“Just”??? If there’s no time, what do you mean by “just”?
Furthermore, it has not been explained to my satisfaction that if time does not exist, why I have to wait at the check-out counter at WalMart.
I believe that any physical and philosophical discussions about time will have to include the WalMart effect.
Another thing that must be explained is the tardiness of my income tax refund, even though I’m not entitled to one.
As a final note, I refute Scylla’s refutation.
He is insane.
I like him, but he’s insane.
Tell that to the guys in Switzerland who make all those nice cuckoo clocks.
Communist!
Causality can not be shown to work in reverse. Sorry, Scylla, but no matter how many words you try to wrap around the idea that time doesn’t exist, you still cant explain away the fact that every type of observation we can make implies the existence of time.
Neither does “up”, but we are all pretty much convinced that there are three directional dimensions to move in.
You could easily make both observers inhabit the same timeslice by having them take their measurements concurrently – for instance, have one observer stationary on the side of the road, and the other one drive by in a car, and have them both take their measurements when the car is directly beside the stationary observer.
Let’s call the stationary observer A, the moving one B, and have them measure the time of occurrence of two events x and y. Observer A would conclude that his timeslice contains himself, observer B, and both events x and y, while observer B would have his timeslice inhabited by himself, observer A, and event x.
This is essentially a restating of the famous Andromeda paradox.
And by the way, your argumentation doesn’t refute time as a dimension – it merely makes it a discrete dimension; all those three-dimensional timeslices have to be ‘stacked’ somewhere, which implies the universe in toto to be four-dimensional.
I think you’re all overlooking the real question here, which is: Is it alternate timeline, or alternative timeline?
Self-preservation doesn’t require sentience.
I’m not. Space is just space. We parse it into three discrete planes because 1) right angles have mechanical utility and 2) we like to parse things.
In Classical Mechanics, yes (although only partially “yes”). In Quantum Mechanics, no. There is no such thing as the precise position of a particle. In fact, there really is no such thing as a particle, in the way you are using that term. Electrons aren’t little spheres with charge on them. They are beyond our senses, and we only think of that way because that is what we are used to thinking about.
It is likely that our brains are simply not capable of understanding the entire universe, and I suspect that time is one of those things about the universe that we are unable to comprehend. That is not to say we shouldn’t keep trying. Just don’t be surprised if somethings are never understood. Perhaps the best we can hope to do is to develop ever improved models to work from, but keep in mind that a model is not the thing that it is modeling.
Scylla, you confuse the issue when you write in the past tense:
That should be: "Yes, I do. I say, ‘There is no time.’
Grammar Nazis live eternally in the present.
OK, now that we’ve resolved that, can we address the following question:
What is hip?
You’ve just described life from the view point of a character on a movie film reel. Each seperate frame is it’s own time/universe. Each borders on but doesn’t interact with it’s neighbors. Each is static, trapped within it’s own frame. Time and motion don’t exist there.
Yet if you step back and view it from a distance, they all become one, adding the dimension of time (leading to motion).
You haven’t argued against time, you’ve argued for it, with the requirement that it be seen from outside.
What about an entity which lives in a five dimensional universe and exists in four physical dimensions? We know what the first three are and presumably it could move in them as well. Why wouldn’t that fourth dimension be, in a real be what we call time? An actual space in which it can freely move forwards and backwards through as we move around in any of our three dimensions?
With the fifth dimension being what constitutes time to that entity, without which, it couldn’t move at all.
Time is the unifying element of a set of more than one plank slice.
But is it possible to get one plank slice on rye? With mayo?
Was this meant to be posted in MPTIMS? yes or no, it should be there anyway.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Palin.
Just came to agree with **Mosier **and Half Man Half Wit.
No. Not at all. Quantum physics demonstrates that time is not infinitely divisible. There is no period of time smaller than planck time. Planck time is no time. Nothing happens. There is no movement. It is just a frozen instant. So, Zeno’s paradox applies. An arrow in flight is at one position in one planck instant, and is magically transported to another in the next. No time. No motion.
Sure, time and motion are implied based on observation in newtionian einsteinian sense, but again, many thought the Sun circled the earth at one time. The observations don’t hold up to current data.
It’s certainly possible that time does not exist. There are reputable physicists who would agree with that. I’m not sure if that’s the same as saying “there is no time”, though, as time may be the manifestation of something else-- something more fundamental.
At any time there is a quantum event where things could go one way or another, time splits and both occur in distinct universes. So, with this paradox you are trying to show things happening in same universes when they are actually happening in multiple universes.
And no, time is refuted as a dimension. What you have is simply distinct separate universes each consisting of planck units (frozen time). Stacking them, or keeping them in proximity doesn’t create time.