An unanswerable question

[mistywerty]

 

It's quite simple really, but i've never thought of it like that...

 

 

 

Time isn't dependent on change. Change is dependent on time. Since change happens, so does time.

 

 

 

If time didn't exist, you wouldn't age. But you do age, because time is passing.

 

 

 

Uhh, what about before the big bang? There was nothing changing, and nothing to age. Thus, there was no time.

[Zierro]

Uhh, what about before the big bang? There was nothing changing, and nothing to age. Thus, there was no time.

 

 

 

But eventually something did happen, and in order for that to happen a fixed amount of time had to pass. The only change was that things were eventually leading up to the big bang.

[pryomancer]

Time is just a human concept, and yes time has always existed. Humans find it hard to fathom something that is eternal, but time is probably the only thing that is, just by the fact that it's been recognised as time by us.

 

You can't really stop time, because time is still going despite itself being stopped, it's just a big complicated paradox.

[Echofish]

Time isn't made out of lines, it is made of circles. That is why clocks are round.

[Kill_Life]

Isn't time part of a dimension (together with space and whatnot).

 

 

 

If time didn't excist (just like space), we could just 'teleport' everywhere we want.

 

And else we wouldn't grow old :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

Uhh, what about before the big bang? There was nothing changing, and nothing to age. Thus, there was no time.

 

 

 

Isn't that like saying:

 

A tree falls in the wood, there's no one to hear it, so there is no sound?

[mistywerty]

Yes. I suppose it is like that.

 

 

 

You couldn't teleport if time didn't exist because it couldn't of happened.

[mr_dude160]

Isn't time part of a dimension (together with space and whatnot).

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, time and space are the 4th dimension

[assassin_696]

I'm not sure whether or not it exists, but it's exact nature is quite interesting.

 

 

 

For a start the units we use to denote it, seconds, are completely arbitary, as with most things. Secondly nearly every law of physics is completely reversible, i.e. they work in both temporal directions. This naturally begs the question why do we experience an arrow of time? The answer is probably due to the second law of thermodynamics, which in itself isn't time reversible but it's a statistical law that only applies for large numbers of particles. At the quantum mechanical scale two particles have little care for the direction of entropy.

 

 

 

I have a book called The End of Time where it's author argues that time is but an illusion. I haven't read it yet, so I don't know his arguments well enough to present them here, but it sounds very interesting.

 

 

 

And no, time isn't really a dimension in the conventional sense. Einstein's special relativity merely stated that time and space as used in physics are interdependent and linked.

 

 

 

Yup, time and space are the 4th dimension

 

 

 

Not really. See above.

[dragoonson]

If time did not exist,there would be no space-time continuum,so basically something that could teleport would be rendered useless,as it would not require to manipulate the said continuum,as it would not exist.Because currently when a being is able to teleport,or manipulate space,it is known as breaking the space-time continuum,it is assumable he is also manipulating time.Since one cannot manipulate that which does not exist,time does exist.Spacetime continuum

 

 

 

[hide=Me hurting my own brain.]Also,may it be possible to teleport by manipulating time alone (as in without manipulating space)?If one time and moved to the next point would it be considered teleportation?No one else would be able to know.Or if you personally stopped moving with the Earth as it spun,would you move be moving across space when you rejoined?Par example,if I was standing on the Statue of Liberty and just stopped moving as the earth rotated,and 12 hours later I decided to rejoin the movement,would I be at the other side of the world?

 

 

 

And finally,would it be "time manipulation" to cross the timezones as every hour passed,setting your clocks back an hour?[/hide]

 

 

 

Time is the fourth dimension,if I remeber correctly.

 

 

 

My brain really,really hurts at quarter to five -.-

[baalboy5]

Time was created because there is nite and day, in a way, it's a imaginble creation and not a realistic one.

 

 

 

Like a imaginery friend, except it everyone knows it

[mistywerty]

Time was created because there is nite and day, in a way, it's a imaginble creation and not a realistic one.

 

 

 

Like a imaginery friend, except it everyone knows it

 

 

 

 

 

Zierro already dismissed my 'Time is like god' argument. See page 3.

[assassin_696]

If time did not exist,there would be no space-time continuum,so basically something that could teleport would be rendered useless,as it would not require to manipulate the said continuum,as it would not exist.Because currently when a being is able to teleport,or manipulate space,it is known as breaking the space-time continuum,it is assumable he is also manipulating time.Since one cannot manipulate that which does not exist,time does exist.Spacetime continuum

 

 

 

It's not as simple as that. We could quite easily "perceive" the existence of time, work it into our laws of physics to explain our perceptions and then declare that it exists without ever proving anything. In fact that's pretty much what we've done. We perceive time and change in our day to day lives, and the laws of physics reflect this to some extent, but that doesn't mean that it exists.

[PumpkinPete112]

If you have a cat in a soundproof box for 2 weeks, is it alive or dead?

 

According to Quantum Physics its BOTH, until the like (.9x10-9999999) Second before you open it, then an outcome is reached and therefore is alive or dead.

