My thoughts on time.

Discussions on the nature of being, existence, reality and knowledge. What is? How do we know?

My thoughts on time.

Postby Infinite_Observer on April 6th, 2018, 6:12 am 

I dont claim to be in anyway correct. Just wanted thoughts and corrections on my idea.

So if we assume the universe started with the big bang, all matter in a single point, and time did not exist until this single point "banged" and expansion began. Would time be the distance of that expansion and only an expression of the transfer of energy from singularity to the edges of the universe?

And then if that is the case, to travel into the future you would only need to move faster than the rate of this expansion?
Infinite_Observer
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2017
Location: Missouri, United States of Merica


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby mitchellmckain on April 6th, 2018, 1:20 pm 

There is no edges of the universe any more than there is an edge of the earth because neither are flat. The Big Bang is not the expansion of a ball of matter out into empty space. It is the expansion of space itself from being completely filled everywhere almost uniformly with a very hot dense state of matter and energy to being filled everywhere with a 2.725 degree Kelvin worth of cosmic background radiation and concentrations of matter condensed into the form of galaxies of various sizes and shapes.

It should be noted that whether the universe is or was ever finite is unknown, because this scenario works either way and it may not be a change in the size of the universe but only its density.


To travel into the future you just have to wait. But if you want to do so faster then I suggest getting the enormous energy required to accelerate to near the speed of light. You can also do this by traveling near very massive bodies like black holes but that I cannot recommend this, since although it is likely to be a great deal cheaper, it is also the far less safer alternative.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1224
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby Braininvat on April 6th, 2018, 2:46 pm 

I hate that tidal force spaghetti-fication!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6483
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
mitchellmckain liked this post


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby mitchellmckain on April 6th, 2018, 4:51 pm 



In the simulations I have ran, it all happens extremely fast. Even trying to get close enough to see the event horizon with your naked eye is pretty much an impossibility. The best you can do is a quick dip into the gravity well and, hoping you survive, slow down a recording of what happened so you can see the thing. And that is not accounting for the gravitational time dilation which only makes this even worse. Oh... and of course using magnification from a distance is the best option of all. I hope they succeed with the attempt they are still working on using radio interferometry.

Hmmm... while the spaghettification depends on the size of the black hole as mentioned in the linked article, I don't think the difficulty of seeing the event horizon does. While the stretching has to do with the gravitational gradient, I believe the dynamics problem scales with the black hole.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1224
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby mitchellmckain on April 6th, 2018, 7:06 pm 

mitchellmckain » April 6th, 2018, 3:51 pm wrote:Hmmm... while the spaghettification depends on the size of the black hole as mentioned in the linked article, I don't think the difficulty of seeing the event horizon does. While the stretching has to do with the gravitational gradient, I believe the dynamics problem scales with the black hole.


Or to put it another way, the stretching problem doesn't scale because we are only increasing the size of the black hole and not your ship.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1224
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby Neri on April 12th, 2018, 5:28 pm 

As I pointed out earlier, time is just an idea that helps us make sense of our experience of things that lie outside of us. As such, it can only have utility if it is coherent in the human mind.

According to the Big Bang Theory, the whole of existence arose out of nothing and nowhere and for no reason at all.

It arose out of nothing, because there was nothing before it from which it could arise.

It arose out of nowhere, because it is said to have arisen out of a spatial point, and such a thing cannot locate itself relative to any other thing when it exists by itself.

It happened for no reason at all, because there was nothing before it to serve as a cause.

Without a pre-existing cause, one is forced to admit that no law of nature was responsible for, nor could possibly explain, why everything rather than nothing is now real.

Indeed, we are told there was no time before the Big Bang and that this event, as it were, “started the clock running.”

Yet, according to general relativity (upon which the Big Bang Theory depends) time, as we understand it, never happened at the Big Bang. In fact, nothing could have happened at all.

Indeed, a geometric entity of three, four or even a hundred dimensions cannot arise, evolve or change without time as commonly understood.

It is said that what “happened” at the Big Bang” was the “beginning” of four-dimensional space, wherein “time” is reduced to an anisotropic space coordinate (McTaggart B-Series).

Accordingly, we cannot really speak of such things as a “beginning” or “end” or “event”. Nor can such a purely spatial entity expand or change in any way.

We are told that, for no reason at all, “space/time” “arose” at the instant of the Big Bang. When we say “instant,” we are talking about a geometric point—something said to exist even though it has a volume of naught.

This “instant” cannot be called “something” on the basis that it has a perfect location; for with nothing else existing, it cannot be located relative to another thing.

Surely, if a thing has no expanse at all, it can only be called “absolutely nothing.” Usually, a singularity is someone’s mathematical error. In this case, it is elevated to the status of the very seed of all of reality.

None of this is coherent according to the processes of human understanding, for it strips the idea of time of all sense and meaning.

More than even this, it tells us that the beginning of the universe happened by employing a mathematics that proscribes happenings of any kind.
Neri
Active Member
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
DragonFly liked this post


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby DragonFly on April 12th, 2018, 7:07 pm 

Yet the Universe was able to come forth, and we observe a zero-sum balance.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby Neri on April 13th, 2018, 9:45 am 

DF,

What you say seems true, but only of the known universe. What we know of may not be the sum of all physical reality [“physical” perhaps being redundant].

In other words, what we call the “universe” may be only one of a great number of such things that are beyond our ability to observe. Each may be in different stages of expansion or contraction with causal powers over the known universe according to laws of nature unknown to us or even beyond our understanding.

Of course, this is only speculation, yet it would eliminate the incoherence of an uncaused singularity and thus would be abductively superior to viewing the known universe as the whole of reality.
Neri
Active Member
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby dandelion on April 13th, 2018, 10:24 am 

Infinite_Observer » April 6th, 2018, 11:12 am wrote:I dont claim to be in anyway correct. Just wanted thoughts and corrections on my idea.

So if we assume the universe started with the big bang,...

Just thought to mention this thread, stuck in the religion area-
http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=27871
For example this, https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... ig-bounce/
dandelion
Member
 
Posts: 353
Joined: 02 May 2014
hyksosWatson liked this post


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby bangstrom on April 13th, 2018, 2:11 pm 

Neri » April 12th, 2018, 4:28 pm wrote:

Without a pre-existing cause, one is forced to admit that no law of nature was responsible for, nor could possibly explain, why everything rather than nothing is now real.


“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”
- Stephen Hawking

In the zero-energy hypothesis the net energy of the universe is zero. We have energy in the form of matter and what we customarily think of as energy. These two forms of energy constitute what is called “positive energy” and positive energy is balanced by an equal amount of “negative energy.” Negative energy is what we call gravity. Gravity is considered negative energy because it takes energy to remove a massive body from a gravitational field.

A quantum fluctuation arising from the vacuum could produce equal amounts of positive energy (matter and energy) and negative energy (gravity) with no violation to the conservation of energy so it takes zero energy to create a universe. Gravity is considered an energy debit since it is the energy deficit left by the formation of positive matter/energy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 445
Joined: 18 Sep 2014


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby DragonFly on April 13th, 2018, 3:14 pm 

bangstrom » April 13th, 2018, 1:11 pm wrote:
Neri » April 12th, 2018, 4:28 pm wrote:

Without a pre-existing cause, one is forced to admit that no law of nature was responsible for, nor could possibly explain, why everything rather than nothing is now real.


“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”
- Stephen Hawking


So, then, a universe or multiverse can be, due to the eternal capability described.

A kind of sub-time of fluctuation noise ensues until something can persist and cause more events to go on, this making for real time.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2304
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: My thoughts on time.

Postby hyksos on May 22nd, 2018, 4:40 am 

bangstrom » April 13th, 2018, 10:11 pm wrote:
Neri » April 12th, 2018, 4:28 pm wrote:

Without a pre-existing cause, one is forced to admit that no law of nature was responsible for, nor could possibly explain, why everything rather than nothing is now real.


“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.”
- Stephen Hawking

In the zero-energy hypothesis the net energy of the universe is zero. We have energy in the form of matter and what we customarily think of as energy. These two forms of energy constitute what is called “positive energy” and positive energy is balanced by an equal amount of “negative energy.” Negative energy is what we call gravity. Gravity is considered negative energy because it takes energy to remove a massive body from a gravitational field.

A quantum fluctuation arising from the vacuum could produce equal amounts of positive energy (matter and energy) and negative energy (gravity) with no violation to the conservation of energy so it takes zero energy to create a universe. Gravity is considered an energy debit since it is the energy deficit left by the formation of positive matter/energy.


User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1294
Joined: 28 Nov 2014



Return to Metaphysics & Epistemology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests