Does time exist?

The light is from a physical source .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is that supposed to mean anything?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Time is real...time and space are two sides of the same coin, and are interchangeable as shown and validated in GR.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I agree with the General theory of relativity, but I think space (Geometry) and time (Philochrony) can be studied and know separately.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Then I guess we're in total agreement.
Time is one of the four dimensions.
Mathematics is a human tool.

 

Accepting that time is real, as is space, is pretty sensible imo.

 

Time is an emergent dimension of geometry

Human mathematics are symbolic representations of natural mathematics.
I believe my perspective is in complete functional harmony with mainstream science. No one has yet proven this interpretation wrong.
OTOH, I believe I have demonstrated the emergent property of Time as a mathematical measurement of "duration" for individual events, much as all human symbolic mathematical measurements are descriptive of natural emergent mathematical phenomena. In fact I believe that my interpretation is closer to Einstein than what is argued here.

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

 

Only if time is associated with and relative to space (or anything else) does measurable duration become apparent and can be described in human arbitrary units of time.

Currently associated best description of time is in association with and relative to:
Physicists Have Broken The Record For The Most Accurate Clock Ever Built

https://www.sciencealert.com/physic...record-for-the-most-accurate-clock-ever-built

IOW we have no clue as to the nature and independent existence of time. Human understanding of "duration" (as increments of time) is always an emergent measurement in relation to a physical phenomenon, never as an independent dimension.

 

But so what ? In the end , time has no efficacy on anything . Ever . Time doesn't speed up or slow down anything .

 

True, time only measures if something physical speeds up or slows down.

 

And everything in between .

 

So your position is not in agreement with mainstream science. Was that a lie?

I have a theory that the universe is powered by the Cosmic Unicorn. No one has proven that wrong either. So I'm just gonna put mine up there in the shelf right next to your idea.

 

[DUPE]

 

Do tell me where and why it is not in agreement with mainstream science. Have you considered that your perspective may not be in agreement with mainstream science?

Tell me where this speaks of an independent time dimension where Time is a Universal constant.

Is your perspective of a Cosmic Unicorn in functional harmony with mainstream science? Have you presented anything that describes this perspective?

 

Because what you purport conflicts with what mainstream science finds.

Have you considered that purporting things that conflict with mainstream science is pretty much the definition of "not in agreement"?

Time is one of the four dimensions. There are three spacelike and one timelike.

Like space, time is fundamental. You've got it backwards: the geometry of spacetime is a property of its spatial and temporal dimensions. Not the other way around.

It is as much in agreement with mainstream science as your ideas. i.e. not.

 

Clocks or external active memories (MEXA) preserve the duration of the Earth's rotational movement in hours, minutes and seconds. Time is measured with the duration of a movement in space. Without movement there is no time. Get outside at 12:00 at noon on your watch and you will see the Sun at its maximum height in the sky.

 

All true, but meaningful only to humans and perhaps organisms that respond to circadian rhythms.

What are biological clocks?

https://www.nigms.nih.gov/education/fact-sheets/Pages/circadian-rhythms.aspx

But these abilities are not indicative of knowledge of time, but memory of the duration of certain natural cycles.

 

Relativity of simultaneity

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

On spaceships, map-clocks may look unsynchronized.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Events A, B, and C occur in different order depending on the motion of the observer. The white line represents a plane of simultaneity being moved from the past to the future.

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

 

No argument from me. But that does not automatically assume that Time is an independent existing dimension. IMO, it is an emergent property of dynamic space and there is no argument that falsifies that.

Time is the emergent fourth mathematical property of geometric space.
Space is not three emergent mathematical properties of temporal duration.

The equation reads "spacetime = 3 D space + time"
Note; The term Dimension is a mathematical term for a spatial measurement.
The term Time is a mathematical term for measurement of temporal duration.

Definition of dimension

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dimension

No mention of Time as an independent dimension. It can be part of a mathematical coordinate in Dimensional space!

Without space there is no time. Space originated before there was time. It's the continuation and dynamic expansion of space that produced measurable temporal duration, symbolized as Time, just like human Mathematics are symbolized values and functions of dynamic geometric spatial dimensions

 

Yes it does.

As stated - in conflict with established science.

This being the Pseudoscience forum does not entitle you to just make stuff up off the top of your head.

Well no it isn't.
You have it backwards.

Also no mention of it being shaped like a puppy, but that does not mean we can just decide it is shaped like a puppy.

You mangle words and torture meaning to suit your needs. This is not science.

 

With all respect Dave, it does not.
The Time we always speak of is spacetime, which emerged and is inseparably connected with the duration of this space since it's beginning, some 13.772 billion (symbolic) years ago.

Answer me this question ; "did Time exist before space existed? If not, it cannot be considered a separate and independent dimension . Time as we know it is/was an emergent property of this space and started with t=0 as the beginning of a mathematical temporal measurement of 3 dimensional space.
If you assert that time is an independent dimension from all other existence you must be able to show this.
What you are declaring is tantamount to assertion there is a God who caused space.

No, I am very much in agreement with the term "spacetime", which includes the symbolized duration of space since it's beginning. I am not in agreement that Time can exist independent of something else. Time can only be used as a measured aspect of something that exists and endures. It cannot be used to measure itself, because it does not emerge and be measured as a duration unless associated with the existence (or change) of something else.

I showed the various definitions of time and its use as a mathematical measurement. Nowhere in the definitions does it assert Time is an independent dimension.

I am not saying anything which disagrees with the facts, only with the interpretation by the majority at this "time" of scientific investigation. There is a persistent debate about this by minds much more educated than mine. It is not fair to single me out as "making stuff up".

There's the rub. I do not have it backwards, you do.

Who is making stuff up?

It seems you understand me sufficiently well to disagree . If I am too obscure all you need to do is ask me to clarify.

Let me give you a fundamental perspective. Time is always dependent on the duration of existence of something else and has no independent duration of existence in and of itself. Is that clear enough?