beyond time?

[Amorphos]

this is probably a very silly set of questions chaps - almost definitely, so please just go with any ideas you have - it is not a challenge thread, just a few crazy ideas i would like to put to bed:

beyond time?

only the now moment exists, we may see light from galaxies far away in time and space, yet the photons we are observing exist in the present. if we were to somehow go to the location of their origin i.e. to the galaxy as it was when the light was omitted, there would be nothing? this in my mind is because you would need all the energy that galaxy had for it to still be there as we would still be in our present time location [our now moment].

another thing that comes to mind is that; going faster than light could possibly actually take us outside of time? if there is a way to go ‘out of time’ then one could potentially pop back into time at any location, effectively giving us the power to travel to any now moment.

an even crazier idea would; can we actually stop dead and arrive out of time. my reasoning - if you will] is that the now moment is in motion right across the universe, and everything is riding that wave, thus there is a ‘speed of time’, to which by going slower than, we could escape the bubble so to say. but how does one stop?

[Quacky]

If we went to a distant star instantly it may or may not be there as the light we see shows what it looked like at a certain time depending on how far away it is. Its possible that the star is still there particulary if it is quite close to us, this applies to everything really, you are seeing the light from your monitor slightly after it was emitted so it might not still be there just its so close to you the time delay is ridiculously small and so it most likely is still there.

As you approach the speed of light time slows and should stop as when you reach it so you couldnt actually escape it since it would stop so you wouldnt be able to do anything until you slowed down. Faster than light is impossible but possibly time of course you would have to far above the speed of light to get back years in a reasonable time, whatever time means in this impossible situation.

[Amorphos]

quacky,

you are seeing the light from your monitor slightly after it was emitted so it might not still be there just its so close to you the time delay is ridiculously small and so it most likely is still there.
good point!

the paradox is thus; the same universe exist in two locations in both time and space, whilst being composed of the same energy, yet energy is conserved. you would have to replicate energy at every moment - imagining that there is such a distinct entity as a ‘moment’ or distinct part of time - throughout time?
secondly the universe would leave a trail of historical moments, which you could potentially visit, thus the history of the universe would exist! further it would be a part of the universe proper - or as the universe is in the present moment?

double paradox eh! lol

[Simetrical]

only the now moment exists, we may see light from galaxies far away in time and space, yet the photons we are observing exist in the present. if we were to somehow go to the location of their origin i.e. to the galaxy as it was when the light was omitted, there would be nothing?

It's not yet clear if time travel is possible. A lot of physicists doubt it due to the inelegance of all proposed solutions to time-travel paradoxes. In the absence of time travel, your question has no answer.

another thing that comes to mind is that; going faster than light could possibly actually take us outside of time? if there is a way to go ‘out of time’ then one could potentially pop back into time at any location, effectively giving us the power to travel to any now moment.

More or less, although of course that's believed impossible.

an even crazier idea would; can we actually stop dead and arrive out of time. my reasoning - if you will] is that the now moment is in motion right across the universe, and everything is riding that wave, thus there is a ‘speed of time’, to which by going slower than, we could escape the bubble so to say. but how does one stop?

Speed is the rate of change of position with respect to time, and therefore time itself cannot have a speed. The idea of time "moving forward" is too figurative to allow any logical possibility of moving forward slower than time does. Your path through space-time can't be changed in such a way as to be legitimately describable as you envision it. Of course, perception of time can be drastically changed through various means.

[Thanatos]

Time is a fundamental aspect of this universe, the fourth dimension from which we can never escape.

The most we can do is stop it, but even that requires that we are made of pure energy.

[Amorphos]

sim
thanks for reply

In the absence of time travel, your question has no answer.

sure, but what about the extra energy needed for a historical universe? it just seams very illogical. it only makes sense in my mind if energy only exists in the present. i cannot believe that all-time exists - it just creates too many paradoxes.

Speed is the rate of change of position with respect to time.

thanks for clearing that one up!

thanatos

The most we can do is stop it, but even that requires that we are made of pure energy.

may i ask; what is pure energy?

[Bootsiuv]

I would think pure energy would be the existence of no mass whatsoever, and if I'm not mistaken, even light has a "mass", although it's not the same mass as matter....but a photon is something. Don't quote me on that though.

[Thanatos]

We know that matter and energy are two forms of the same thing, thanks to Einstein's theory of relativity. However, we don't know what that "thing" is. Light is pure energy, and has no matter.

[Bootsiuv]

Oh, well, then, ya learn something new everyday.

[Chaigidel]

well without time the other dimensions cannot have form, nor can any energy change nor be exchanged, so to move outside of time would mean to cease to exist, to try to reach the past you would come upon an unmovable wall so to speak, no entry allowed since after time "passes over" a particular place the history is then an absolute certainty what has transpired cannot be changed.

I suppose you could find a way to maybe go into the future, from the past, but probably only in bit form, a couple of bits of info at a time, and you would end up in random places all over space-time

so to speak there is no place to go outside of space-time centrally because you are a being made up of the causality of this particular universe and its laws which all seem to add up to perceivable space-time.-- your are inseperable from actual time, mainly because we exist only as a result of the space time that has occured, so on an atomic level you could say that we are attached to time, and without this attachment we simply do not exist in any form.


ah wait to put it super simple being within time in your proper place is kinda like standing on a positive and a negative pole, and the battery is all of space-time, and if you step out of your proper time, the current that keeps you in existence would also be broken, so like a lightbulb you would simply go out.

[chris_uk_83]

only the now moment exists, we may see light from galaxies far away in time and space, yet the photons we are observing exist in the present. if we were to somehow go to the location of their origin i.e. to the galaxy as it was when the light was omitted, there would be nothing? this in my mind is because you would need all the energy that galaxy had for it to still be there as we would still be in our present time location [our now moment].

What? Why would the fact that we can observe photons that originated many years ago mean that there would be more than one galaxy and that it would take up all of the galaxy's energy to create multiple copies of it and that the galaxy wouldn't really exist?

Time to explain a bit about how we "see into the past".

First we have to discuss how we see in the first place, in an entirely physics way, we're not letting the metaphysical "who does the seeing?" question crop up this time because it just doesn't matter. We see things because photons enter our eyes. Depending on what emitted those photons or what they've been reflected off (both the same thing to all intents and purposes) they will contain different information. For example, if you have a red light bulb, the photons will be red photons; if they've been reflected from a stapler on your desk then that set of photons will contain all the information about an image of a stapler. These photons enter your eyes and are decoded to produce the image of the stapler in your brain. Clearly the encoding/decoding process is a little complex and depends on wavelengths and phases of photons, but don't let's worry about that for the time being because it doesn't make a difference to our analogy.

Now photons don't change the information encoded in them unless they encounter something else. So if a set of photons is emitted from a galaxy a hundred light years away it will retain the information that was encoded in it a hundred years ago when it enters our eyes (actually telescopes hooked up to computers) allowing us to "see" what happened 100 years ago in this galaxy.

If we move closer to said galaxy, say 50 light years, then we'll be able to see photons that originated 50 years ago, thus "seeing" 50 years into that galaxy's past. This continues all the way until we arrive at the galaxy, then we see its present.

If you don't like the idea that information is transmitted by photons in the form of energy try this analogy: every hour the people who live in a galaxy collect all the information about the present time in their home, box it up in a capsule and shoot it in our direction. It will take time to reach us, say 1000 years. We'll have no way of knowing what's happened between the time the capsule was sent and it arriving on Earth, since the information we have dates back 1000 years. Photons are basically the same thing. Just because a galaxy sends off information pods doesn't mean it exists in many places, just that it's sending information to many places, much like a radio station transmits to many radios but the broadcasters stay in one place.

It wouldn't use all its energy because there's no reason to do so and it certainly wouldn't copy itself to different times.

Questions?

[Chaigidel]

so there is one constant moment which pervades the entire universe simulataneously?

[Bootsiuv]

While I'm not 100% certain what you're asking....I know that the universe has a "right now" everywhere....Something is happening 1 light year, 10 light years, 100 light years etc....right now. We just don't see it right now, because the information i.e. light, can't reach us instantly....it can only move as fast as the speed of light, and because space is so incomprehensively vast, even at that incredible speed, we won't see it for a long time.

I equate it to astronauts going to mars and sending a radio message back to earth....they'll send the message, but it won't reach the people on earth for some minutes, perhaps hours (not certain on the exact length of time), so by the time we hear it, it's a very old message, at least by human standards.

I hope I answered your question, even though I really didn't understand the question to begin with.

[Chaigidel]

does time the singular moment occur or not occur at the same moment at all places in all the universe at once--- even though time is relative to each spot, time still occurs everywhere at ONE time--- unchanging throughout the universe there is a SINGLE moment shared by all existence.

even though it is relative to each point it still occurs everywhere at once.

[Bootsiuv]

I would think so....this moment right now is occurring everywhere in the universe. If I'm wrong forgive my ignorance, and if I'm way the hell off....I give up, as I still don't quite understand.

How could this moment occur at different times in different places? Time, as far as I know, is constant throughout the universe. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable about the subject of time will be able to answer you more clearly. I'm off to play Rome....that doesn't make my brain hurt.

[felicissimus]

The answer is as always from phylosophy .
First we must ask what is time ?-It marks and measures the present state of things in my oppinion but is not a matter itself .
Imagine all existing things are 2-3 balls locked in a sphere for simplicity and nothing else exists .What is time for them will be time for all other existing things if the principle is the same and we find it .
So the 3 balls move constantly chaoticly and never know what will be next ,where a certain ball will be as they change their speed chaoticly by hit of each other .In this case the time going for them marks their position in the sphere in each single moment .And that is time at all-it simply MARKS THE PRESENT STATE OF THINGS .To differentiate it from another state of things in which the things are already in another state,in new moment .
Therefore you cannot go back in time-because the state of things never reverts back the same as it was because there is no reason for this to happen and the changes in all things are irreversible .You cannot also go ahead in time in the future,because the future state of things as chaotic is highly and completely inpredictable .
Therefore one can say time is a little artificial cathegory and it does not quite exist itself .And this is so because out of measuring,it has no effect on things at all .

[Chaigidel]

without time there is nothing--- time is a necessity of existence--- not an arbitrary term. I would say it most certainly exists, im sure thats why its called the 4th dimension


but I completely agree there is no time travel , not future or past--- in particle form there is probably, but never in this form so to speak.(on this level of existence)

[chris_uk_83]

it is possible for different observers to move through time at different rates due to special relativity. There's a thread on that which I advise anyone to read who is interested.

[Bootsiuv]

Here's a question: Does the movement of planets around stars, and stars around galactic centers, influence the rate of time on that planet?

What I mean to say is....due to the fact that the earth travels around the sun at ~30km a second, and the sun travels around the galactic core at ~225km a second, does that influence the rate of time's progression in our solar system? Would a planet nearer to the galactic core experience a slow down in time, because those planets move faster, with the ones near the core moving extremely fast i.e. many thousands of km a second?

[Chaigidel]

even with time being relative to an observer it is not relative in Condition.