# The illusive Nature of Time

#### SinisterThinking

##### Junior Member
This is where I digress from the special relativity theory. Einstein essentially says that time is relative. I get that, however by agreeing, there is an unprovable assumption that needs to come with that construct. We must assume that there are varying and arbitrary methods to measure time. There simply isn't any. If there were, it still isn't any good because there's no inherent method available for comparison. Hence the phrase,"coordinated universal time".

To be honest, your postulate on time stopping with motion stopping can only be theoretical. Motion doesn't arbitrarily cease. Otherwise we should ask for our money back from 6th grade when inertia was introduced.

In your football argument with black holes, the ball in fact, would travel at the speed of it's wavelength * monumental speed of the black hole's gravity regardless of where you watch from. Since a human has different measurements than a football, your frame of reference would absolutely change. You can't reduce your analogy of measuring (relative) time as if you were holding coffee in a moving car.

#### dimension-1hacker

##### Active Member
You can't see anything moving into the hole unless you're there moving in with it.

Do you see the earth move through space? We are definitely moving with it.
It's excruciatingly slow but it is certainly measurable.You can also assume visibility when your dealing with wavelength.

What's been seen is gas orbiting a black hole. Any of it that touches the event horizon is still there now, to us.

Here's the problem with that observation. Imagine that you are standing right in front of an oncoming tornado. Let's assume that tornado is 4 light years away. Knowing the nature of a tornado you must assume it's moving. At that moment you measure it's distance, that distance changes by V/T. The change is measurable thus making it observable.

And time only stops for the observer, and the time that stops is not the observer's time.

Either time stops or time does not stop. Time isn't a thing. It's merely a "ratio-oriented" measurement. More importantly, that measurement is a human construct AND requires measurable change to occur.

I'd point out that if the roles were reversed and the observer was falling into the hole (and somehow watching another person not in the gravity well,) then to the falling observer time would stop for that other person. So it works both ways.

There is no way to apply conjecture to a black hole. Scientists are far from having any understanding of the "event horizon".

But, yes, the flow of time depends on observation, just like the rest of reality.

Observations aren't always visible.
Now you are buying into Brian Greene's(I think that's his name) ideas of "sensations". Reality is easily acceptable. It's not rocket science.
time is not just a form of measurement, "space-time", as space cannot move on its own because nothing can cause itself to move. Hence something other then space exists to cause things to move, so I argue time is not only what allows space to move but also the cause. Also, consciousness is different then space because physical objects interacting does not produce consciousness. Therefore there is something else that most humans cannot describe yet, for things to move and consciousness need to be there.

#### SinisterThinking

##### Junior Member
time is not just a form of measurement, "space-time", as space cannot move on its own because nothing can cause itself to move.

The big bang theory assumes expansion of space. Since no opposing force is acting upon it, it continues to expand.

Hence something other then space exists to cause things to move, so I argue time is not only what allows space to move but also the cause.

I hate to ask this but do you have any proof or relevant theory that suggests time is a thing.

Also, consciousness is different then space because physical objects interacting does not produce consciousness. Therefore there is something else that most humans cannot describe yet, for things to move and consciousness need to be there.

I'm so sorry. I do not understand what you are saying.

#### dimension-1hacker

##### Active Member
First, the big bang theory assumes the expansion of space therefore cannot prove that the expansion of space occurs as long as no opposing force is acting upon it; where are the proofs? The big bang theory is one theory that has not been proven to be accurate, space may have been compressed into a ball during one point of time but that was not the beginning. Nothing can be created because when nothing is there to cause something to there, nothing will always be there. may have only occurred within the known universe. How can something physically have no cause to move yet moves, something compressed space into a ball if the big bang occurred so there was something before it. Thought experiment: there are 10 balls on a pool table and none are moving, how will the balls move? Clearly none can cause themselves to move so nothing can ever move, yet some of the balls start to move; why? Nothing physical caused it.

I think time is the fourth dimension. time is the ability for change yet cannot picture the physical structure of the first three dimensions that would allow movement to occur, only the dimensions themselves therefore time is I think the fourth dimension.

The brain neural net, and sciencetists say the exchanging of electrical impulses between neurons produces consciousness yet those interactions
are just things interacting with each other no more no less, nothing else occurred within that interaction therefore understanding was not produced only the interaction itself.

Last edited:

#### SinisterThinking

##### Junior Member
First, the big bang theory assumes the expansion of space therefore cannot prove that the expansion of space occurs as long as no opposing force is acting upon it; where are the proofs? The big bang theory is one theory that has not been proven to be accurate, space may have been compressed into a ball during one point of time but that was not the beginning. Nothing can be created because when nothing is there to cause something to there, nothing will always be there. may have only occurred within the known universe. How can something physically have no cause to move yet moves, something compressed space into a ball if the big bang occurred so there was something before it. Thought experiment: there are 10 balls on a pool table and none are moving, how will the balls move? Clearly none can cause themselves to move so nothing can ever move, yet some of the balls start to move; why? Nothing physical caused it.

I think time is the fourth dimension. time is the ability for change yet cannot picture the physical structure of the first three dimensions that would allow movement to occur, only the dimensions themselves therefore time is I think the fourth dimension.

The brain neural net, and sciencetists say the exchanging of electrical impulses between neurons produces consciousness yet those interactions
are just things interacting with each other no more no less, nothing else occurred within that interaction therefore understanding was not produced only the interaction itself.

1) Far be it from me to argue with Newton.

2) There are a vast amount of scientific assumptions.(Including the Big Bang)

3) You assumed no cause of movement(with the pool balls). That doesn't make it true.

4) Scientists do not say the exchange of impulses produce consciousness. The exchange of impulses (through dendrites) merely pass input to create output. The brain and a hard drive are quite similar. they both accept input, they both store output and the neurons and dendrites act like the CU/ALU of a processor. It's pretty cool really.

#### dimension-1hacker

##### Active Member
1) Far be it from me to argue with Newton.

2) There are a vast amount of scientific assumptions.(Including the Big Bang)

3) You assumed no cause of movement(with the pool balls). That doesn't make it true.

4) Scientists do not say the exchange of impulses produce consciousness. The exchange of impulses (through dendrites) merely pass input to create output. The brain and a hard drive are quite similar. they both accept input, they both store output and the neurons and dendrites act like the CU/ALU of a processor. It's pretty cool really.
1. Newton's first law proves that when no objects with only mass are not moving there is no object with only mass to act on any of the other objects with only mass.
2. pool table experiment: there can be no beginning because nothing can cause itself, and if there is no end to each causes causes each cause, well nothing causes itself do move, and nothing can move unless acted on. So it is not mass acting on mass.
3. two dimensional people see two dimensional things. Three dimensional people see three dimensional things.
4. Unless a property of the object that is not mass causes the object to move, nothing with mass could start to move.
5. scientists based off the data that I know about do not know what consciousness is.
6. Parts of the big bang theory are inherently illogical because there cannot be only nothing before something, nothing cannot cause something to be created therefore nothing can be created only shaped.
7. science is a type of philosophy
8. 1d = 1 line, 2d = 2 lines intersecting, 3d = 3 lines intersecting in the same place, 4d = something that I cannot yet visualize but allows objects to move as first step equals width, second plus height, third, plus depth, fourth plus what? What else is there? movement. what are thoughts, connecting thoughts to physical an idea are understanding what something is and is not at the same time without physically being the thing in of itself, dimensions are simultanious, define the structure of things. Two dimensional people do not see 3 dimensions but know mathematically that 3d are 3 lines intersecting at different angles. Think about everything that you know exists but cannot visualize then assign dimensions to them based off the structure of those things.

Last edited:

#### Harte

##### Senior Member
This is where I digress from the special relativity theory. Einstein essentially says that time is relative. I get that, however by agreeing, there is an unprovable assumption that needs to come with that construct. We must assume that there are varying and arbitrary methods to measure time. There simply isn't any. If there were, it still isn't any good because there's no inherent method available for comparison. Hence the phrase,"coordinated universal time".

To be honest, your postulate on time stopping with motion stopping can only be theoretical. Motion doesn't arbitrarily cease. Otherwise we should ask for our money back from 6th grade when inertia was introduced.

In your football argument with black holes, the ball in fact, would travel at the speed of it's wavelength * monumental speed of the black hole's gravity regardless of where you watch from. Since a human has different measurements than a football, your frame of reference would absolutely change. You can't reduce your analogy of measuring (relative) time as if you were holding coffee in a moving car.
Digress all you want, but you're digressing from reality.
The effect has been measured millions of times. Literally, given that GPS systems have to compensate for the fact that their satellites aren't as deep in the Earth's gravity well as what they are measuring.

It's actually a given, and I gave you the equation to calculate it, so... fantasize onward with your special world view.
The rest of us will stay here in the real world.

Harte

#### dimension-1hacker

##### Active Member
This is where I digress from the special relativity theory. Einstein essentially says that time is relative. I get that, however by agreeing, there is an unprovable assumption that needs to come with that construct. We must assume that there are varying and arbitrary methods to measure time. There simply isn't any. If there were, it still isn't any good because there's no inherent method available for comparison. Hence the phrase,"coordinated universal time".

To be honest, your postulate on time stopping with motion stopping can only be theoretical. Motion doesn't arbitrarily cease. Otherwise we should ask for our money back from 6th grade when inertia was introduced.

In your football argument with black holes, the ball in fact, would travel at the speed of it's wavelength * monumental speed of the black hole's gravity regardless of where you watch from. Since a human has different measurements than a football, your frame of reference would absolutely change. You can't reduce your analogy of measuring (relative) time as if you were holding coffee in a moving car.
There might be physical methods to measure time, but consciousness is the ability to understand concepts; science is the sum of visually perceived information constructed into theories that may or may not be correct. Time though is not an object that may or may not have mass, therefore cannot be measured only by using technology that measures things with only mass. Time is the fourth dimension, or in other words something can only be measured and understood by your mind which has the ability to understand concepts and change what is visually perceived. If you want i can provide more proofs about all of the above. Before you assume those statements are false please disprove them specifically.

#### dimension-1hacker

##### Active Member
Digress all you want, but you're digressing from reality.
The effect has been measured millions of times. Literally, given that GPS systems have to compensate for the fact that their satellites aren't as deep in the Earth's gravity well as what they are measuring.

It's actually a given, and I gave you the equation to calculate it, so... fantasize onward with your special world view.
The rest of us will stay here in the real world.

Harte
visual reality is subjective as one persons internal model of the external world may not be another's, I think about reality as a computer program. The brain is one big hard drive, disprove simulation theory and you may be correct, but don't disprove it yet say that I am not correct means you don't know.