Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Time

Time

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
comtoolsquestion
20 Posts 5 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    ColinDavies
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    If Time was actually going backwards in our area of the Universe could we actually detect that it was? Remember, "The first think thats pops into your head doesn't need to come out your mouth" Regardz Colin J Davies

    Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

    More about me :-)

    L C J J 4 Replies Last reply
    0
    • C ColinDavies

      If Time was actually going backwards in our area of the Universe could we actually detect that it was? Remember, "The first think thats pops into your head doesn't need to come out your mouth" Regardz Colin J Davies

      Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

      More about me :-)

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      If time is going backwards and this movement of time preserves the state of the entire universe as it was when the time was then, IMO we won't be able to detect it since we won't be aware that its going backwards. But if time goes backwards only in our area of universe, maybe we could detect it by comparing motions of bodies in our area with those of the other parts of the universe. If time was going backwards in our area of the universe and our part (chunk) of time goes forward as usual, we could easily detect the backward movement of time by shaking hands with our ancestors wasting no backward moving time hurrying to get up from their graves. Please don't ask me to explain any of the above since I'm myself:confused: . :-D

      C 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • C ColinDavies

        If Time was actually going backwards in our area of the Universe could we actually detect that it was? Remember, "The first think thats pops into your head doesn't need to come out your mouth" Regardz Colin J Davies

        Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

        More about me :-)

        C Offline
        C Offline
        Chris Maunder
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        How do you define the direction we travel in time? Do we decide we are going forward if entropy is increasing and backwards if it's decreasing? If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. cheers, Chris Maunder

        C 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          If time is going backwards and this movement of time preserves the state of the entire universe as it was when the time was then, IMO we won't be able to detect it since we won't be aware that its going backwards. But if time goes backwards only in our area of universe, maybe we could detect it by comparing motions of bodies in our area with those of the other parts of the universe. If time was going backwards in our area of the universe and our part (chunk) of time goes forward as usual, we could easily detect the backward movement of time by shaking hands with our ancestors wasting no backward moving time hurrying to get up from their graves. Please don't ask me to explain any of the above since I'm myself:confused: . :-D

          C Offline
          C Offline
          ColinDavies
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Stick Figure wrote: Please don't ask me to explain any of the above since I'm myself I believe I undestand what you are saying, however whilst I agree with the first paragraph, I do not agree with the second. If time was going backwards in our part of the universe and forwards in anonther part of the universe, we might fallaciously decide that we were going forward and they were going forward also at a greater speed. Or if we looked at the part of the Universe going forward in an symmetrical manner we might even concur they were going backwards in time. In reference to your second paragraph if Time was going backwards would we not be ancestors not be shaking hands with us rather than we with them. As our past is our future we would be unaware of the future which is our past. Where I see this as unsolvable is that we don't know where is a clear reference point. And what if the Universe was rotating and time was constant, would this explain all the dark matter stuff. Regardz Colin J Davies

          Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

          More about me :-)

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • C Chris Maunder

            How do you define the direction we travel in time? Do we decide we are going forward if entropy is increasing and backwards if it's decreasing? If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. cheers, Chris Maunder

            C Offline
            C Offline
            ColinDavies
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Chris Maunder wrote: How do you define the direction we travel in time? Gosh that is one good question !! If we were going backwards in time what would it matter we'd be thinking we were indeed going forwards. Yes, I wonder if to balance the Big Bang stuff one part of the universe went forward and the other backward, that is assuming that time is only using one dimension. Chris Maunder wrote: Do we decide we are going forward if entropy is increasing and backwards if it's decreasing? The current thought is that way isn't it. Chris Maunder wrote: If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. Is it ? I remember being on a train once when I was a kid and the train seemed to take off. But we wern't moving ! It was the train on the adjacent track that was moving, and giving me the impression. How do we not no our senses are not decieving us like that ? Regardz Colin J Davies

            Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

            More about me :-)

            C 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • C ColinDavies

              Chris Maunder wrote: How do you define the direction we travel in time? Gosh that is one good question !! If we were going backwards in time what would it matter we'd be thinking we were indeed going forwards. Yes, I wonder if to balance the Big Bang stuff one part of the universe went forward and the other backward, that is assuming that time is only using one dimension. Chris Maunder wrote: Do we decide we are going forward if entropy is increasing and backwards if it's decreasing? The current thought is that way isn't it. Chris Maunder wrote: If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. Is it ? I remember being on a train once when I was a kid and the train seemed to take off. But we wern't moving ! It was the train on the adjacent track that was moving, and giving me the impression. How do we not no our senses are not decieving us like that ? Regardz Colin J Davies

              Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

              More about me :-)

