Can We Adjust Our Brains to See in Slow Motion?

[TRIPL3 THR33]

There is no such thing as time. Time exists only because there is a witness to "The Reaction" (the continuation of energy changing form). Without a witness to the reaction, the reaction would happen instantaneously. The illusion of time, is the rate we comprehend the reaction. In the same way that a movie camera works, our brains take snapshots of the surrounding environment and makes our comprehension seem to flow at a continuous rate (what we call time).

 

One might then ask, “Well how much time passes between each snapshot?” There is no amount of "time" in between the snapshots, there is only “the amount of the reaction” that takes place before we take the next snapshot. We get the illusion of time because the reaction doesn’t stop. The reaction always reaches the point where our brains take the next snapshot.

 

I consider that what we perceive as time has come about as a result of matching the “rate that our brain takes snapshots” to the “need to comprehend things at a certain rate”. If, in between each snapshot, we let more of the reaction happen without comprehension, everything around us would seem to happen a lot faster. If, in between each snapshot, we let less of the reaction happen, everything around us would seem to happen a lot slower. I believe we have evolved to have time happen for us at the optimum rate. I believe that other living creatures on this planet would have different perceptions of time. Time would go slower relative to us for small spiders, flies, etc.

 

We will discover that in certain moments, like car accidents, the brain can decrease “the amount of the reaction” that takes place before the next snapshot and hence give the impression that time is going slower.

 

We will discover how to control “the amount of the reaction” that occurs before each snapshot is taken and hence be able to watch/do things in slow motion.

 

Thoughts?

[ajb]

Let us consider an experiment. I measure the radio activity of a sample of some isotope which we will assume has some short half-life. I record this activity. I then place the sample in a lead box and seal it. I then return to the box after some time (say a few half-lifes), open it and measure the radio activity of the sample. Question; what will I measure as the activity? Will it be just the same as when I sealed the sample in the box? Remember that according to your hypothesis time does not exist unless we are watching something change.

[Strange]

Why do "time doesn't exist" threads appear as regularly as clockwork?

[TRIPL3 THR33]

Ok, forget that I said there is no such thing as time.

What I'm saying is that we should be able adjust our perception of time in order to see in slow motion.

[ajb]

What I'm saying is that we should be able adjust our perception of time in order to see in slow motion.

This must be a question for biologist to understand. It is related to how our brains are able to process information. At some point this will be limited by physics, there will be some limit related physics of the materials in the brain.

[TRIPL3 THR33]

Lets call the starting of a stopwatch point 1 (p1) in the reaction (everything happening in the universe at the same moment). Once the stopwatch shows 1 minute we stop it (p2). We call this 1 minute of "time". I call this a measure of how much of the reaction has occurred (r1). r1 = p2 - p1.

 

r1 is that same anywhere in the universe. However, r1 relative to r1 that occurs in a strong gravity field happens sooner. The same amount of the reaction happens. It's the rate of the reaction that's decreased due to gravity. Not time. Gravity affects the mass in the reaction but doesn't affect light. Hence why light is the same speed anywhere in the universe. Gravity doesn't effect time because time isn't a real thing that can be effected.

[ajb]

Gravity affects the mass in the reaction but doesn't affect light.

Gravity does effect light. For example we have gravitational lensing where light is bent around massive objects.

 

Hence why light is the same speed anywhere in the universe.

As measured in any local inertial frame yes.

 

Gravity doesn't effect time because time isn't a real thing that can be effected.

You will have to be more careful here by what you mean by time. Anyway, the proper time as measured by an inertial observer does depend on gravity.

 

For example, people have measured the effect of gravitational time dilation in the lab [1] as well as via the GPS system.

 

Reference

[1] C. W. Chou, D. B. Hume, T. Rosenband and D. J. Wineland; Optical Clocks and Relativity; Science vol 329 no. 5999 (24 September 2010), pp. 1630–1633;

 

[TRIPL3 THR33]

Firstly, thanks for taking the time to read and reply to my posts.

 

But how can "time" be affected? Time isn't a physical property of the universe like mass, energy and light is? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the rate of the reaction at location A is accelerated relative to the reaction at location B due to gravity?

I understand that GPS's rely on taking into account the proven theory of relativity. Isn't that just because the rate of the reaction is faster in a satellite relative to an object on earth. I'm not saying that theory of relativity doesn't hold true. Just the way we think about it is maybe incorrect. Maybe gravity makes the reaction go faster/slower relative to other locations and what we measure as a result is a change in time (essentially a factor used to measure delta reaction). Wouldn't it make more sense that gravity is affecting the mechanics of reaction rather than the measurement of change?

Once again, I appreciate the feedback. I'm probably just a crackpot but I'm glad your not treating me with contempt.

[Spyman]

Gravity is not the only thing causing time dilation, speed is also affecting time.

 

If it was a mechanic reaction then different constructions would be affected differently, which they don't.

 

Relativity regard time as a dimension similar to space.

[sunshaker]

 

I consider that what we perceive as time has come about as a result of matching the “rate that our brain takes snapshots” to the “need to comprehend things at a certain rate”.

 

 

 

a simple strope effect (snapshots)

[ajb]

But how can "time" be affected? Time isn't a physical property of the universe like mass, energy and light is? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the rate of the reaction at location A is accelerated relative to the reaction at location B due to gravity?