[Lenticular_J]

Ahh, Schrödinger's cat. Quantum physics are indeed some crazy [cabbage].

[Orpheus]

Time is relative, to events that occur around you, and dictate everything, past, present, and future. Time creates chaos, which co-exists with order. Order is how time is chronological, and how everything flows smoothly. Time is why we know if and when anything occurred. However, order cannot exist without chaos to balance it, and without chaos to affect time, order would be rendered nonexistent, and would cause a time paradox, destroying time within itself. By this concept, we have no choice but to believe that Time, is omnipotent, and cannot be denied it's existence.

 

 

 

Time travel is harder to explain. Allow me to visually explain...

[Wongtong]

Time could be an illusion. But I dunno, doesn't mean that question's unanswerable. I think the thing is that you can't be certain about the correct answer.

[Mylez]

Time could be an illusion. But I dunno, doesn't mean that question's unanswerable. I think the thing is that you can't be certain about the correct answer.

 

 

 

If you're looking at life, and the things that surround it in a philosophical way, nothing is certain. Nothing is determined. Time would just be another idea created by man. But it isn't, we're certain it exists and there is evidence to suggest so, the question is answerable, he's not asking why the human race exists and what the purpose of life is, he's merely asking if time exists. And since the idea of time, suggested by people is apparent. It does, and the fact that things happen in order, counteracts anything, which suggests otherwise. :shame:

[doomy]

Well, if you think time doesn't exist or is an illusion, wouldn't everything happen at once, which would be impossible because even at once the time is still a tiny amount of time, so nothing would have ever happened and therefore nothing would exist?

 

So its prettymuch asking if we or anything exist?

 

 

 

Anyway- We all get older whether you think times there or not.

[oegly41]

Is time relative or constant? That is the question.

 

 

 

It is said that time is relative to gravity.Things move faster when there is little gravity, and slower when there is much gravity. This means that if you spend ten years (relative to Tellus time) in a place with infinite gravity, and then come back you wouldn't have aged at all, because there were no time there to age you. They have tested this with atomic clocks at the bottom and on the top of Empire State Building, and found out that time goes a little faster on the top, when you define time as atomic activity. So according to this theory, time is relative and does therefore not exist.

[Mylez]

Is time relative or constant? That is the question.

 

 

 

It is said that time is relative to gravity.Things move faster when there is little gravity, and slower when there is much gravity. This means that if you spend ten years (relative to Tellus time) in a place with infinite gravity, and then come back you wouldn't have aged at all, because there were no time there to age you. They have tested this with atomic clocks at the bottom and on the top of Empire State Building, and found out that time goes a little faster on the top, when you define time as atomic activity. So according to this theory, time is relative and does therefore not exist.

 

 

 

That test is true, although we're talking nano-seconds. The same can be said for high speeds. It's been tested on aeroplanes and such.

 

But something relative can also be considered a constant, providing the variables do not change, am I right? :)

 

~Edit, also... even if time is relative, it still exists and there is nothing to prove otherwise. So either way this thread, and his theory have been out-argued ;)

[oegly41]

 

That test is true, although we're talking nano-seconds. The same can be said for high speeds. It's been tested on aeroplanes and such.

 

But something relative can also be considered a constant, providing the variables do not change, am I right? :)

 

~Edit, also... even if time is relative, it still exists and there is nothing to prove otherwise. So either way this thread, and his theory have been out-argued ;)

 

This just goes back to the definition of existence. Is time something controlling the chain of events, or is the chain itself?

[Mylez]

 

That test is true, although we're talking nano-seconds. The same can be said for high speeds. It's been tested on aeroplanes and such.

 

But something relative can also be considered a constant, providing the variables do not change, am I right? :)

 

~Edit, also... even if time is relative, it still exists and there is nothing to prove otherwise. So either way this thread, and his theory have been out-argued ;)

 

This just goes back to the definition of existence. Is time something controlling the chain of events, or is the chain itself?

 

 

 

Well now you're talking about pre-determined fate. The chain of events happens because decisions are made which determine the outcome. This isn't related to time, only in the way that the events follow parallel to time.

[Zonorhc]

Time is a constant, but our measurement of it is subjective.

 

 

 

What's so hard about that?

[Mylez]

Time is a constant, but our measurement of it is subjective.

 

 

 

What's so hard about that?

 

 

 

^ What I say trying to say, although my wording is somewhat fragmented compared to yours :

[assassin_696]

Time is a constant, but our measurement of it is subjective.

 

 

 

Time isn't a constant. There is no universal time.

 

 

 

The possibility that time may not exist is known among physicists as the problem of time. It may be the biggest, but it is far from the only temporal conundrum. Vying for second place is this strange fact: The laws of physics dont explain why time always points to the future. All the lawswhether Newtons, Einsteins, or the quirky quantum ruleswould work equally well if time ran backward. As far as we can tell, though, time is a one-way process; it never reverses, even though no laws restrict it.

 

 

 

The question is far more complicated and subtle than many of you seem to assume.