What Does it Take For Time to Manifest Itself?

[Skwim]

Consider:

a) Everything in the universe is at a complete standstill. There isn't a single movement occurring anywhere; not even at the atomic/subatomic level.* Can time be said to exist?

b) A single, lone atom arises in which its sole electron orbits its nucleus. At one moment it is here and at another moment it is there.* Does this mean time is now necessarily "running"?

c) If the answer to a is NO and if the answer to b is YES, does this mean that time is a function of movement/change of state? Perhaps even solely so?​

* I know this would mean stuff would not exist, but this is a thought problem, so bear with me.

* Yeah, yeah, I know.
.
.

 

[Tumah]

I thought time is a measurement of change, not something that manifests.

 

[dfnj]

Consider:

a) Everything in the universe is at a complete standstill. There isn't a single movement occurring anywhere; not even at the atomic/subatomic level.* Can time be said to exist?

b) A single, lone atom arises in which its sole electron orbits its nucleus. At one moment it is here and at another moment it is there.* Does this mean time is now necessarily "running"?

c) If the answer to a is NO and if the answer to b is YES, does this mean that time is a function of movement/change of state? Perhaps even solely so?​

* I know this would mean stuff would not exist, but this is a thought problem, so bear with me.

* Yeah, yeah, I know.
.
.

"There Is No Such Thing As Time"

Lot's of videos on "Time does NOT exist:"

 

[dfnj]

I thought time is a measurement of change, not something that manifests.

If when to start and when to stop is arbitrary, that is, subjective, then does time exist objectively? I don't think Time really exists. It's more like a strong faith the future will behave like the past. You can't see Time like you see an apple. It doesn't exist unless we use language to say it exists. Time is a lot like the word God. God is change.

 

[Skwim]

If when to start and when to stop is arbitrary, that is, subjective, then does time exist objectively? I don't think Time really exists. It's more like a strong faith the future will behave like the past.

Is that a faith you have, that the future will behave like the past.? Tomorrow will be just like yesterday?

You can't see Time like you see an apple. It doesn't exist unless we use language to say it exists.

So, as long as there's some one person left on earth to say time exists then it exists. Once this person dies time stops existing. That about it?

.

 

[osgart]

How can you have motion without time. Maybe motion is time. Maybe there is a grander clock underlying existence arising from a quantum vaccuum. Maybe everywhere is everywhere all at once.

Perhaps all places exist all at once. Outside of time you exist everywhere and nowhere.

Perhaps time is dependent on matter and energy, generated by it. And the sum total of matter and energy create the arrow of time. Each different entity in the universe has its own clock cycle, and in reality everything is totally relative based on relationships interacting.

Time could have been born out of chaos, each thing its own microtiming.

Maybe a greater concept is needed than time. Omnipresence gets my vote.

Its very spooky that time is so relative and constant where we live in particular.

I mean even in a multiverse does there even have to be a flush full range of possibilities thats a given 100% going to occur. And on a long fine line.

We are moving time in an omnipresence.

I dont think you can escape from the existence of time. It just is.

 

[sayak83]

Consider:

a) Everything in the universe is at a complete standstill. There isn't a single movement occurring anywhere; not even at the atomic/subatomic level.* Can time be said to exist?

b) A single, lone atom arises in which its sole electron orbits its nucleus. At one moment it is here and at another moment it is there.* Does this mean time is now necessarily "running"?

c) If the answer to a is NO and if the answer to b is YES, does this mean that time is a function of movement/change of state? Perhaps even solely so?​

* I know this would mean stuff would not exist, but this is a thought problem, so bear with me.

* Yeah, yeah, I know.
.
.

Yes, time is a measure of change of state.

 

[Skwim]

I thought time is a measurement of change, not something that manifests.

You mean like a foot long hot dog doesn't manifest as a foot long, but is a consequence of its measurement?

Actually, I look at time as a consequence of change. No change, no "flow" of time, and whether or not the moments of change are measured, time would still flow. And, if no sentient being ever populated the universe, changes in inanimate objects could still take place, all of them signaling the passage of time.

