Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Time - My theory

  1. #1

    Time - My theory

    ---Please forgive any spelling mistakes--------

    Everything revolves around time...speed...life...
    But time is man made it was invented with the first clock and is the basis of all science.
    Could it be possible that time is holding us back.

    If you think about it in the sense of travelling through time:
    Einstein states that E=MC2 C=speed of light.
    The speed of light = (Distance travelled by a proton) / (the time taken to travel that distance)
    Because this great equation involves TIME, which is, man made...human defined...is it possible that it is flaud.

    This is pure theory with no evidence, but because time is man-made, does this mean that it also has our restrictions. By this I am referring to our ability to understand how the universe works.

    read more on this theory here:
    http://forum.dragonfire-id.com/viewtopic.php?t=24

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    4,985
    well, time isn't "man made", but the methods of keeping track of it are.
    time existed long before the first clocks were built. just that we found a way to quantify it, a name to give it, and units to measure it by.
    i suppose light didn't exist until we invented the flashlight?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    4,985
    how many places did you post his?

  4. #4

    ;-)

    wasn't sure where to put it
    since this theory covers many subjects, i just wanted it read and get people's opinions

  5. #5
    the origional units to measure time was the position of the sun. Einstine gave birth to his equasions because he was looking at two clocks at a distance apart and noticed a difference (from E=MC2 documentry on c4)
    the point in this is that humans think that because clocks are universal our sun, the same must be true throughout the universe.

    if you say travelled to some distant galixy their way for measuring time would be different and their equasions would be different. without going there yourself, could you say for curtain that their perception of time would be the same?

  6. #6

    Time my theory...

    i know i have postes all over the place but:

    Everything revolves around time...speed...life...
    But time is man made it was invented with the first clock and is the basis of all science.
    Could it be possible that time is holding us back.

    If you think about it in the sense of travelling through time:
    Einstein states that E=MC2 C=speed of light.
    The speed of light = (Distance travelled by a proton) / (the time taken to travel that distance)
    Because this great equation involves TIME, which is, man made...human defined...is it possible that it is flaud.

    This is pure theory with no evidence, but because time is man-made, does this mean that it also has our restrictions. By this I am referring to our ability to understand how the universe works.

    This of course means that everything - every equation based on time is man mad, and has these restrictions. That is why we are unable to travel through time and space at these speeds because of our limited abilities, we will never be able to understand how the universe truly works.

    Last part I promise
    If you thing of a dragon fly...
    Its life span is 24 hours...what is time to it. Now think, if we lived for 24 hours and still had our level of intellect, what would be time to you? All the equations ever invented around time would be different and would probably still hold the same amount of truth. Now think of the universe what is time to it. If we could only see a fraction 'time' in it's true form, then maybe the light barrier may not seem so implausible.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    13,440
    Moved, from Astronomy to ATM

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    13,440
    Welcome to BAUT, anubis_1987.

    Please take the time to read the BAUT rules.

    It seems that, in your short time here already, you have broken at least three of them (hijacking other threads to promote your own, ATM, idea; multiple posts/threads; posting ATM ideas outside the ATM section).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    4,985
    wow..
    now that i think about it, all we really need to do to solve our problems is to build different clocks.
    clocks that go faster to make trips to other stars (or across the country in the car with your family) shorter, and clocks that go slower to make us immortal..
    it all makes sense...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by anubis_1987
    the origional units to measure time was the position of the sun. Einstine gave birth to his equasions because he was looking at two clocks at a distance apart and noticed a difference (from E=MC2 documentry on c4)
    the point in this is that humans think that because clocks are universal our sun, the same must be true throughout the universe.

    if you say travelled to some distant galixy their way for measuring time would be different and their equasions would be different. without going there yourself, could you say for curtain that their perception of time would be the same?
    Youre talking about different units of time. Doesnt mean that time came into existance when we did. Two similar events (like supernova explosions) would take almost the same time to occur in two different galaxies, but they wouldn't take the exact same time, due to differences in the environment. Obviously, it would be highly not possible to find two exactly similar stars going supernova in exactly the same conditions.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by anubis_1987
    i know i have postes all over the place but:

    Everything revolves around time...speed...life...
    But time is man made it was invented with the first clock and is the basis of all science.
    Could it be possible that time is holding us back.

    If you think about it in the sense of travelling through time:
    Einstein states that E=MC2 C=speed of light.
    The speed of light = (Distance travelled by a proton) / (the time taken to travel that distance)
    Because this great equation involves TIME, which is, man made...human defined...is it possible that it is flaud.

    This is pure theory with no evidence, but because time is man-made, does this mean that it also has our restrictions. By this I am referring to our ability to understand how the universe works.

    This of course means that everything - every equation based on time is man mad, and has these restrictions. That is why we are unable to travel through time and space at these speeds because of our limited abilities, we will never be able to understand how the universe truly works.

    Last part I promise
    If you thing of a dragon fly...
    Its life span is 24 hours...what is time to it. Now think, if we lived for 24 hours and still had our level of intellect, what would be time to you? All the equations ever invented around time would be different and would probably still hold the same amount of truth. Now think of the universe what is time to it. If we could only see a fraction 'time' in it's true form, then maybe the light barrier may not seem so implausible.
    That would really suck to live only for 24 hours, but it still doesnt change anything. An object free falling (on earth) from a height of say 100m would take exactly the same amount of time for a person living for 24 hours and for a person living for 100 years.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    439
    It is hard to understand the meaning of the sentence "time is made by man".
    Some philosophers are solipsists. As far as I know their opinion is something like this:"All that exists does so only in my mind"(of course they may object).
    Anywhay of course all our words, and the way we use it, including "time", are man made, like all instruments of measurement. So You could as well say mass is man-made, distance is man made (meters or inches?) The classification of living species are highly artificial ("invented" in part by the swede Lin&#233.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    288
    Could it be dinosaur-made?
    Why are you so anthropocentric? (is this a right word?)

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,225
    There is something about time though that begs an answer to a question we don't even know. Could I be more cryptic?
    I do think there's something fishy about how we treat time in equations. We can't help it, but something's fishy I say!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    99
    Well, time existed before there were clocks, and space existed before there were rulers, but there is something fundamentally different about time, as compared to space. Our perception of time is that it moves only in one direction, at least on the macro level. Sub-atomic particles can in theory act the same going backwards as forwards in time, but not huge masses of particles. That's kind of fishy, isn't it? We can go to and fro in space but not in time. Why not?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    135

    About time

    Remorseless time!
    Fierce spirit of the glass and scythe -- what power
    Can stay him in his silent course, or melt
    His iron heart with pity!

    George D. Prentice
    -----------------

    nubis 1987 in #1 wrote:
    But time is man made it was invented with the first clock
    novaderrik in #2 wrote:
    Time existed long before the first clocks were built.
    TravisM in #14 wrote:
    I do think there's something fishy about how we treat time in equations. We can't help it, but something's fishy I say!
    Joe87 in #15 wrote:
    Well, time existed before there were clocks,Ösnip
    Letís see if I can clarify our understanding of time. If we observe the position of the sun at sunrise, noon, and sunset, in addition to remembering those observations we also remember the order in which they were made. Associated with the content of each long term or short term memory is its sequential position in a string of memories. Our recognition of memory sequences is the source of our notions of the past, present, and future; that is the basis of our concept of time.

    Keep in mind, however, that we are not the only animals that can have memories and recall of memory sequences. Animals that hunt, for example, often base their present actions on the anticipated future action of their prey. To distinguish between present and future actions requires some understanding of time. So, nubis 1987, if time was invented, it was invented before there were humans.

    In a few sentences I will use the term Ďabstractioní, so letís be clear about what I mean by that term. An abstraction expresses a quality or characteristic apart from any specific object or instance. For example, there are red apples, red sunsets, and red light. Red is an abstraction. Red does not have existence independent of the things it characterizes. There is no such thing as red itself.

    Time is an abstraction we make from the motion of things. We cannot conceive of time without conceiving of things that move, such as the rhythmic beating of our hearts, the motion of the sun across the sky, the swinging of a pendulum, the oscillations of a quartz crystal, and the alternating electromagnetic field of a photon. We do not sense time; we sense things and observe and remember their changes. Therefore, time without things can have no meaning for us. Just as there is no such thing as red itself, there is no such thing as time itself. So, novaderrik, and Joe87, since there are no such things as red itself and time itself, it seems meaningless to speak of their existence.

    TravisM, lets examine your fishiness idea. Since mathematics and its equations are themselves abstract, they are well suited to make abstractions of abstractions without introducing any fishiness. However, mathematical models or equations that would require or presume time to exist independent of things would indeed seem fishy.

    Joe87 in #15 also wrote:
    We can go to and fro in space but not in time. Why not?
    The idea of going to and fro in time presumes that the time traveler would be spared the effects of the travel, that he could even go to times before and after his own existence. I guess he would don a cloak that shields him from time, or make a Dorian Grey deal with Mephistopheles.

    The notion of time running backwards implies that all motions would be reversed and that all history would retrace its steps backward. Itís not possible, I tell you! There are too many things that prohibit the reversal of time. Water canít change its direction thorough a check valve. Electrons cannot change their direction through a diode or transistor.

    The earth would have to change its direction of rotation in order to make sundials tell time backwards. If it changed its direction instantaneously there wouldnít be a human-built structure left standing and there would be horrific flooding. Instead of people getting younger they would be killed; that wouldnít be a backward replay of history. And if it changed direction slowly, there would be terrible destruction as equatorial oceans moved towards the poles during the reversal. That, too, would not be a backward replay of history.

    As I said, itís not possible. Itís as funny as a man jumping up upside down from a swimming pool and landing feet first on a diving board. Just because weíve seen films run backward or wished we could take back some words weíve said doesnít make time running backwards possible, let alone a good idea. Although Lemaitre thought of the expanding universe played backward like a film, he wasnít suggesting that time could really reverse. The idea of the reversal of time, of going back in time, is fantasy.

    The past no longer exists. The future does not yet exist. Iím sorry Joe87, we are forever stuck in the present, observing the past, and anticipating the future.

    P.S. If I could go back to April first, I would have told you how changing the power grid from plus 60 cycles per second to minus 60 cycles per second would make electric clocks run backwards and bring all other actions in sync, and unquestionably plunge the world into eternal darknessÖÖheh, heh, heh. You dare think I joke? Light would leave our eyes and fly back to their former sources. A very dark outlook indeed. Beware! Donít fool with negative frequencies.
    Last edited by Richard J. Hanak; 2006-Apr-10 at 01:00 AM.

  17. #17
    Richard J. Hanak would you allow me to include your post on my web page
    and...

    theoretically, if i was to go back in time and say kill my mum before i was born, how could i have changed the past to prevent my birth...but...if i didn't change the past then i would have travelled back in time and so on and so forth.
    If some one actually achieved this, would there be a way out of it?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    135

    About time

    anubis 1987, If my name will appear as the author of the post I allow you to include my post on your web page.

    anubis 1987 in #17 wrote:
    theoretically, if i was to go back in time and say kill my mum before i was born, how could i have changed the past to prevent my birth...but...if i didn't change the past then i would have travelled back in time and so on and so forth.
    If some one actually achieved this, would there be a way out of it?
    Actually achieved? I wrote in post # 16:
    The idea of the reversal of time, of going back in time, is fantasy.
    The reason it can only be fantasy is that it inexorably leads to self-contradictions. Self-contradictions are meaningless, cannot exist, and cannot be actually achieved. We cannot eat our cake and have it too. Fantasies are fun, but letís not confuse them with actuality.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    763
    Glad to see someone who have similar theory about time as I do.
    Time do not exsist, it is just expression of energy (e=mc^2 does not have t component)
    More energy you have, the faster you are. mostly none of fundamental laws contain time component.
    another way to express time is m/m0 m-current mass of particle, m0- referense mass of same particle. if you supply more energy to particle it will have more mass, so time will become slower.

    here is thought experiment to prove this:
    you take atomic clock and put it into flywheel, then you supply it with lots of energy, to make its mass double. You will notice that clock became 2 times slower. This means that now you will need 2 times more energy to acellerate some particle to the same speed inside clock, than outside. since clock basicaly stays in same place all time, time flow should be same inside and outside, since it is not so time looses its meaning.

    So time more or less is coeficient to compare energies. it can be replaced with distance and speed of light t=l/c. since speed of light is absolute constant and time is not, why not replace time with speed of light?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,031

    Time and General Relativity

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard J. Hanak
    Letís see if I can clarify our understanding of time...
    That was the most beautiful explanation of time that I have ever read because it is logical, in its approach, to the understanding of time. Thank you.

    That leads me to question the absolute correctness of the application of general relativity to the case of blackholes because from what I have read time stops at the Schwarzschild radius and time moves backwards within the radius. If time moved backwards then the object that fell into the blackhole*** would reverse course and fall out of the blackhole and so the object would forever oscillate back and forth between crossing and re-crossing the Schwarzschild radius. I have read creative explanations of how this is all possible but, really, either our explanation of relativity needs to be corrected or the formula needs to be corrected.


    *** - actually to be correct: as soon as the object hit the Schwarzschild radius its velocity would cease because velocity is time dependent and since time is not moving then neither can the object and so mass would accumulate at the Schwarzschild radius and back-up the whole works.
    Last edited by Squashed; 2006-Apr-15 at 08:54 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Time - My theory
    By anubis_1987 in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2006-Apr-02, 10:27 PM
  2. Time - My theory
    By anubis_1987 in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2006-Apr-02, 10:20 PM
  3. The Serial Theory of Time
    By mob206082 in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2004-Aug-06, 05:12 AM
  4. The Theory of Time Travel
    By darkvenusian in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 1970-Jan-01, 12:00 AM
  5. The Serial Theory of Time
    By mob206082 in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 1970-Jan-01, 12:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •