Debate What is the very nature of Time?

[JackStagger]

That's very much how I see it. All together they are unified by an immense but basically algebraic joint probability cause and effect trait. That is time, the meter stick and compass of change. Not to be confused with time-like curves in quantum physics, though that's really splitting hairs as I did with my zero net entropy and energy example. Same meter stick, different methods.

I have no firm convictions about more complicated causality problems and alternate timelines, I simply don't know that but I find it interesting.

 

[lightsolitaire]

I haven't the time currently to sufficiently discuss the totality of creation, which time is solely a portion of.

Einstein died being unable to answer the largest question of his life. How to make a simple equation to explain all of creation itself. Partly he was unable to answer his question because he could not accept chaos as a part of the universal equation.

All forces work together yet are unique and individual according to their specific purpose. Time, space, gravity, chaos, order, etc.

When able, I will attempt to explain further. Too much to do for now!

Yes, treversal is correct. Time in fact is in physical motion. Must add though, it is only in motion up to the point where time itself stands still (on the other side of creation as we currently exist below the vault of space. Information found in Hebrew Bible). In saying this, currently time and eternity (where time does not exist) are currently working together as well.

Personally, the most frustrating portion of time currently, is the effect of chaos. From chaos comes order. Unfortunately, chaos has not stabilized as of yet within time. Good grief.

Therefore, we may know the sunrises and sets and physical formation has come into order. However, with times fluid movement and unsettled order, we may unknowingly wake up on a different time line. Hence Mandela Effects and why changes in timelines can be and have been observed.

On a positive note, for those spiritually astute enough, a vast change in time is usually preceded with numerous warnings before it occurs. You simply have to be observant even while it may be uncomfortable.

 

[PaulaJedi]

Time is motion. Pause this video game and time stops.

The game was paused, not time. The world around you is still going round and round.

 

[lightsolitaire]

I did once have an experience where time stood still. Only once. Long, long before I awoke to the nightmare (what others call a game).

It was very early in the morning. I was going to the temple and was deeply concerned knowing I didn't have time for the temple and getting to work on time. I went anyways. Time itself stood still in the temple. I was able to do my work in it and not only arrive to work on time but also was able to unexpectedly help someone on the way to work.

A pretty neat experience.

Have to admit, I really miss the temple and the those very simple days with wonderful, kind friends and my mom.

Now days people are just mean and hateful. Seems like the world has lost a lot of love.

Can someone please rewind? Insert laughing emoji here (the link isn't working).

It is very curious though that someone signs on as "Mr. Door-Chan_16" with the name of Lawrence. And, from the Philippines? Makes me wonder if the nightmare is continuing. God, I hope not.

Who is he? Who sent him, if anyone did? Deal with it like I have grown to? Ignore it? Probably...

 

[deliriousScientist]

My consept of time is that time exist till there is motion no absolute rest. i.e, if the earth spinning and orbital velocity becomes zero for the sake of the argument, and we stop doing any work i mean no action then there will be no time. Time is reaction of any action my concept.
This was the idea which i had when i first read about time.

 

[JackStagger]

Mathematically speaking, absolute change is equal to absolute zero change. That is to say with time everything is equal to nothing. This is in an infinite sense, where change is not in fact change because everything is changing constantly. To not change would be the change in that situation. To not have any changes ever would be equivalent to all changes taking place simultaneously forever. Time is the rate of changes, not the changes themselves, and thus is absolute at each extreme of nothingness and everything. It's of mathematical and philosophical utility to look at it this way because in reality we can no more infinitely stop anything any more than we can make anything infinitely change. Science has failed to observe a single thing to be infinite outside of mathematics, where it works as a sort of gauge theory mechanism like zero.

If we could stop time in a laboratory, it would not be truely still-time. It would only be still-time within our forward moving time, that is to say it's a still-time that has a beginning and an end. True still-time would simply not exist on this plane. It's mathematically poetic but not really empirical, because in real life there is nothing that says we cannot create a still-time state, but absolute still-time is simply incompatible with our dimension and would be of no use to us in any laboratory sense whatsoever.

 

[Treversal]

Mathematically speaking, absolute change is equal to absolute zero change. That is to say with time everything is equal to nothing. This is in an infinite sense, where change is not in fact change because everything is changing constantly. To not change would be the change in that situation. To not have any changes ever would be equivalent to all changes taking place simultaneously forever. Time is the rate of changes, not the changes themselves, and thus is absolute at each extreme of nothingness and everything. It's of mathematical and philosophical utility to look at it this way because in reality we can no more infinitely stop anything any more than we can make anything infinitely change. Science has failed to observe a single thing to be infinite outside of mathematics, where it works as a sort of gauge theory mechanism like zero.

If we could stop time in a laboratory, it would not be truely still-time. It would only be still-time within our forward moving time, that is to say it's a still-time that has a beginning and an end. True still-time would simply not exist on this plane. It's mathematically poetic but not really empirical, because in real life there is nothing that says we cannot create a still-time state, but absolute still-time is simply incompatible with our dimension and would be of no use to us in any laboratory sense whatsoever.

Years ago I tried to create my own version of a zero time generator. Basically I tried to block out everything and create a zone of nothingness. The ZTG was in a vacuum, had rotating and oscillating magnets, a Casimir core and other parts that I cannot even recall now that used. I remember that I also used a radioactive material that a scientific supplier for some reason sold me just because I said it was for research. I placed other objects in the center, such as a watch, which appeared to be affected by this field and planned on using yeast but never got around to it. Some day I may try again on a grander scale using the latest theories developed in the years since that time. How many people can say that they have tried to make absolutely nothing and failed?

 

[JackStagger]

Interesting, but keep in mind that is not absolute nothingness since it has a beginning and an end. You cannot make something which did not, does not, and will not exist— you'd have to "find" it.

 

[Treversal]

Interesting, but keep in mind that is not absolute nothingness since it has a beginning and an end. You cannot make something which did not, does not, and will not exist— you'd have to "find" it.

The goal was to create (?) a tiny little minuscule zone with nothing in it. No air, to light, no particles, quantum vacuum fluctuations (read fewer), etc.

 

[JackStagger]

Yes, very interesting experiment all the same. I'm working on a similar experiment to create a gravity vacuum based on the mathematics of GTR. I imagine a successful result in either of our experiments would be largely predicated on the same quantum principles, though I do not incorporate radioactive materials myself.