.



.

 

[Valjean]

Time and space are equivalent. Move in space and you move in time.
But does either exist without an observer?

 

[Jumi]

A: Observable changes
A: Caesium standard clocks
A: Arbitrary feeling of changes happening requiring an observer

Pick one...

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

Will it ever be possible to return to a previous event,
Or once an event has happened,
Is it forever gone?

The present manifests itself,
So nothing to be concerned about there.
But the past,
Holy smoke I hope it isn’t gone forever.

 

[exchemist]

How can you have motion without time. Maybe motion is time. Maybe there is a grander clock underlying existence arising from a quantum vaccuum. Maybe everywhere is everywhere all at once.

Perhaps all places exist all at once. Outside of time you exist everywhere and nowhere.

Perhaps time is dependent on matter and energy, generated by it. And the sum total of matter and energy create the arrow of time. Each different entity in the universe has its own clock cycle, and in reality everything is totally relative based on relationships interacting.

Time could have been born out of chaos, each thing its own microtiming.

Maybe a greater concept is needed than time. Omnipresence gets my vote.

Its very spooky that time is so relative and constant where we live in particular.

I mean even in a multiverse does there even have to be a flush full range of possibilities thats a given 100% going to occur. And on a long fine line.

We are moving time in an omnipresence.

I dont think you can escape from the existence of time. It just is.

I think Tumah is spot-on in saying time is what we use to measure change.

Motion, it seems to me, is a subset of change processes - though I suppose it's fair to say there is a motion-based explanation of most change in the kinetic theory of matter.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

What are events seperated by? Time or Change

 

[exchemist]

What are events seperated by? Time or Change

An event is a change.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

An event is a change.

What are two changes seperated by? Time or more change
And what’s causing all these changes?

 

[Revoltingest]

About people who say time doesn't exist.
They have too much of it on their hands.

Of course it exists.
Don't believe me?
Look outside at anything moving.
Time = distance / velocity
There you go.

 

[exchemist]

What are two changes seperated by? Time or more change
And what’s causing all these changes?

Space and/or time separates them.

Causes are another issue entirely.

 

[dfnj]

Is that a faith you have, that the future will behave like the past.? Tomorrow will be just like yesterday?
So, as long as there's some one person left on earth to say time exists then it exists. Once this person dies time stops existing. That about it?

People have strong faith that nature will continue to behave according to the laws of physics in the future.

People do not die. We do not own the elements that make up our character. Who we are, that is the elements that make up our character, continue to live on in other people who are still alive. As long as humanity continues to exist none of us really dies. What makes me unique in the Universe will of course never repeat because the exact state of the Universe in time never repeats. But human beings are not really the time they are living in.

 

[dfnj]

How can you have motion without time. Maybe motion is time. Maybe there is a grander clock underlying existence arising from a quantum vaccuum. Maybe everywhere is everywhere all at once.

Perhaps all places exist all at once. Outside of time you exist everywhere and nowhere.

Perhaps time is dependent on matter and energy, generated by it. And the sum total of matter and energy create the arrow of time. Each different entity in the universe has its own clock cycle, and in reality everything is totally relative based on relationships interacting.

Time could have been born out of chaos, each thing its own microtiming.

Maybe a greater concept is needed than time. Omnipresence gets my vote.

Its very spooky that time is so relative and constant where we live in particular.

I mean even in a multiverse does there even have to be a flush full range of possibilities thats a given 100% going to occur. And on a long fine line.

We are moving time in an omnipresence.

I dont think you can escape from the existence of time. It just is.

It's not my argument although I can appreciate it because Babour makes a very good argument. You should watch the video. The piece about two clocks is subtle but I think he makes a very good point.

 

[dfnj]

About people who say time doesn't exist.
They have too much of it on their hands.

Of course it exists.
Don't believe me?
Look outside at anything moving.
Time = distance / velocity
There you go.

If you watched the video, the argument is based on the idea if nothing is moving does that mean time does not exist.

If you want to sound a little more intelligent than just shooting from the hip then watch the video. It's not my argument. I'm not Julian Barbour.