every thing and person in that car). However to an observer standing on the curb who has X-Ray vision and can see that bouncing ball in the speeding car there is a huge difference. To this dude the ball is not only traveling from the bottom of the box to the top, its also traveling forward at 50% of c so it comes up say .5 inches but also travels forward many thousands of miles. This effect slows everything in the car down so the people within the car notice nothing.

 

Fair enough. The same stuff takes longer to do, but that is because they are moving... that's one way of looking at it. From your own reference frame you can convert to theirs and consider how they would see things. They can do the same, by the way.

 

I'd agree considering time slowing down is not necessary for this, although it can definitely be convenient.

 

If time traveled backward it would mean that events 'rewind'. How to notice? Actually I cover this one above (or maybe you disagree with my reasoning). Almost everything has forward/backward symmetry. And 'I'm' the one saying 'reversing time'. I'm saying that despite this apparent f/b symmetry of physics (I just read all about this and it surprised me), the reversal of time (if it existed) will not work. Why? Because, like you say, it would have to be an 'exact' reverse play -- using the same forces and gravity will not (or should not) reverse directions pulling the spattered pieces of egg from the floor and putting them back on the table and no force or law of physics will bind the cracked egg shell back together. Not all events will replay exactly. (And if you want to say 'well, gravity would work backward in a time reversal' then count on the table floating upward.) You'd notice the cracked egg staying on cracked on the floor.

 

I hope that makes sense because instead of retyping all this I could be in bed with my wife!!

 

Cheers,

r

 

Ah, but I'm talking traveling forward in the minus time direction, and you're talking traveling backwards in the plus time dimension. Rewinding, as it were. I walk toward the west the same as I walk toward the east. I don't need to walk backward, and walking backward would be extremely awkward.

 

But suppose that for a while a few things actually did look like rewinding. Even the smallest disturbance, however, and that falls apart. Then, running the laws of physics in minus time, you still get increasing entropy. Everything would look much the same, wouldn't it? Then, people might talk about the difference in rewinding events occurring in the minus time direction vs time going in the plus time direction.

[rrw4rusty]

Ah, but I'm talking traveling forward in the minus time direction, and you're talking traveling backwards in the plus time dimension. Rewinding, as it were. I walk toward the west the same as I walk toward the east. I don't need to walk backward, and walking backward would be extremely awkward.

 

But suppose that for a while a few things actually did look like rewinding. Even the smallest disturbance, however, and that falls apart. Then, running the laws of physics in minus time, you still get increasing entropy. Everything would look much the same, wouldn't it? Then, people might talk about the difference in rewinding events occurring in the minus time direction vs time going in the plus time direction.

 

It's too late plus I've just tried to get through the next couple of pages in Penrose's The Road to Reality (the book attempts to use/teach/make you understand... 'the math') so, my brain has turned further to clay. I'll have to read and think about this in the morning. I kind of see where your coming from.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Ah, but I'm talking traveling forward in the minus time direction, and you're talking traveling backward in the plus time dimension. Rewinding, as it were. I walk toward the west the same as I walk toward the east. I don't need to walk backward, and walking backward would be extremely awkward.

 

But suppose that for a while a few things actually did look like rewinding. Even the smallest disturbance, however, and that falls apart. Then, running the laws of physics in minus time, you still get increasing entropy. Everything would look much the same, wouldn't it? Then, people might talk about the difference in rewinding events occurring in the minus time direction vs time going in the plus time direction.

 

We're talking about two different things neither of which provides proof for time. I talking about time rewinding as in one person travels back in time while the rest of the universe is still going forward and from my point of view people 'do' walk backward and I see time rewind. In effect I'm going faster then light walking time back.

 

You are saying the universe changes the direction of time's arrow but we wouldn't notice the difference (as if all matter suddenly became antimatter). In this case I'd have to say that time is still going forward but since I don't believe in the kind of time that stretches backward or forward it doesn't matter. If we're really going backward then we are heading back to the big bang and the extremely low entropy state we had after the expansion (ergo entropy is decreasing).

[Mr Skeptic]

We're talking about two different things neither of which provides proof for time. I talking about time rewinding as in one person travels back in time while the rest of the universe is still going forward and from my point of view people 'do' walk backward and I see time rewind. In effect I'm going faster then light walking time back.

 

For below, the first paragraph corresponds to entropy as its own law of physics, giving an arrow to time. The second corresponds to entropy being a statistical thing, based on the laws of physics, all the other of which are time-symmetrical.

 

I would think that if you are rewinding time just for you, then everyone would see you walking backwards. You would be unthinking things and forgetting stuff. Things would get really awkward wherever you interacted with the rest of the world. I consider this to be impossible for that reason.

 

If instead you were traveling backward in time while everyone else were traveling forward in time, both your and the world's entropy would be increasing, and you'd see each other as antimatter. If you were riding into the sunset side by side with your buddy, he would be traveling forward, westward, with increasing time. You would be traveling backward, eastward, in reverse time... ie you would look to be doing the same as your buddy. If you and your buddy touched, then your atoms going in opposite directions in time would collide, resulting in a particle that has zero speed in time, ie a photon.

 

Or at least that makes sense to me.

 

You are saying the universe changes the direction of time's arrow but we wouldn't notice the difference (as if all matter suddenly became antimatter). In this case I'd have to say that time is still going forward but since I don't believe in the kind of time that stretches backward or forward it doesn't matter. If we're really going backward then we are heading back to the big bang and the extremely low entropy state we had after the expansion (ergo entropy is decreasing).

 

I think I understand what your concept of time is. A sequence of events, rather than a dimension, right? But, how would you deal with things like continuous movement rather than a series of events? For every spatial position there is a corresponding time position, so time would look like a dimension, no?

[rrw4rusty]

Dear Mr. Skeptic,

 

I will have to think about all of that. I wish I had info on the physicist who is building a time machine using lasers to warp space (perhaps you’ve heard of it). He believes that he can send things back into the past (though only to a point when the machine was last turned on) and perhaps even a person. I wonder what he would think of all the problems you envision.

 

The following is from webpedia:

-----

there are two distinct viewpoints on time. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Time travel, in this view, becomes a possibility as other "times" persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time.[2][3] The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz[4] and Immanuel Kant,[5][6] holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be travelled.

----

This describes my position (the 2nd opposing view).

 

Imagine the universe is a two dimensional sheet called ‘now’. On the right side positive energy pores in (the future coming at us) causing patterns to flicker and dance on its zero width surface (the activities of our universe) then, on the left side negative energy exits (the past flowing away from us). The sheet wouldn’t be flat and in fact I’m not sure what it would look like but the point is that all that exists of our universe is this two dimensional ‘now’ with no thickness (or maybe its not even that, just the divide between positive and negative energy (or normal matter and antimatter). There is nothing but 'now' burning its way across the cosmos -- no past and no future except for records and memory and, hopes and dreams. (The universe for my next sci-fi book: Mantis)

 

With regards to the shape of that sheet, if tonight we saw a nova of a star 100 LY away, would you say that from our frame of reference that the nova event happened tonight or 100 years ago. In other words is the cone of light emanating from each object a cone of existence or a cone of information?

 

Cheers,

Rusty

 

Edit: Understand, I prefer the first view of time (in the wikipedia description) and am looking for a way to convince myself again.

Edited February 18, 2010 by rrw4rusty

[Mr Skeptic]

the point is that all that exists of our universe is this two dimensional ‘now’ with no thickness (or maybe its not even that, just the divide between positive and negative energy (or normal matter and antimatter). There is nothing but 'now' burning its way across the cosmos -- no past and no future except for records and memory and, hopes and dreams.

 

I'd agree, this is a significant problem for time as a dimension, especially considering the universe appears non-deterministic. The future unknowable, and most of the past cannot be remembered.

 

I'll have to think about that aspect some more.

 

Oh, and I think quantum people have a view of time different than other physicists, but I don't remember exactly what it was.

[rrw4rusty]

Oh, and I think quantum people have a view of time different than other physicists, but I don't remember exactly what it was.

 

Over the last year all the books I've read (5 of them) have been on quantum physics or string theory. Each book has discussed time. It seems like besides from the probability wave function it's pretty much the same.

 

Rusty

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Ah! Here's that 'time machine'. I don't know if this guy's a quack or serious... maybe you can tell me. The video originally aired on the History Channel.

 

 

Cheers,

Rusty