It's a figment of our imaginations
Fundies say the darndest things! - Comments
To quote:
FSTDT (Fundies Say The Darndest Things) is a site where you can rate how "fundamentalist" a person's quote is (i.e., how much of a radical right-wing statement it is). But this quote brought something to mind that I often muse about.
I think time is illusory. I realize there are proofs that the faster you move, the slower time moves (they did this with 2 clocks at different elevations or something like that). Einstein even stated that time and space are one thing with four dimensions: "space-time". But why is it we can move freely in three dimensions but cannot do the same (without a whole lot of esoteric happenings) in the fourth: time?
Let's take an example. Quantum physics has concluded that light is made out of a "quanta" (both a wave and a particle) known as a photon. Now, the question is, can a particle have zero mass? It must have SOME mass if a black hole can attract it, which has been proven. The law of gravity states that 2 objects with mass will exert some attraction between each other. Therefore, light has mass.
But how can anything with mass move at the speed of ... well ... light? If, as Einstein (or some other physicist) suggests, anything moving AT the speed of light would encounter an environment of no temporal progression (time stands still), how can light move anywhere? If t always equals '0', how can anything move? This is the theory about what happens when something reaches the "event horizon" on a black hole. Time stands still and the object is stuck there at the event horizon.
Actually, that last bit might be wrong. I recall now that the "event horizon" is where light can no longer escape the black hole. Or it may be both.
Anyway, I do recall the theory that time stands still as v = c (velocity reaches the speed of light). But that would mean, as I said before, that the photon would not be able to progress...as I see it anyway. And that would mean there'd be no light, as light is at a standstill. At the speed of light.
It may just be that I can't get my mind past this point to understand how anything can move when time is standing still. The theory is that the faster you go, the slower time goes (see my clock experiment reference above); and therefore time stops at the speed of light. I just can't figure that one out.
So, consider these 2 points:
1. You cannot freely move in this fourth dimension--time--like you can in the other three that comprise 'space.'
2. You seemingly reach a paradox regarding the motion of photons (how can anything move when time stands still, yet light still moves!!!).
I therefore postulate that time is a creation of the mind, to help us chronicle events. Even our measurement of time is arbitrary: we invent minutes and days to help us track time. What if humans had evolved on Venus, instead? Our measurement of time within a solar year would be a lot different than we would have created (and did create) on Earth.
With that having been said, what DID happen before the Big Bang? How can time be tied into space, if time is an illusion? Time could not have started at the Big Bang. It's an awful lot like the Zen-like train of thought, "if a tree crashes in the woods, and nobody's there, does it still make a sound?" (Schroedinger's Cat also applies here--if the event is unobserved, what will the outcome of the event be?) That having been said, could there have been time if nobody was around to observe it? What was the rate of time back at the creation of the universe? With all the new particles moving at or near the speed of light mere picoseconds after the Big Bang, how fast was time moving? Or has "time" always had a constant rate, because it doesn't really exist?
What existed before the Big Bang? Older universes that fizzled out (as we expect our current universe to do)? How many? And why, oh, why did the Big Bang happen, and why did it happen when it did? What caused it? A random roll of the dice?? A purely statistical anomaly? How can anything "happen" if there's no time? How can this event be chronicled if time was also created at the event? There was no time beforehand, so how can an event be marked to have happened if there's no way to mark it?
This is why I believe time is truly relative (and subjective), and that God exists.
To quote:
"Evolution covers a finite time interval
It is comical that people who choose "evolution" as a philosophy which explains our ultimate origins are also claiming to be logical and intelligent.
Because right at the outset, it is OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WITH A FUNCTIONING BRAIN, that since evolution only even tries to address a finite time interval, IT IS NOT EVEN A DIMENSIONALLY CORRECT THEORY TO APPLY TO EXPLAIN OUR ULTIMATE ORIGINS AND THE ORIGINS OF THE UNIVERSED.
ie - What happened before the "big bang"?
What percent of the infinity of time is accounted for by the finite time interval of the theory of evolution?
Answer: ZERO PERCENT.
Since God created the dimensions of time and space and all matter from nothing, it is logical that He is also responsible for all life, whether or not any suppositions of the theory of ecolution are consistent with His creative process. "
quackie9999, Yahoo!News message board for article headlined "Scientist finds 100 million-year-old bee"
FSTDT (Fundies Say The Darndest Things) is a site where you can rate how "fundamentalist" a person's quote is (i.e., how much of a radical right-wing statement it is). But this quote brought something to mind that I often muse about.
I think time is illusory. I realize there are proofs that the faster you move, the slower time moves (they did this with 2 clocks at different elevations or something like that). Einstein even stated that time and space are one thing with four dimensions: "space-time". But why is it we can move freely in three dimensions but cannot do the same (without a whole lot of esoteric happenings) in the fourth: time?
Let's take an example. Quantum physics has concluded that light is made out of a "quanta" (both a wave and a particle) known as a photon. Now, the question is, can a particle have zero mass? It must have SOME mass if a black hole can attract it, which has been proven. The law of gravity states that 2 objects with mass will exert some attraction between each other. Therefore, light has mass.
But how can anything with mass move at the speed of ... well ... light? If, as Einstein (or some other physicist) suggests, anything moving AT the speed of light would encounter an environment of no temporal progression (time stands still), how can light move anywhere? If t always equals '0', how can anything move? This is the theory about what happens when something reaches the "event horizon" on a black hole. Time stands still and the object is stuck there at the event horizon.
Actually, that last bit might be wrong. I recall now that the "event horizon" is where light can no longer escape the black hole. Or it may be both.
Anyway, I do recall the theory that time stands still as v = c (velocity reaches the speed of light). But that would mean, as I said before, that the photon would not be able to progress...as I see it anyway. And that would mean there'd be no light, as light is at a standstill. At the speed of light.
It may just be that I can't get my mind past this point to understand how anything can move when time is standing still. The theory is that the faster you go, the slower time goes (see my clock experiment reference above); and therefore time stops at the speed of light. I just can't figure that one out.
So, consider these 2 points:
1. You cannot freely move in this fourth dimension--time--like you can in the other three that comprise 'space.'
2. You seemingly reach a paradox regarding the motion of photons (how can anything move when time stands still, yet light still moves!!!).
I therefore postulate that time is a creation of the mind, to help us chronicle events. Even our measurement of time is arbitrary: we invent minutes and days to help us track time. What if humans had evolved on Venus, instead? Our measurement of time within a solar year would be a lot different than we would have created (and did create) on Earth.
With that having been said, what DID happen before the Big Bang? How can time be tied into space, if time is an illusion? Time could not have started at the Big Bang. It's an awful lot like the Zen-like train of thought, "if a tree crashes in the woods, and nobody's there, does it still make a sound?" (Schroedinger's Cat also applies here--if the event is unobserved, what will the outcome of the event be?) That having been said, could there have been time if nobody was around to observe it? What was the rate of time back at the creation of the universe? With all the new particles moving at or near the speed of light mere picoseconds after the Big Bang, how fast was time moving? Or has "time" always had a constant rate, because it doesn't really exist?
What existed before the Big Bang? Older universes that fizzled out (as we expect our current universe to do)? How many? And why, oh, why did the Big Bang happen, and why did it happen when it did? What caused it? A random roll of the dice?? A purely statistical anomaly? How can anything "happen" if there's no time? How can this event be chronicled if time was also created at the event? There was no time beforehand, so how can an event be marked to have happened if there's no way to mark it?
This is why I believe time is truly relative (and subjective), and that God exists.
posted by xanadian at 11:39 AM
0 comments