You can either mean coordinate time or proper time when using 'time'. I think you mean proper time here as the time measured by a clock moving under the influence of gravity. The time measured in this way clearly depends on the path taken in space-time and this depends on gravity. You should look up the basics of gravitational time dilation.

 

I understand that GPS's rely on taking into account the proven theory of relativity. Isn't that just because the rate of the reaction is faster in a satellite relative to an object on earth. I'm not saying that theory of relativity doesn't hold true. Just the way we think about it is maybe incorrect. Maybe gravity makes the reaction go faster/slower relative to other locations and what we measure as a result is a change in time (essentially a factor used to measure delta reaction). Wouldn't it make more sense that gravity is affecting the mechanics of reaction rather than the measurement of change?

With the GPS both the gravitational and kinematic time dilation effects are taken into account.

 

Once again, I appreciate the feedback. I'm probably just a crackpot but I'm glad your not treating me with contempt.

I don't think you are a crackpot, just not really yet aware of all the physics. Coming here and asking questions is a good start.

[TRIPL3 THR33]

I get the fabric of space time and how large objects bend space time around them. Therefore both speed and gravitation forces affect an object. This is a model that fits experimental results perfectly. But this model can be rearranged so that speed and gravity affects an object rate of reaction rather than time and space (both of which aren't real things to be affected. They only exist as a byproduct of comprehension)

Edited March 6, 2015 by TRIPL3 THR33

[ajb]

I get the fabric of space time and how large objects bend space time around them. Therefore both speed and gravitation forces affect an object. This is a model that fits experimental results perfectly. But this model can be rearranged so that speed and gravity affects an object rate of reaction rather than time and space (both of which aren't real things to be affected. They only exist as a byproduct of comprehension)

You need to define carefully 'rate of reaction'. This sounds just the same as timing something to me.

[TRIPL3 THR33]

If we can ditch the idea of the Space-Time continuum then we can also move on from the idea that space and time were "created" at the same moment as the big bang. Which also seems ridiculous.

[ajb]

If we can ditch the idea of the Space-Time continuum then we can also move on from the idea that space and time were "created" at the same moment as the big bang. Which also seems ridiculous.

The 'big bang' theory does not really say anything about the creation of space and time, only that space-time has undergone and is undergoing an expansion. We don't know much about what should replace the initial singularity as predicted by classical gravity. The quantum theory should help us here, but alas we don't have a full theory of quantum gravity yet.

[TRIPL3 THR33]

We model that gravity and speed affects the time it takes for a reaction to occur relative to a reaction occuring somewhere else. Rather than actually affecting the physical rate it happens at. A subtle difference maybe. But Therefore we wouldn't need the space time continuum in order for this model to work.

[ajb]

We model that gravity and speed affects the time it takes for a reaction to occur relative to a reaction occuring somewhere else.

Okay, that is time dilation in a 'nut shell'. You need two durations to compare to see the effects.

 

Rather than actually affecting the physical rate it happens at.

Correct. As far as a local comoving observer sees it nothing special happens. The physical process occurs at the 'standard' rate. Other observers may well disagree.

 

For example, we know the rates of decay of particles found in cosmic rays as measure in the lab. Such particles seem to live longer when observed moving quickly as cosmic rays. As far as the particles themselves are concerned they decay at the 'standard' rate, which is what we measure in the lab. It is there fast speeds that mean that as far as we are concerned, they take longer to decay.

 

A subtle difference maybe. But Therefore we wouldn't need the space time continuum in order for this model to work.

Feel free to develop models without space-time. People do think about such things, but it is not typical or it is usually based on modifying space-time say via noncommutative geometry.

[TRIPL3 THR33]

When a stopwatch measures what we call time, all that is being measured is the amount of reaction between two points in the reaction. We get the notion that time is a real and tangible thing to measure because of our consciousness. Because we observe the reaction at a certain rate. Like I explained above, our brain takes snapshots at equally spaced intervals (not time intervals but delta reaction intervals). Because the reaction continues forward and always reaches the next snapshot it seems continuous. We have evolved to match our rate of comprehension optimally with our environment. Other creatures (small spiders, flys etc) probably experience a faster rate of comprehension (smaller intervals between snapshots) compared to us. Each creature would measure the same time on a stopwatch at any location in the universe. Even if no observer existed the same measurement would be taken because it's delta reaction. The same thing can be said about space but I don't have a good way of explaining that. So if you understand what I'm saying here then can you see how time isn't something that can be effected? We say that gravity slows time down. We measure that time is going slower near large objects. We put that all together and bam! Great model that works. But it's only because we haven't figured out how gravity slows the reaction down that requires us to continue using time in the model. Eventually we will figure that out and we can rid ourselves of time and space and all the limitations it adds to our equations/models by having them in there.

Everything I wrote above is just a hypothesis. I'm fully aware it needs to be backed up but evidence to be considered accurate. And yes I am ignorant to a lot of physics. Though, I really don't think I need a degree in physics for what I have written above to be considered reasonable.

[StringJunky]

Time is what clocks measure, like rulers measure length. Without time everything would happen at the same moment, if at all. This is not what we observe. Without time there can't be any motion because speed is d/t. Note: this does not mean that time is motion but motion can't manifest without it.

Edited March 9, 2015 by StringJunky