Can time exist without matter?

[MrZ]

Hello faradave,
it truly was unclear, sorry for that. I believe that in reality there can be no motion without interaction. ("unless acted upon by a net force")
In reality space,can not be empty. not talking philosophically but about our space, here in our universe. empty space is a "sea" of something(not going to discuss it here) containing other things as well.
"lightlike" forces do not magically force, there is a reason for everything. energy is a convenient word, different things in same basket.
But there are interactions. You can think "what if we take those interactions away", but they can't be taken away.
Also it doesn't mean that with fewer interactions there is "slower" time. Some interactions actually slow relative "time", slow decay and so on. There are so many mechanisms we have yet to discover.


As you can see i keep making unclear assertions.. I apologize but can't really explain. My understanding is somewhat ..weird. :)

[Faradave]

Hello MrZ,

I didn't mean to seem abrupt. In the science forums, it is usual to take as a starting point that time is one of four dimensions. One might then argue the priority or subsequence of particles and their interactions.

Particle interactions would similarly be construed as an exchange of mass-energy, momentum and/or information. Since the maximum propagation rate for these is universal speed limit c, a temporal component is implied.

Welcome to SPCF! Hope you enjoy it here.

[HarryP]

It's hard to make a statement or prediction about something that is outside of our reality. As far as relativity and Einstein go as far as I know space and time are intervowen and therefor one can't exist without the other. But I might be wrong as might Einstein

[Dave_Oblad]

Hi HarryP,

Outside our Reality? Can you explain that? There is nothing outside our Reality that affects us.

Regards,
Dave :^)

[AustinParadisePDX]

As far as my understanding goes, time only exist with motion, and it speeds up the more we are familiar with the thing. Basically, the more experiences to relate it to, the faster time goes. Time is a question, the more you know about it, the quicker you get the answer. Thoughts?

[Dave_Oblad]

Hi AustinParadisePDX,

Welcome to the Forums.

Not sure of what to make of your post. From a Science point of view, it makes no sense. Maybe from a philosophical point of view.. perhaps? Time seems to go faster the older one gets.. spoken from experience only.

Nine months of school felt like an eternity when I was 15. Today, at 66, one year feels like three months. Is that what you are trying to express?

Regards,
Dave :^)

[AustinParadisePDX]

I actually started this thread. Hahahah!!

The more you try something, the more proficient you become, and the faster the time it takes to do the task.

Example: When you first go to a new destination, it seems like an eternity, but, after doing it more times, becomes shorter in time.

Make sense now?

[Dave_Oblad]

Hi again,

So you are equating Time to the experience of it, rather than ticks of a clock. For me, the passing of time is relative to the entertainment or boredom values experienced. It's totally subjective in such cases.

Best regards,
Dave :^)

[vivian maxine]

Hi again,

So you are equating Time to the experience of it, rather than ticks of a clock. For me, the passing of time is relative to the entertainment or boredom values experienced. It's totally subjective in such cases.

Best regards,
Dave :^)

Good point, Dave. Giving me ideas. Can we all just toss the clocks and live by our own time? As long as we do play so much magic with time, why not try it?

[BadgerJelly]

I actually started this thread. Hahahah!!

The more you try something, the more proficient you become, and the faster the time it takes to do the task.

Example: When you first go to a new destination, it seems like an eternity, but, after doing it more times, becomes shorter in time.

Make sense now?

That is more about attention and repetition. Also depending upon events during your trip your perception of time will alter. We basically blot out what is always there in a way. Also hindsight can effect how you believe you perceived time. If something new and unexpected happens it stands out and the immediate surrounding time period stands out too.

sometimes in my life a month seems like a year because of how much I manage to cram in.

[ringer777]

i agree that time (moving forward) cannot exist without matter because that is the nature of the universe we live in. they say the universe is still expanding and expanding faster, not slower. If the universe stopped expanding, time would stand still or become non-existent. you and I wouldn't be able to make our next move, we would either freeze or become non-existent in a way that is hard to wrap your head around. Maybe the universe expands in order to accommodate what just happened, so maybe what happened 2 seconds ago, still exists in the universe somehow like a series of dominoes in a way we cannot phathom. like remember your 10 year old self on christmas day - that may still exist right now but in that part of the universe where it was already expanded into. life is a journey? i don't know.

[Heavy_Water]

Can time exist without matter? If we think deeply time can only exist if there are matter around. Assuming if there is a lone single atom and there is no observer, there will be no motion, change and time. And we should know that actually time is just a concept which don't have any real existence.

Thoughts?

I believe it can.

May I offer a syllogism?

To wit........................

Space is a vacuum. More vacated of molecules and atoms than we can replicate here on Earth in our best, cutting-edge vacuum chambers, as I recall.

Time is a part of the fabric that comprises the Space-Time Continuum.

The vacuum of Space is, of course, a part of the STC

Therefore, Time can and does exist in the absence of Matter.

[RoccoR]

Re: Can time exist without matter?
→ rchrdstvr77, Philip, et al,

This is an impossible question. No matter which side you take [(• Yes time exist) (• No time doesn't exist)] your answer can not mean anything. The laws of physics (and --- for that mater --- every other cornerstone science) do not exist in an empty universe. Time is merely a description.

≜ IF there is nothing to describe, THEN time cannot be a characteristic.
≜ IF there is no matter, THEN there can be no energy (no frequency of radiation or light, no electromagnetic fields, no fundamental frameworks or Architecture like space-time).

We have no idea if the laws of physics are universal. BUT, the laws of physics as we know them, cannot exist (are meaningless) if there is no application (energy on which the laws of physics could be derived).

In a universe "without matter" (which implies no energy), the question of "time" is as meaningful as the question of the "unicorn."

(ANSWER)

Nonsensical: Yes and no, existence and nonexistence are undefined.

Most Respectfully,
R

[mitchellmckain]

Can time exist without matter?

Yes

It did. Time came into existence before matter.

If you want a more difficult question then ask...

Can time exist without energy?

In that case, you going to have a difficulty with defining energy apart from time.

We can, and I do speculate that there is substance of all thing which is like energy and then I would say that you cannot have time without that. I think it is the clear implication of modern physics that there is nothing universal or absolute about time and it is just as much a part of and contingent upon the physical universe as anything else. (In fact, time is simply an ordering of events and there is no reason why there might not be many separate temporal orderings in existence somewhere.) So, I would think this energy-like substance of all being is a pre-requisite for the existence of time. But, energy as we know it in science is just as much a part of the structure of the universe as is time and there is no justification for a precedence in that case.

I suspect this is coming from a kind of phenomenological thinking that time requires some effect as if there can be no time without a means to measure it. I believe this leads to logical inconsistencies, however.

[Alan McDougall]

Time and movement and the flow of entropy are all linked so that one cannot exist without the other.
Another thought is what about absolute zero, could this be added making the universe into a hypothetical huge piece of concrete

Alan

[mitchellmckain]

Time and movement and the flow of entropy are all linked so that one cannot exist without the other.
Another thought is what about absolute zero, could this be added making the universe into a hypothetical huge piece of concrete

Alan

So let's suppose you have two boxes. One has matter inside and the other does not. Can we conclude that time only exists in the box with matter in it? No. This is the inconsistency which I mentioned above. Matter is matter. Motion is motion. And time is time. These are three separate and distinct things and should not be confused with one another. The empty box has no matter or motion within it, but it is not not the case that time does not exist in that box. We can say that nothing every happens in the empty box precisely because time does exist in that box.