Someone explain time to me?

[aimforthehead]

Here is my understanding (or lack thereof) in dealing with time.

 

From what I understand time is directly related to gravity. The higher the gravity, the slower the time. But it is relative. Just because time is moving slower does not mean you will sense everything in slow motion.

So, if you were to be on the outside of a black hole, watching someone fall into the black hole, they would appear to be falling slower and slower, until they stopped moving indefinitely, but to them, it would be a constant motion (except for spaghettification, so there would be a difference in different parts of your bodies, assuming you somehow lived to see it).

 

So, when NASA puts cameras on their space crafts and show the launching, is the time actually moving faster and faster gradually? What is the difference between having a camera in a space where time moves more quickly and physically being there?

 

To understand my question easier, if we dropped a camera with live video feed in the black hole with the person falling, would it appear to be getting slower and slower, or constant like to the person falling?

 

 

[Marqq]

Here is my understanding (or lack thereof) in dealing with time.

 

From what I understand time is directly related to gravity. The higher the gravity, the slower the time. But it is relative. Just because time is moving slower does not mean you will sense everything in slow motion.

So, if you were to be on the outside of a black hole, watching someone fall into the black hole, they would appear to be falling slower and slower, until they stopped moving indefinitely, but to them, it would be a constant motion (except for spaghettification, so there would be a difference in different parts of your bodies, assuming you somehow lived to see it).

 

So, when NASA puts cameras on their space crafts and show the launching, is the time actually moving faster and faster gradually? What is the difference between having a camera in a space where time moves more quickly and physically being there?

 

To understand my question easier, if we dropped a camera with live video feed in the black hole with the person falling, would it appear to be getting slower and slower, or constant like to the person falling?

 

 

 

First off, kudos on the term: spaghettification...nice

Time is indirectly related to gravity and velocity relative to [math]c[/math] (referred to as the inertial frame). As gravity and velocity increase, the passage of time slows. Subtle difference, but important...

As far as a live feed into a black hole (presuming instant transmission from equipment unaffected by the gravity), it would not show slow to us, because we would not be in the extreme inertial frame.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Marqq

[DrRocket]

Here is my understanding (or lack thereof) in dealing with time.

 

From what I understand time is directly related to gravity. The higher the gravity, the slower the time. But it is relative. Just because time is moving slower does not mean you will sense everything in slow motion.

So, if you were to be on the outside of a black hole, watching someone fall into the black hole, they would appear to be falling slower and slower, until they stopped moving indefinitely, but to them, it would be a constant motion (except for spaghettification, so there would be a difference in different parts of your bodies, assuming you somehow lived to see it).

 

So, when NASA puts cameras on their space crafts and show the launching, is the time actually moving faster and faster gradually? What is the difference between having a camera in a space where time moves more quickly and physically being there?

 

To understand my question easier, if we dropped a camera with live video feed in the black hole with the person falling, would it appear to be getting slower and slower, or constant like to the person falling?

 

 

 

Time does not speed up or slow down. Time always progresses, according to any accurate clock, at 1 second/second.

 

What clocks measure is proper time. Proper time is associated with a world line, and two world lines joining joining two identical spacetime points can exhibit different proper times. This phenomena can account for "gravitational time dilation", the "twin paradox" and any other questions involving time.

 

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/54990-proper-time/

[Amr Morsi]

It is the linked sequence of events with respect to certain frame of reference.

Edited September 2, 2011 by Amr Morsi

[swansont]

Although I can't understand anything about time (May be it is to be optimized BY A MAN to make the most benefit or INTEREST!).

 

But I can give a model:

1. It is a definition of the creation. The interval is that which is created.

2. Since, it is a definition, then you can seek about its properties and its dependencies together with effects.

3. Local Time is always in the positive direction. No creature will remedy what he experienced and begin from new. No one. No one. No one then No one

4. It is directly related to any move in space. Classical Effect + Relativistic Effect. And, both are related to it.

5. Simply, as a 'Hockey Player' I can tell the definition very confidently, and very surely: "Time is a 'matter' of sequencing of events to a certain particle" WOW! What a definition! And, I have scored! Yess!

 

I will not be in any gladness to hear any comment as I am not sure of anything that I have just written because I am just suggesting or recommending.

 

Time expert! I have managed to score a goal in 11 seconds after opponent centering. Minimum Time?! Not exactly, but the inertia was high somewhat .... very high '2el7a2e2a ya3ny'.

!

Moderator Note

This not the forum to be speculating about time. That's for Speculations

[Amr Morsi]

Sorry ...... It is the last time. Believe me.

[Mystery111]

Time does not speed up or slow down. Time always progresses, according to any accurate clock, at 1 second/second.

 

What clocks measure is proper time. Proper time is associated with a world line, and two world lines joining joining two identical spacetime points can exhibit different proper times. This phenomena can account for "gravitational time dilation", the "twin paradox" and any other questions involving time.

 

 

http://www.sciencefo...90-proper-time/

 

Well, to be honest, I think that depends on what time really is. I mean, General Relativity permits pure gravity solutions, where this model is called a timeless model, it is also reflected in the Wheeler de Witt equation. The idea that we live in a timeless universe goes in direct confrontation with our perception of time; so it may be that time is purely a subjective phenomena and as far as we can tell, is a definition itself of the psychological arrow of time. And if time is subjective, then it is also subjected to the effects of a gene called the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus. This gene regulates the speed at which our perception of time occurs at. This is why we may feel time moving faster than at other times. So we might owe our sense of time to a genetic part of our existence. And if so, then time can speed up or slow down. We might be just imposing our experience of the world to the world, simply assuming that time must exist objectively.

Edited September 7, 2011 by Mystery111

[DrRocket]

Well, to be honest, I think that depends on what time really is. I mean, General Relativity permits pure gravity solutions, where this model is called a timeless model, it is also reflected in the Wheeler de Witt equation. The idea that we live in a timeless universe goes in direct confrontation with our perception of time; so it may be that time is purely a subjective phenomena and as far as we can tell, is a definition itself of the psychological arrow of time. And if time is subjective, then it is also subjected to the effects of a gene called the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus. This gene regulates the speed at which our perception of time occurs at. This is why we may feel time moving faster than at other times. So we might owe our sense of time to a genetic part of our existence. And if so, then time can speed up or slow down. We might be just imposing our experience of the world to the world, simply assuming that time must exist objectively.

 

rubbish

[Mystery111]

rubbish

 

Of course, you are entitled to your own opinion, but I can assure you science backs up what I tell you. You're quick disapproval of my post tells me you are set within your ways, but wholey unscientific because you are not willing to face the facts about time in General Relativity or what biological science has to say about the perception of time.

[DevilSolution]

AHA, oh time how we love to calculate you!

 

Time is perception but more confusing is that its not subjective as nothing scientific is. Time therefor must have an exact perception for every given circumstance thats physical possible (which is far to complex for me to understand or attempt to explain), this would obviously include all current forces in the universe, all energy's, all constant and variable states and will all have some logical output for how time at any given circumstance would be perceived (also we require some form of conscious being for that perception). The real question about time is not how we perceive our own time, this is fairly constant and constrained to our physical conditions that we have evolved too, but moreover how we perceive other people's time. As far as the camera goes, though i dont know or claim to know about black holes i would say the video feed would be relative whats happening to the camera in the black hole, if it does slow down...so will the feed.

 

im sure this is all speculative though, maybe it helped?

[Mystery111]

Beleiving it is subjective is half the problem... there is the issue of unifying general relativity with quantum mechanics and both their descriptions of time differ greately. Where in GR a theory permits solutions to a timeless universe, in quantum mechanics, time is real, but is a succession of a generated set of beginnings and ends, it's not a smooth river as most often spectulate. So somehow the human is smack in the middle of these two theories - on one hand we have timelessness and the other is quantum mechanics which doesn't reflect our experience of time either.

 

As far as time is concerned, believing it is objective leads to more problems than it does just assuming we add those details to the world. Time is very subjective in the sense we feel it pass, we also make the distinction between past and future; an inherent property itself of an arrow of time. But we are also told in quantum mechanics that the only ever real time is the present time, as Einstein once said, the past and the future are only an illusion.

[DevilSolution]

"Einstein once said, the past and the future are only an illusion. " <-- i dont like him much

 

 

space and time constrict everything from happening at once, time therefor must have some physical rule for which its constrained too, the question about quantum mechanics and general relativity is answered when you imagine what happens if you had bernards watch, if when you click the button gravity stops we know general relativity is what controls it, if however gravity still works but the atomic clock stops we know that quantum mechanics control time...the answer i believe is somewhere in-between. Our perception of it is based on our evolution to our physical surroundings which means the flow of time or perception of such a thing is pretty much based on a built in clock that works with our gravity and sun. If however we could imagine being inside a quark or such, the smallest scalable thing that can be broken, and we now exist inside this quark, time will still exist in exactly the same way. This seems to say that the quantum world creates a much larger world BUT the rules that exist must be the same and therefor so are the results. in other words your size, your energy and your conditions will give you your perception of time, indistinguishable of what it is were calculating.

 

if what is small is big then what results from the quantum gives us gravity and can as such to a point be described as indistinguishable (one and the same). So when we click the button on the watch they both stop because one is the result of the other and its the other is which holds the rule.

 

the results from that are pretty strange because it would mean time is calculable too not solely but predominantly gravity and in which the quantum is almost pointless because although the rules are set from this POV, they are not lived in this POV or shall we say calculable to it.

 

the way i understand time in my mind is simply an iteration of change, if no change occurs no time occurs, the sole cause of change in our universe is gravity (and the big bang) gravity is most likely caused by or indistinguishable from the quantum world (where the rules of physics are made) and therefor if time is the result of gravity and other forces / energy / constant and variable states it could simply be defined as an objective perception calculable to every given circumstance thats physically possible |~~{()}~~|

[SamSneed]

Time as we know it is based on our understanding of the THIS solar system. Time is not the same for us as it is on Mars. So time is relative. The only thing that is constant is light.

 

How many times have you said to yourself "time really flew"? If we lose track of time then it has no relevance to the universe. The universe is infinitely old. It does not care how old the Earth is.

 

Time is a social construct designed by Earthlings. It has no bearing to the universe.

 

Everything we know to be truth only works in this solar system. We can sit and observe, test and evaluate things that happen outside our solar system based on our understanding of this solar system.

 

Point being this...I think time is irrelevant to understanding the universe. It helps with understanding what we see but not what we don't see. The only way for time to be relevant is if we knew there was (in fact) a big crunch coming. Then we can extrapolate time. Meaning, in 1 trillion years the universe will begin to contract. That let's me know the life cycle of this universe is 1 trillion years. That's some information on time that I can actually use in understanding the universe.

[IM Egdall]

To try and answer aimforthehead's original question, in relativity there are two effects on the passage of time. Let's use GPS satellites as a simplified example:

 

Special relativity. Atomic clocks on board the satellites run slower than clocks on Earth by about 7 thousand nanoseconds per day. This is due to their motion relative to the Earth (time dilation).

 

General relativity. Satellite atomic clocks run faster than Earth clocks by about 45 thousand nanoseconds per day. This is becuase they are further away from Earth -- the source of the gravity. (gravitational time dilation).

 

Now 45 minus 7 is 38. This means that taken together, the two relativity effects produce a net gain of about 38 thousand nanoseconds per day in the timing of satellite clocks (compared to clocks on the ground).

 

See link: http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Edited September 27, 2011 by IM Egdall

[LawfulBlade]

... it is also subjected to the effects of a gene called the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus. This gene regulates the speed at which our perception of time occurs at. This is why we may feel time moving faster than at other times. So we might owe our sense of time to a genetic part of our existence. And if so, then time can speed up or slow down. ...

 

The Suprachiasmatic Nucleus is a part of the brain, not a gene. It's job is to entrain circadian rhythms, not to perceive time. So, for example, after the sun's gone down, and it's been dark for a bit, it signals the pineal gland to produce and release melatonin. It does that through direct/indirect detection of light (depends on the animal, whether it has direct photoreceptors or not), and has direct input from the eyes.

[Greg Boyles]

If time was purely a subjective human phenomenum then surely all humans in one time zone would not be able to agree on the measurement of time etc. But largely we can and do agree on its measurement.

 

The sun rising in the east and setting in the west over aperiod of 12 hours or so is not subjective but a fact.

 

Perhaps our feelings about time are subjective but our experience of it is not.

 

 

 

Although what if the Earth was in a tidally locked orbit around the sun, and day and night did not exist. I wonder how our experience of time would change then.

 

We would still be able to detect the passage of time however through the procession of star constellations in the sky and progression of events on earth.

Edited September 30, 2011 by Greg Boyles

[IM Egdall]

If time was purely a subjective human phenomenum then surely all humans in one time zone would not be able to agree on the measurement of time etc. But largely we can and do agree on its measurement.

 

 

I agree that time is not a subjective human phenomenon. But it is relative. How an observer measures how fast time passes on a clock depends on the observer's motion relative to that clock.

 

The reason we agree on time's measurement in our everyday lives is because our everyday speeds relative to each other are such a small percentage of the speed of light. Light travels at about 670 million miles an hour in a vacuum. So even commercial airplane speeds (about 550 miles an hour relative to the Earth) are less than a millonth the speed of light.

 

Einstein's formula on the rate of time's passage and relative motion is the so-called Lorentz factor or the square root of (1 - v^^2). Here v is relative velocity as a percentage of the speed of light. A v of a millionth the speed of light results in an extremely small factor for a change in the rate of time's passage. So we don't notice it. But it is real -- and measurable with ultra-high accuracy clocks.

 

If in some future age, people regularly travel in spaceships at hundreds of millions of miles an hour, they would know from first-hand experience that time is relative.

[Amr Morsi]

Whether there is a time or not, you gonna do it in a shot ...... Optimize