Is There A Universal Now?

[Write4U]

Where is the universal clock?

There is no clock! Clocks are for humans. A present state of NOW is independent of clocks.

NOW is not a measurement. It is a present condition of being. The Universe is NOW!

You cannot say "some parts of the Universe do not exist NOW". That's a contradiction.

now
adverb

1. 1.
   at the present time or moment.
   "where are you living now?"
   
   Similar:
   at the moment
   
   at present, just now, right now, at the present time, at the present moment

Oxford Dictionary

The Universe's continuous existence results in a chronology of NOWS since it's beginning, independent of any clock.


According to our arbitrary measuring system, the Universe has accumulated 13.7 billion years of NOWS.

 

[Neddy Bate]

That is why I don't use SR, it is a useless exercise. It cannot yield a definitive answer to the OP question.

The OP refers to the 'Andromeda Paradox' which is an SR thought experiment. The whole thought experiment shows that there is no universal now in the universe, according to SR. But okay, whatever.

 

[Neddy Bate]

Not a great deal if anything. However I was correcting what I consider a incorrect statement - clocks measure time time. Since the statement was made in the thread Is There a Universal Now silly me thought it should be replied to and, as already mentioned, corrected in the same thread. Happy for you to contact moderators to have my post moved to where you consider it should reside

...

Not totally incorrect understanding

I'd say my position, more a considered opinion which no poster has shown not correct, to this moment, but whatever

Again if you feel my post belongs at / under another thread feel free to have it moved

Not at all, I did not mean to imply it was off topic. I was agreeing with your position that time is not "stuff", while also saying that we can still question whether there is a 'universal now' regardless. My position is that the question of whether there is a 'universal now' pertains to whether clocks can be syncrhonised 'universally' which means everyone everywhere, in all states of motion, would have to agree they are synchronised.

The question of whether the clocks are really measuring anything aside from their own periodic motion does not seem to play a part. But you are certainly free to mention it here, I would say.

 

[Neddy Bate]

Bx is the axis of simultaneity, so B is measuring the ends 0 and e at the same time!

You mean that B locates both ends at same time according to B, i.e., in the reference frame of B. What I mean is that A would say, in the reference frame of A, that what B actually did was locate one end first, and then the other end afterwards.

 

[BdS]

Leaving the current universal NOW should be required as a proof for claiming time travel. To be classified as true time travel you would need to disappear from the current universal NOW and appear in another past or future universal NOW and maybe run into your twin... Who knows if the past or future even exist for you to travel to them. IMO I doubt the universe works like that, storing every slice of past and future somewhere? where? storing mass for every slice in which space?

Is there a Universal NOW?
There might only be an evolving Universal NOW that physically exists.

 

[Write4U]

Who knows if the past or future even exist for you to travel to them. IMO I doubt the universe works like that, storing every slice of past and future somewhere? where? storing mass for every slice in which space?

David Bohm proved that under certain circumstances the chronology could be reversed and restore a past condition to its initial configuration by a process called laminar flow.

However, the problem with all of that is the fact that even as you would travel back in time, i.e. reverse the flow of physical change, your own NOW would still continue to accumulate chronologically forward and grow older. If not, you'd grow younger as you travelled back in time and that presents a fatal contradiction....

 

[Write4U]

The OP refers to the 'Andromeda Paradox' which is an SR thought experiment. The whole thought experiment shows that there is no universal now in the universe, according to SR. But okay, whatever.

I can agree with that within a dynamic Universe. But I still maintain that in order for the Universal Wholeness to maintain its existence, it must be producing a chronology of NOWs or it would have ceased to exist as a Wholeness.

 

[Beaconator]

The OP refers to the 'Andromeda Paradox' which is an SR thought experiment. The whole thought experiment shows that there is no universal now in the universe, according to SR. But okay, whatever.

The statute ain’t always the principle.

 

[Neddy Bate]

I can agree with that within a dynamic Universe.

If you can agree to it, then I agree also!

 

[Neddy Bate]

The statute ain’t always the principle.

Right. I did not intend for the principle to be misconscrewed* with the statute.

* purposeful misspelling.

 

[Michael 345]

Is there a Universal NOW?
There might only be an evolving Universal NOW that physically exists.

A great way of expressing the current situation

Nothing existing in the past - how could it?

Nothing existing in the future - again how could it?

The speed of light is the limiting factor of our knowledge about the reality of previous slices of NOW

I'm not discounting records about the happenings in the past. Said records though really do need to have been experienced by the person to be accurate for the person

Even events experienced need context to be be accurately assessed by the person as to purpose

I contend we all live not ONLY in a unique singular NOW situation it is impossible for said situation to be in any other format

 

[Write4U]

If you can agree to it, then I agree also!

I never argued against relativity. I merely observed it wasn't applicable to the Thread title.

 

[phyti]

Write4u;

But that is not the question!The question is not if every object in the Universe has its own NOW . The question is if the Universe has its own NOW....The Universe is a single expanding object (world volume) that has a singular existence. Nothing inside the Universe affects the existence of the expanding singularity.

