Debate What is the very nature of Time?

[Kairos]

@Kairos but going back to one of your other posts.

if its not discovered and at this time how can you rule out a multiverse?

At some point in the future are you not predicting the future in saying it has to be proven today?

anyway whats your credentials for proving otherwise?

I did not rule it out. I just said I do not personally believe it based on parsimony alone but, if somebody were to actually prove that interpretation, then I would change my mind.

What these so-called "skeptics" do, which is fallacious, is to claim something does not exist because nobody proved it. That's obviously nonsense since anything we recently discovered still existed before we discovered it.

 

[TimeFlipper]

I think you are talking about neutrinos.
There are areas of quantum physics that seem to show that quantium states of subatomic particles are influenced by future events, so there may be some validity to what you remember. But I think what you're remembering is what's called superposition. That's where a particle assumes the quantum state of another particle. There are three kinds of neutrinos, but every neutrino assumes the quantum state of the other two kinds, morphing from one kind into another.

But you can bet that neutrinos aren't interfering or in any way reacting with the protons (and ionized nuclei) in the beams used by Cern. Neutrinos don't interact with anything. WAY too small and practically massless. That's why detectors have to be far underground, to try and eliminate "hits" caused by other particles.

Harte

I take your points Hartey, but if those particles, what ever they might be, are continually flowing through every part of our Earth, it would seem logical that at some moment in time, they too would be flowing across the beams in CERN`s collidor, and even having some form of influence in the past, during the moment the two beans collide with each other....

Those particles could be on some kind of "mission", maybe they were "programmed" by something or someone in the future, to purposely create "events" in the past, so that the future benefits, or doesnt from them....You made it tantalisingly more interesting to me now Hartey...Thanks for the input ..

 

[Harte]

Neutrinos do not interact with other particles. They are practically massless and are orders of magnitude smaller than a proton.
You can't make up physics to try and support an idea.

Harte

 

[TimeFlipper]

Neutrinos do not interact with other particles. They are practically massless and are orders of magnitude smaller than a proton.
You can't make up physics to try and support an idea.

Harte

Particle physics tell me neutrinos were originally difficult to locate, since they interact very weakly with other particles, which strongly suggests to my ignorance on such matters, that there is some form of interaction, however weak it might be....Also, particle physicists used to believe that neutrinos were massless, but since then they have obviously been educated ..

Remembering that the collder at CERN is 575 feet underground, i assume that apart from digging that deep to use the Earths crust as a defence against radiation, and wanting to preserve the aesthetics of the natural landscape (sic)....That depth would prevent the penetration of many particles, but certainly not our wonderful little friend, the Neutrino ..

 

[Harte]

If you ran 100 billion runs of proton beam experiments at CERN, you might get one interaction with an external neutrino involved.

Harte

 

[TimeFlipper]

If you ran 100 billion runs of proton beam experiments at CERN, you might get one interaction with an external neutrino involved.

Harte

Its irrelevant if i ran 1000 billion runs of proton beams, neutrinos do interact with other particles..End Of ..

 

[Mr. Door-Chan_16]

Another Question...
What do you think of the Higgs Boson, and Field?

 

[TimeFlipper]

Another Question...
What do you think of the Higgs Boson, and Field?

I prefer to believe in what Stephen Hawkins said, that the Higgs Boson is potentially extremely dangerous!....As for the Higgs Field, you can find that along with the Higgs Boson, if you go onto your browser and type in, "Stephen Hawkin Fears Higgs Boson Doomsday, And Hes Not Alone" ..

 

[Harte]

Its irrelevant if i ran 1000 billion runs of proton beams, neutrinos do interact with other particles..End Of ..

I'll let you know in 500 billion years.

Harte

 

[kcwildman]

time is a funny concept indeed. we as humans live from point A to B, yet if we do not move no time has passed.
all time, is an amount of distance observed by the traveler . it is the only way we have to explain our life from birth to death.
sadly we only use a set of rules put together by observing a set rate of radioactive decay under the exact and very limited conditions which we live in here on earth, sooooooo
if we change the conditions for said object we change the rate of decay for said object . so when the rate of decay is changed because those conditions no longer apply.
poof !!!!!!! time is no longer connected to distance traveled by said object at a set speed, or the rate of radioactive decay of said object under those specific conditions.
time has no meaning
time is the construct of our peanut brains
yes my ole friend Harte, it is relative only to the observer.
but then again, this is just the babblings of one who swings about in the trees, and wears only a bit of a rag to cover his ass. a wise man once said I know that I do not know