              C Offline
              C Offline
              Chris Maunder
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              ****Colin Davies wrote: Chris Maunder wrote: If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. Is it ? I remember being on a train once when I was a kid and the train seemed to take off. But we wern't moving ! It was the train on the adjacent track that was moving, and giving me the impression. How do we not no our senses are not decieving us like that ? Determining if you are moving by checking your velocity against another non-fixed object will only tell you what your velocity is relative to that object. Entropy doesn't rely on a frame of reference. cheers, Chris Maunder

              C 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • C Chris Maunder

                ****Colin Davies wrote: Chris Maunder wrote: If so then it would be obvious which direction we were travelling. Is it ? I remember being on a train once when I was a kid and the train seemed to take off. But we wern't moving ! It was the train on the adjacent track that was moving, and giving me the impression. How do we not no our senses are not decieving us like that ? Determining if you are moving by checking your velocity against another non-fixed object will only tell you what your velocity is relative to that object. Entropy doesn't rely on a frame of reference. cheers, Chris Maunder

                C Offline
                C Offline
                ColinDavies
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Gosh, Heaven forbid the thermodinamic police come knocking on my door for breaking a law. Chris Maunder wrote: Entropy doesn't rely on a frame of reference. Ouch, this is getting more complex, But isn't as our Universe expanding the entropy getting less as is the nature of the Inflation theory and the expansion follows the time axis ? Regardz Colin J Davies

                Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                More about me :-)

                C 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • C ColinDavies

                  Gosh, Heaven forbid the thermodinamic police come knocking on my door for breaking a law. Chris Maunder wrote: Entropy doesn't rely on a frame of reference. Ouch, this is getting more complex, But isn't as our Universe expanding the entropy getting less as is the nature of the Inflation theory and the expansion follows the time axis ? Regardz Colin J Davies

                  Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                  More about me :-)

                  C Offline
                  C Offline
                  Chris Maunder
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Entropy is a measure of disorder. It's always increasing. Just take a look at my office. cheers, Chris Maunder

                  C 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C Chris Maunder

                    Entropy is a measure of disorder. It's always increasing. Just take a look at my office. cheers, Chris Maunder

                    C Offline
                    C Offline
                    ColinDavies
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Chris Maunder wrote: Entropy is a measure of disorder. It's always increasing. Just take a look at my office. LOL Regardz Colin J Davies

                    Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                    More about me :-)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • C ColinDavies

                      If Time was actually going backwards in our area of the Universe could we actually detect that it was? Remember, "The first think thats pops into your head doesn't need to come out your mouth" Regardz Colin J Davies

                      Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                      More about me :-)

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      Jamie Hale
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Regardless, I'm just a series of time-slices on the processor of life. J "I am wise enough to therefore not spout my ill informed opinion as if it were remotely related to fact." - Christian Graus

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • C ColinDavies

                        If Time was actually going backwards in our area of the Universe could we actually detect that it was? Remember, "The first think thats pops into your head doesn't need to come out your mouth" Regardz Colin J Davies

                        Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                        More about me :-)

                        J Offline
                        J Offline
                        Jeremy Falcon
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Time does not exist outside of the relative movements based on perceived constraints. Because of this, forward or backward cannot really exist outside of our own awareness of the idea based on - once again - perception and constraints. This is like asking which way is up - there is none. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                        Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                        C C 2 Replies Last reply
                        0
                        • J Jeremy Falcon

                          Time does not exist outside of the relative movements based on perceived constraints. Because of this, forward or backward cannot really exist outside of our own awareness of the idea based on - once again - perception and constraints. This is like asking which way is up - there is none. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                          Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                          C Offline
                          C Offline
                          ColinDavies
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          That makes perfect sense to me. :-) Regardz Colin J Davies

                          Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                          More about me :-)

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • J Jeremy Falcon

                            Time does not exist outside of the relative movements based on perceived constraints. Because of this, forward or backward cannot really exist outside of our own awareness of the idea based on - once again - perception and constraints. This is like asking which way is up - there is none. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                            Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                            C Offline
                            C Offline
                            Chris Maunder
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            I disagree. There are some actions that will occur in one direction in time but not the other. Consider an object falling. Going forward in time the object will go down, going backwards in time it will go up. I stick to the premise that the second law of thermodynamics determines the direction of time. cheers, Chris Maunder

                            J 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • C Chris Maunder

                              I disagree. There are some actions that will occur in one direction in time but not the other. Consider an object falling. Going forward in time the object will go down, going backwards in time it will go up. I stick to the premise that the second law of thermodynamics determines the direction of time. cheers, Chris Maunder

                              J Offline
                              J Offline
                              Jeremy Falcon
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              But Chris, this still depends on relativity. The falling object is relative to the point of origin, to say the least. Our perceived time exists, but time itself doesn't. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                              Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                              C 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • J Jeremy Falcon

                                But Chris, this still depends on relativity. The falling object is relative to the point of origin, to say the least. Our perceived time exists, but time itself doesn't. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                C Offline
                                C Offline
                                Chris Maunder
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                OK - ambiguous analogy. How about fire? When something burns it's clear that fuel is consumed and entropy (disorder - in this case orderly arrangements of chemicals turning into a chaotic swirl of plasma and gas) increases. When you watch something burn either forwards or backwards in time it's quite clear which way you are going. cheers, Chris Maunder

                                J 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • C Chris Maunder

                                  OK - ambiguous analogy. How about fire? When something burns it's clear that fuel is consumed and entropy (disorder - in this case orderly arrangements of chemicals turning into a chaotic swirl of plasma and gas) increases. When you watch something burn either forwards or backwards in time it's quite clear which way you are going. cheers, Chris Maunder

                                  J Offline
                                  J Offline
                                  Jeremy Falcon
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  You're right, but that's not what I'm saying. Well, that's not what I'm trying to say. :-O I guess my wording skills leave a lot to be desired. Lemme elaborate a bit more... The perception of our idea of fire being present means there is perception present. Perception is based on relativity and constraints. Thus, those two factors are present allowing us to perceive our concept of time and other items associated with it. Remove yourself, the fire, the (relative) distance between you and the (perceived) fire, etc. from the equation. Then there is no way to measure forward or backward, time, or anything thing else for that matter. Time in itself does not exist, but it's our perceived notion of such things that allow our minds to formulate a mental basis of their existence. In short, time, fire, etc. only exists in our minds. Here's an analogy. Try going back 2000 years in the past and convince someone about bacteria’s presence. They'll most likely think you're nuts because to them it doesn't exist. Why, because they can't perceive it. They are constrained by the naked eye. When the microscope was invented our constraints changed. As a result, our perceptions changed. Now bacteria is a part of our perceived reality - just as time and fire are. But, if you remove certain items from the equation in this case even our idea of time can't hold up. It's all in our minds. We define our existence based what we perceive. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                  Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                  C C 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • J Jeremy Falcon

                                    You're right, but that's not what I'm saying. Well, that's not what I'm trying to say. :-O I guess my wording skills leave a lot to be desired. Lemme elaborate a bit more... The perception of our idea of fire being present means there is perception present. Perception is based on relativity and constraints. Thus, those two factors are present allowing us to perceive our concept of time and other items associated with it. Remove yourself, the fire, the (relative) distance between you and the (perceived) fire, etc. from the equation. Then there is no way to measure forward or backward, time, or anything thing else for that matter. Time in itself does not exist, but it's our perceived notion of such things that allow our minds to formulate a mental basis of their existence. In short, time, fire, etc. only exists in our minds. Here's an analogy. Try going back 2000 years in the past and convince someone about bacteria’s presence. They'll most likely think you're nuts because to them it doesn't exist. Why, because they can't perceive it. They are constrained by the naked eye. When the microscope was invented our constraints changed. As a result, our perceptions changed. Now bacteria is a part of our perceived reality - just as time and fire are. But, if you remove certain items from the equation in this case even our idea of time can't hold up. It's all in our minds. We define our existence based what we perceive. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                    Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                    C Offline
                                    C Offline
                                    ColinDavies
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    Jeremy Falcon wrote: We define our existence based what we perceive. Is that like. I think, therefore I am ?? Regardz Colin J Davies

                                    Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                                    More about me :-)