'Now' is the current state of consciousness of an advanced life form, with a memory that enables comparison of the current moment with the previous moment.

Do you think the universe has a consciousness?

 

[phyti]

Neddy;

1.
Let me ask you... Do you feel that distance is something which requires an observer to exist? Like, if no person observed and measured the diameter of the earth, then the earth would not have a diameter? Of course that would be nonsense.
2.It is the same with Special Relativity. For example, the the twin scenario does not require actual twins, or actual people. It would work the same way with only clocks instead of twins. We know that it works as predicted with muons, for example.

1. Measurements are arbitrarily defined and only have meaning to human investigation.
When viewing the moon, we encapsulate it within a circle/sphere. When the surface is examined using a telescope, there is no circle/sphere!
2. You are correct. Tell that to Mike F.
In the 1905 paper, it was only about clocks. The aging aspect was added later (1911) by P. Langevin and A. Einstein.

 

[phyti]

;



Motion is the changing position of an object relative to a reference object.

It's a relationship of two things.

metronome: n,
device to mark time: a device used to indicate a given tempo by means of an aural or visual signal produced electronically or by an adjustable pendulum
synonym: clock
Early 19th century. From Greek metron “measure, meter” + nomos “rule, division.”

Just as spatial intervals are measured in terms of smaller standard spatial intervals,
temporal intervals (amount of activity) are measured in terms of smaller standard event intervals or clock events.
The metronome supplies a beat/cycle for the music student. A clock using a constant periodic process via (water, sand, sun, radiation, etc.) defines the beat/cycle and in addition accumulates the beats/cycles for any recording purposes.
Example: To measure the duration of a lunar eclipse, subtract beginning time from ending time.
Any process used for the purpose of timekeeping, involves em or gravitational interactions, and therefore is altered by motion, based on constant independent velocity of light.

 

[Write4U]

Write4u;
'Now' is the current state of consciousness of an advanced life form, with a memory that enables comparison of the current moment with the previous moment.

I disagree. Relativity requires conscious calculation.
Physics itself doesn't give a hoot about time. Time is not a measurable object. It is an emergent byproduct and result of duration.

Do you think the universe has a consciousness?

Consciousness is irrelevant to existence. All durable objects, conscious or not, have a chronology of NOWS to accommodate their existence and duration. That chronology of physical processes mathematically requires temporal permission and with a duration of any kind, time emerges as a byproduct for each instance of existence.



When something becomes extinct, time is no longer required for its continued chronology of existence. When we look into the past, the object that existed then may no longer exist NOW. What we observe is a NOW in the past, not a present NOW.

This is why science has assigned different names for timelines of various states of chronological existence.

Particles produce a worldline = chronology of 0 dimensional nows.
Strings produce a Worldsheet = chronology of 1 dimensional nows.
Branes produce a Worldvolume = chronology of 2 dimensional nows.

 

[Neddy Bate]

If we can all agree that no conscious life form is required, then what shall we use to measure all of these "nows," rather than observers? I was thinking clocks would do nicely.

 

[Write4U]

If we can all agree that no conscious life form is required, then what shall we use to measure all of these "nows," rather than observers? I was thinking clocks would do nicely.

I believe that is a contradictory statement and question.

If conscious (human) life is not required there is no one to measure all those "nows" and clocks would be superfluous. That doesn't mean all instances of "now" disappear magically. NOW exists as long as the Universe exists.

The Universe did very well without conscious life for a long, long chronology of "nows", without any need for measurement. The term spacetime implies a durable chronological creation of spatial "points", thereby creating an accompanying emergent chronology of temporal "nows". No spatial points, no temporal nows.

 

[Beaconator]

If we can all agree that no conscious life form is required, then what shall we use to measure all of these "nows," rather than observers? I was thinking clocks would do nicely.

So how do you appeal to the measuring of two different times as the radius of light travels at light speed while the diameter measures double and the circumference is in the nines…

Over 900,000 different times in one second. Or one time per second. Now is certainly stuck at now. I don’t get the idea of time travel where it comes to numbers. But I do believe in it when it comes to matter. And one Time creating a surface area more than I can calculate in my inebriated state.

These are the issues me must face. The numbers are there but our tech is lacking from what I can imagine.

ps you are being hypnotized.

 

[Michael 345]

If we can all agree that no conscious life form is required, then what shall we use to measure all of these "nows," rather than observers? I was thinking clocks would do nicely

.
There are no all those NOW's

There is a singular NOW which encompasses the totality of the Universe

If you believe there are multiple NOW's please explain, from any arbitrary reference point are those NOW's

• ahead or
• behind or
• mixed equally - ahead= behinds

Also is there a limit to the numbers of

• how far ahead or
• how far behind or
• mixed equally - far aheads = far behinds

Also is there a set period for any of the aheads or behinds

A singular Universal NOW eliminates all of the above

Random thought just popped into brain - would time dilation be the Universe's method of maintaining a Universal NOW?

Exchange of information between any NOW's, having c as a maximum but can be expressed in arbitrary units of distance per arbitrary units of periods has no effect on the Universal NOW