Einstein view of time

Thinking about the OP question. Seems to me that Einstein did not consider time as independent from space, but more as a mathematically necessary permission for space and change to unfold, persist and evolve.

An object "needs" time to remain an object which is what it wants to do, but in order to do so it must shed energy and that process "requires time" (enough for the duration), a necessary and mathematically implied sufficient temporal permission.

Time = x (any value). It is part of the Function.
This phenomenon is explained here;
In logic, necessity and sufficiency are terms used to describe a conditional or implicational relationship between statements. For example, in the conditional statement "If P then Q", we say that "Q is necessary for P" because P cannot be true unless Q is true. Similarly, we say that "P is sufficient for Q" because P being true always implies that Q is true, but P not being true does not always imply that Q is not true.
Click to expand...
The assertion that a statement is a "necessary and sufficient" condition of another means that the former statement is true if and only if the latter is true. That is, the two statements must be either simultaneously true or simultaneously false.
Click to expand...
In ordinary English, "necessary" and "sufficient" indicate relations between conditions or states of affairs, not statements. Being a male sibling is a necessary and sufficient condition for being a brother.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

I believe Einstein looked at it from a "necessary and sufficient" perspective when he came up with the term "spacetime"........:).......the very definition of a necessary and sufficient self-referential condition in accordance with Occam's Razor.

spacetime = 3D coordinate of space geometry, an address. Time = chronological quantum movement from one 3D spacetime coordinate to another, @ "c".

It is the "c" restriction which is causal to the necessity for time. Time is a qu-bit....:)
 
Last edited:
Michael 345 said:
If only you had said AGE and not TIME that would be perfect :)

:)
Click to expand...
I consider them interchangeable, but I like the immediacy of duration; "I'm late, I'm late for a very important date"!
We experience duration every day, we experience age every year...in celebration of our birthday.....:cool:
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
Time is the measurement of; past (start) --> duration (existence) --> future (finish)
Click to expand...

The past only exists in the memory of the subject and the future in his imagination. Real time is the duration or continuity of things in a certain state or situation. There is only the continuous present equal to time, cp = t. Clocks measure time, the continuity of things in the present.
 
Asexperia said:
The past only exists in the memory of the subject and the future in his imagination. Real time is the duration or continuity of things in a certain state or situation. There is only the continuous present equal to time, cp = t. Clocks measure time, the continuity of things in the present.
Click to expand...
This is mystical nonesense.

I repeat my earlier assertion - science is founded on the principle of causality. That is, every event has a cause (past) and every event has an effect (future).

It is true that in the quantum world things are not quite that simple - one says that an operator acting on the state of a quantum system has a certain expectation value.

It can be shown (but not easily) that this is a form of causality.

I repeat, any science that defies the principle of causality is junk
 
Last edited:
QuarkHead said:
I repeat my earlier assertion - science is founded on the principle of causality. That is, every event has a cause (past) and every event has an effect (future).
Click to expand...

You should say: Each event has a cause (before) and each event has an effect (after).
 
What does continuous present mean?

Time flows in the present and is perceived as a continuous succession of irreversible moments that goes from the past to the future.
 
The atomic clocks at NIST and all common clocks don't measure 'time', they meter time in a convenient interval. It aids in establishing order like: GPS, air traffic control, roadway traffic, communications, appointments, bills due, etc. I.e. everyday life.
 
phyti said:
The atomic clocks at NIST and all common clocks don't measure 'time', they meter time in a convenient interval. It aids in establishing order like: GPS, air traffic control, roadway traffic, communications, appointments, bills due, etc. I.e. everyday life.
Click to expand...

They meter AGEING and linked with numerous other linked systems incorporated in numerous other equipment the SYNCHRONIZATION of the workings of the combined systems

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
They meter AGEING and linked with numerous other linked systems incorporated in numerous other equipment the SYNCHRONIZATION of the workings of the combined systems

:)
Click to expand...
Age is the duration of something, and it's calculated as the difference in time of introduction and time of disappearance.
 
phyti said:
Age is the duration of something, and it's calculated as the difference in time of introduction and time of disappearance.
Click to expand...
Noooooooo

AGE is calculated from one arbitrary moment to another arbitrary moment

AGE is not TIME

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
AGE is not TIME
Click to expand...

For the purposes of the twin "paradox", the traveler knows the date and time when the home twin (she) was born. It is exactly the same date and time when the traveler (he) was born ... they are twins. So, at any later time in his life, if the traveler knows the current age of the home twin, he knows the date and time on her wristwatch. So in that case, her age is EXACTLY equivalent to the date and time at her location.
 
Mike_Fontenot said:
For the purposes of the twin "paradox", the traveler knows the date and time when the home twin (she) was born. It is exactly the same date and time when the traveler (he) was born ... they are twins. So, at any later time in his life, if the traveler knows the current age of the home twin, he knows the date and time on her wristwatch. So in that case, her age is EXACTLY equivalent to the date and time at her location.
Click to expand...

For the purposes of the twin paradox the traveler knows the arbitrary labelled moment when the home twin was born ✓

It is EXACTLY the same arbitrary labelled moment when the traveler was born because are twins ✓

So at any later moment in life if the traveler knows the current AGE of the home twin the current arbitrary labelled moment on twins wristwatch is known ✓

So in that case home twins AGE is EXACTLY equivalent to the arbitrary labelled moment at current location ✓

:)
 
phyti said:
The atomic clocks at NIST and all common clocks don't measure 'time', they meter time in a convenient interval.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make between measuring time and metering time intervals. Please explain.
 
James R said:
I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make between measuring time and metering time intervals. Please explain.
Click to expand...

I'd guess he means that an interval of time on Earth would not be the same Interval of time on a satellite. Dilation is why clocks will record different times at different accelerations. Unsure what he meant about Aging though? People would respectively age the same from their own perspectives.

Introduction and interference of time?
 
Bob-a-builder said:
I'd guess he means that an interval of time on Earth would not be the same Interval of time on a satellite.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he would say that whether you use a clock on Earth or in a satellite, you're still not measuring time; you're only "metering time in a convenient interval". I just don't know what his distinction is between the two forms of words.
 
James R said:
I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make between measuring time and metering time intervals. Please explain.
Click to expand...
There is no such animal as TIME

phyti said:
The atomic clocks at NIST and all common clocks don't measure 'time', they meter time in a convenient interval. It aids in establishing order like: GPS, air traffic control, roadway traffic, communications, appointments, bills due, etc. I.e. everyday life.
Click to expand...

Michael 345 said:
They meter AGEING and linked with numerous other linked systems incorporated in numerous other equipment the SYNCHRONIZATION of the workings of the combined systems

:)
Click to expand...

https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn...errer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s

Seems like some people will go to extraordinary lengths to measure something which does not exist:)

The link gives details of why accuracy of a clock in deep space is required

As I understand the situation if you calculate some sort of situation on Earth and set up the clock on the probe (or whatever equipment is being sent out there) the further out the more the clock will drift and the more imprecise the Earth calculation will become

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top