                                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • J Jeremy Falcon

                                      You're right, but that's not what I'm saying. Well, that's not what I'm trying to say. :-O I guess my wording skills leave a lot to be desired. Lemme elaborate a bit more... The perception of our idea of fire being present means there is perception present. Perception is based on relativity and constraints. Thus, those two factors are present allowing us to perceive our concept of time and other items associated with it. Remove yourself, the fire, the (relative) distance between you and the (perceived) fire, etc. from the equation. Then there is no way to measure forward or backward, time, or anything thing else for that matter. Time in itself does not exist, but it's our perceived notion of such things that allow our minds to formulate a mental basis of their existence. In short, time, fire, etc. only exists in our minds. Here's an analogy. Try going back 2000 years in the past and convince someone about bacteria’s presence. They'll most likely think you're nuts because to them it doesn't exist. Why, because they can't perceive it. They are constrained by the naked eye. When the microscope was invented our constraints changed. As a result, our perceptions changed. Now bacteria is a part of our perceived reality - just as time and fire are. But, if you remove certain items from the equation in this case even our idea of time can't hold up. It's all in our minds. We define our existence based what we perceive. Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                      Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                      C Offline
                                      C Offline
                                      Chris Maunder
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      What you're proprosing is a philosophy similar to George Berkeley where he says "to be is to be perceived" ie nothing exists unless (until) it's percieved by us. Nothing actually exists in the material world. I disagree strongly with this (this, to me, is akin to a 3 year old pulling the covers over their head and stating that if they can't see the bogeyman, the bogeyman can't see them). I argue that physical processes go on regardless of perception, and that time and space are coupled inseparably. The rate you move in time is dependant on the rate you move in space, and in some situations (eg the interior of the event horizon of a black hole) these roles are reversed. You say that there is no way to measure the time if we take away the ability to measure something relative to us. The same goes for velocity. We can't measure our speed if we don't have something to measure it against (in fact velocity is a pointless quantity without a reference value). Does that make the measurement of velocity a moot (or imaginary) point? The equations of motion in physics are reversible, so that processes can work backwards and forwards equally well. However the probability that things will work both ways is infinitisimely small. Chemicals can ignite and burn in one direction of time, and there is definitely the chance that a bunch of chemicals may spontaneously congregate to form a plasma and from there join to form the smooth, cool head of a match. The chances are so small that it's safe to use events like this to determine the direction we travel in time. cheers, Chris Maunder

                                      J 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • C Chris Maunder

                                        What you're proprosing is a philosophy similar to George Berkeley where he says "to be is to be perceived" ie nothing exists unless (until) it's percieved by us. Nothing actually exists in the material world. I disagree strongly with this (this, to me, is akin to a 3 year old pulling the covers over their head and stating that if they can't see the bogeyman, the bogeyman can't see them). I argue that physical processes go on regardless of perception, and that time and space are coupled inseparably. The rate you move in time is dependant on the rate you move in space, and in some situations (eg the interior of the event horizon of a black hole) these roles are reversed. You say that there is no way to measure the time if we take away the ability to measure something relative to us. The same goes for velocity. We can't measure our speed if we don't have something to measure it against (in fact velocity is a pointless quantity without a reference value). Does that make the measurement of velocity a moot (or imaginary) point? The equations of motion in physics are reversible, so that processes can work backwards and forwards equally well. However the probability that things will work both ways is infinitisimely small. Chemicals can ignite and burn in one direction of time, and there is definitely the chance that a bunch of chemicals may spontaneously congregate to form a plasma and from there join to form the smooth, cool head of a match. The chances are so small that it's safe to use events like this to determine the direction we travel in time. cheers, Chris Maunder

                                        J Offline
                                        J Offline
                                        Jeremy Falcon
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #19

                                        Chris Maunder wrote: I argue that physical processes go on regardless of perception, It's our perception that makes them physical processes in the first place. We define, classify, and label them whatever because we are able to perceive them. It doesn't necessarily mean the arrangement of whatever wasn't there, but more so that our thoughts and ideas of it weren't. Therefore, things as we see it wasn't there. Therefore, things as we know it wasn't there. Our concept of time could easily be interpreted as toilet paper in another galaxy. And, as any good alien knows, toilet paper most certainly does exist, but how they see it is defined by my aforementioned posts. The whole forwards and backwards notion doesn't change, just our thoughts on it wrap to what we know as our reality. Image being deaf, paralyzed, and mute your entire life and trying to explain what sex (presuming you know of its existence) is like without someone else being able to convey that to you. You'd conceive your own ideas about it, and it becomes your own reality regarding sex. And, sex would be different for you. It would be different for another man. So, then you’d have to go on to things about what sex really is in the first place, etc. I believe that objects are what they are, but it's our minds that make them what we want to see from what is there. Don't you just love stimulating conversation? It sure beats the heck out of, "does my hair look okay?" ;) Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                        Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • C ColinDavies

                                          Jeremy Falcon wrote: We define our existence based what we perceive. Is that like. I think, therefore I am ?? Regardz Colin J Davies

                                          Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin

                                          More about me :-)

                                          J Offline
                                          J Offline
                                          Jeremy Falcon
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #20

                                          ****Colin Davies wrote: I think, therefore I am Yup. And, that reminds me of a joke... A lady was taking a trip via airplane and her seat was right next that of René Descartes, but her ticket called for the window seat where he was already sitting. She asked him if he would move and he replied, "I think not." *Poof* -- he disappeared. :) Jeremy L. Falcon Homepage : Sonork = 100.16311
                                          Perseverance pushes past painful promenades - providing precious peace. Surely some striving souls survive symptomatic stress? Maybe my mangling might misguide malicious miscreants?

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups