• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Fine, you may take the evidence provided as solid, I have doubts, Same for time, time is not an entity, of course if you use a proxy measurement like atomic clocks, quartz X'tal clocks (which are only timing themselves), of course they are affected by gravity, acceleration, speed, etc.. But that's not time changing, it is the proxy 'time' measurement mechanism.
You've got to laugh at the straw-clutching.

You think it's just a massive coincidence that all our timekeeping devices just happen to be affected in exactly the way predicted (and they were predictions, made before any measurements) by the theory? Not to mention the astronomical observations like the very first prediction that was tested, the perihelion precession of Mercury.

What's more, the GPS satellites are affected by their position in the gravitational field despite being in free-fall and hence not actually experiencing any force of gravity. As for speed, even Galilean relativity tells us that you cannot detect constant speed, and the time dilation effect is symmetrical, If two observers move relative to each other, they will each see that the other's time is running slower. It's easy to see why that would be the case if we treat space-time geometrically, but as an effect of motion, not so much....
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
You've got to laugh at the straw-clutching.

You think it's just a massive coincidence that all our timekeeping devices just happen to be affected in exactly the way predicted (and they were predictions, made before any measurements) by the theory? Not to mention the astronomical observations like the very first prediction that was tested, the perihelion precession of Mercury.

What's more, the GPS satellites are affected by their position in the gravitational field despite being in free-fall and hence not actually experiencing any force of gravity. As for speed, even Galilean relativity tells us that you cannot detect constant speed, and the time dilation effect is symmetrical, If two observers move relative to each other, they will each see that the other's time is running slower. It's easy to see why that would be the case if we treat space-time geometrically, but as an effect of motion, not so much....
What is time? Seriously, time is merely existence continuing to exist. There is no entity, there is no entity to measure, just the sun coming up and going down, etc.. If you think time is an entity, tell us where it resides, what is its energy, how big is it?
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
What is time? Seriously, time is merely existence continuing to exist.
So, I give you evidence that our understanding of space-time is correct and you just ignore it and insist your own blind faith instead. :rolleyes:

There's little point in trying to convince somebody that absolutely knows they're right by faith alone.

If you think time is an entity, tell us where it resides, what is its energy, how big is it?
Space-time is the 'entity' and it's all around you. Nobody knows how big it is, or how much energy it might have (in total, you can calculate it locally).
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
So, I give you evidence that our understanding of space-time is correct and you just ignore it and insist your own blind faith instead. :rolleyes:

There's little point in trying to convince somebody that absolutely knows they're right by faith alone.


Space-time is the 'entity' and it's all around you. Nobody knows how big it is, or how much energy it might have (in total, you can calculate it locally).
Space-time is the continuing existence of 3D space. It is a great human invention to measure/time the passage of existence existing, but since there is no actual entity 'time', you need a proxy, early clocks counted the swings of the pendulum, before that the sun dial, etc..
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
Space-time is the 'entity' and it's all around you. Nobody knows how big it is, or how much energy it might have (in total, you can calculate it locally).
How do you measure the 'time' part of space-time, what instrument do you use, and what exactly is it measuring and how?
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Space-time is the continuing existence of 3D space.
No matter how hard you stamp your little foot about this, the evidence is otherwise.

You cannot explain the evidence of the endless correct predictions of GR with "the continuing existence of 3D space", the universe simply doesn't work like that. That's presumably why you've totally ignored the predicted effects that I mentioned.

The most recent success was the detection of gravity waves in 2015, predicted by Einstein using GR in 1916.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
No matter how hard you stamp your little foot about this, the evidence is otherwise.

You cannot explain the evidence of the endless correct predictions of GR with "the continuing existence of 3D space", the universe simply doesn't work like that. That's presumably why you've totally ignored the predicted effects that I mentioned.

The most recent success was the detection of gravity waves in 2015, predicted by Einstein using GR in 1916.
You are avoiding simple questions, how do you measure the 'time' part of space-time, what instrument do they use, and what exactly is it measuring and how?

Just answer the ones that you can and leave the ones you can't.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
You are avoiding simple questions, how do you measure the 'time' part of space-time, what instrument do they use, and what exactly is it measuring and how?
Silly question and transparent evasion, but just like you measure space against some standard length, you measure time against a standard duration.

You are quite clearly running away from the fact that there are measurable effects that simply cannot be explained by your simplistic "continuing existence of 3D space" or by fictitious effects on time measuring devices, that were predicted exactly and numerically, to the very limit of our ability to measure them, by the theory of space-time.

I just don't get why some people cling so desperately to outdated ideas about the world, despite there being endless evidence that they're wrong. Why?
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
Silly question and transparent evasion, but just like you measure space against some standard length, you measure time against a standard duration.

You are quite clearly running away from the fact that there are measurable effects that simply cannot be explained by your simplistic "continuing existence of 3D space" or by fictitious effects on time measuring devices, that were predicted exactly and numerically, to the very limit of our ability to measure them, by the theory of space-time.

I just don't get why some people cling so desperately to outdated ideas about the world, despite there being endless evidence that they're wrong. Why?
So you use a clock/timer, and a timer is measuring a duration. A duration is a finite period of existence continuing to exist, yes? In this case, the timer is a proxy measurement for the duration.

So time is not an entity, and the clock/timer is a proxy measurement of duration.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Silly question and transparent evasion, but just like you measure space against some standard length, you measure time against a standard duration.
..actually, it's measured in terms of space.
So, when we calculate a velocity we have Distance/Time.

As time is itself is measured in terms of space, velocity is .. what exactly? :D
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
So you use a clock/timer, and a timer is measuring a duration. A duration is a finite period of existence continuing to exist, yes? In this case, the timer is a proxy measurement for the duration.

So time is not an entity, and the clock/timer is a proxy measurement of duration.
You're still ignoring the evidence. Just take time dilation, here is a chart showing the theory and the actual measurements:
Time_Dilation_vs_Orbital_Height.png

"Daily time dilation over circular orbit height split into its components. On this chart, only Gravity Probe A was launched specifically to test general relativity. The other spacecraft on this chart (except for the ISS, whose range of points is marked "theory") carry atomic clocks whose proper operation depend on the validity of general relativity."


When the theory was published that made these predictions, there were no artificial satellites and no atomic clocks.

This is what we call "evidence", and it's very, very far from being all the evidence. The simplistic "continuing existence of 3D space" simply cannot explain this.

You can bury your head in the sand and live in your own little fantasy world if it makes you happy, but for anybody who prefers reality, space-time has been spectacularly confirmed by the evidence.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member

When the theory was published that made these predictions, there were no artificial satellites and no atomic clocks.

This is what we call "evidence", and it's very, very far from being all the evidence. The simplistic "continuing existence of 3D space" simply cannot explain this.
Yes, but that does not explain to us what time actually is ..
It is a model, constructed through observation, by defining space in terms of physical measurement,
and time in terms of space.

If we are not careful, we might feel that we know what it all means, despite having made these
definitions ourselves, so as to represent a model.

i.e. you can't take "the time" out of space-time, because we have initially defined it so. :)
 
Last edited:

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
You're still ignoring the evidence. Just take time dilation, here is a chart showing the theory and the actual measurements:
Time_Dilation_vs_Orbital_Height.png

"Daily time dilation over circular orbit height split into its components. On this chart, only Gravity Probe A was launched specifically to test general relativity. The other spacecraft on this chart (except for the ISS, whose range of points is marked "theory") carry atomic clocks whose proper operation depend on the validity of general relativity."


When the theory was published that made these predictions, there were no artificial satellites and no atomic clocks.

This is what we call "evidence", and it's very, very far from being all the evidence. The simplistic "continuing existence of 3D space" simply cannot explain this.

You can bury your head in the sand and live in your own little fantasy world if it makes you happy, but for anybody who prefers reality, space-time has been spectacularly confirmed by the evidence.
I don't do GR, but I understand that there is no real entity represented by the concept of time other than the continuity of reality, and all measurement of such are by proxy.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
What is time? Seriously, time is merely existence continuing to exist. There is no entity, there is no entity to measure, just the sun coming up and going down, etc.. If you think time is an entity, tell us where it resides, what is its energy, how big is it?
Time is measured by clocks. While all clocks to not measure time, directly, but rather time in the context of space; space-time. The second hand on the analog wrist watch, defines one second of time as the displace of the second hand in space, one notch. Digital clocks measure time by the change in a given space of the display. The day, month and year is defined as the relative movement of the earth and the sun, moon, sun, respectively, in space. Clocks do not not measure pure time, but time as a function of space. This leads to confusion in terms of defining time all by itself. If you use the wrong tool to measure an effect, like a meter stick to measure body mass, then this leads to a diversity of theory and opinions. It becomes less about truth and more about practical gimmicks.

Since the criteria of. "before time", is before the appearance of space-time, which the clock is designed to measure; time as a function of space, before time or before clock time, would be pure time, that is not dependent on space. Clocks cannot measure this form of time, since it enters the realm of consciousness. In your head you can visualize movement in space, while not moving.

Let me give an example. Sometimes I like to watch TV police dramas, where each week the actors solve complex crimes in one hour. This is not in touch with space-time, in the sense that real crime and police, also routinely solve crimes in minutes. However, in the duration of time allowed for that TV program, crime are solved, in one hour, each week, like clockwork. On one hand we can measure the clock time of the TV drama, and it repeats as an hour. But the content and the actions do not seem possible in terms of space-time, in that allotted time. However, the time potential for the entire drama, always finishes in one hour. The drama is using more like pure time not attached to the limits of space, like we have in space-time. However, it does propagate in time and finishes in one hour in terms of the magic world of TV.

If we look at the contract between evolution and creation, evolution takes a billion years in space-time. While Creation is similar to the TV drama doing the same things in 6 days. Like the TV drama, where all main the actors have the intuitive and rational skills of Sherlock Holmes. and can solve crime faster, Creation has an entity; God, that planned the drama before setting it in motion, so it fits the allotted time. Pure time is attached to consciousness, where we can plan in advance, to make things happen, elsewhere, faster and reach fruition; time potential.

Entropy appears to be connected to time potential. We know that entropy has to increase, but we do not know for certain where in space this may occur next. Entropy has all the attributes of potential in time, with an uncertainty in space. Clocks are of no use in making predictions. We know there is a potential in time for someone to win the lottery, but the place in space, is far more uncertain. That analysis and conclusion has a connection to separated time.

I do not like statistics, when in comes to modeling events in space-time, since reason is more appropriated. Reason requires the assumption that space and time are tethered. Adding extra time potential to space-time, to get uncertainty in space, adds too much imaginary. However, this would be appropriate, as we go down into the quantum state, but less so at the macro-states.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Yes, but that does not explain to us what time actually is ..
There is no such thing as time other than a direction through space-time that depends on the observer/frame of reference. The same is true of 3-dimensional space. That is what all the evidence is telling us.

It is a model...
That's what science does. It builds models of reality that it then tests against reality. That's all your brain does too. Nobody has anything but models.

...you can't take "the time" out of space-time, because we have initially defined it so.
Nonsense. Before Einstein, they were treated separately. Now we know that they can't be because such models don't work.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
I don't do GR, but I understand that there is no real entity represented by the concept of time other than the continuity of reality, and all measurement of such are by proxy.
You don't 'understand' at all. You appear to have a blind faith belief that no amount of evidence is ever going so be able to penetrate. What I don't understand is why people bury themselves in such reality-denying faith...
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Time is measured by clocks. While all clocks to not measure time, directly, but rather time in the context of space; space-time. The second hand on the analog wrist watch, defines one second of time as the displace of the second hand in space, one notch. Digital clocks measure time by the change in a given space of the display. The day, month and year is defined as the relative movement of the earth and the sun, moon, sun, respectively, in space. Clocks do not not measure pure time, but time as a function of space. This leads to confusion in terms of defining time all by itself. If you use the wrong tool to measure an effect, like a meter stick to measure body mass, then this leads to a diversity of theory and opinions. It becomes less about truth and more about practical gimmicks.

Since the criteria of. "before time", is before the appearance of space-time, which the clock is designed to measure; time as a function of space, before time or before clock time, would be pure time, that is not dependent on space. Clocks cannot measure this form of time, since it enters the realm of consciousness. In your head you can visualize movement in space, while not moving.

Let me give an example. Sometimes I like to watch TV police dramas, where each week the actors solve complex crimes in one hour. This is not in touch with space-time, in the sense that real crime and police, also routinely solve crimes in minutes. However, in the duration of time allowed for that TV program, crime are solved, in one hour, each week, like clockwork. On one hand we can measure the clock time of the TV drama, and it repeats as an hour. But the content and the actions do not seem possible in terms of space-time, in that allotted time. However, the time potential for the entire drama, always finishes in one hour. The drama is using more like pure time not attached to the limits of space, like we have in space-time. However, it does propagate in time and finishes in one hour in terms of the magic world of TV.

If we look at the contract between evolution and creation, evolution takes a billion years in space-time. While Creation is similar to the TV drama doing the same things in 6 days. Like the TV drama, where all main the actors have the intuitive and rational skills of Sherlock Holmes. and can solve crime faster, Creation has an entity; God, that planned the drama before setting it in motion, so it fits the allotted time. Pure time is attached to consciousness, where we can plan in advance, to make things happen, elsewhere, faster and reach fruition; time potential.

Entropy appears to be connected to time potential. We know that entropy has to increase, but we do not know for certain where in space this may occur next. Entropy has all the attributes of potential in time, with an uncertainty in space. Clocks are of no use in making predictions. We know there is a potential in time for someone to win the lottery, but the place in space, is far more uncertain. That analysis and conclusion has a connection to separated time.

I do not like statistics, when in comes to modeling events in space-time, since reason is more appropriated. Reason requires the assumption that space and time are tethered. Adding extra time potential to space-time, to get uncertainty in space, adds too much imaginary. However, this would be appropriate, as we go down into the quantum state, but less so at the macro-states.
iu
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
You don't 'understand' at all. You appear to have a blind faith belief that no amount of evidence is ever going so be able to penetrate. What I don't understand is why people bury themselves in such reality-denying faith...
Reality is forever on the other side of concepts, nothing you ever think is real, it may represent reality to you, but it is not reality. I mostly deal in realty itself, not the conceptualization of it. Simply put, time is the continuity of existence, and though that is a conceptualization, you understand the reality it is meant to represent, I hope.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Reality is forever on the other side of concepts, nothing you ever think is real, it may represent reality to you, but it is not reality. I mostly deal in realty itself, not the conceptualization of it.
Oh, right, I see, you alone have magical access to reality itself. Right.

Simply put, time is the continuity of existence, and though that is a conceptualization, you understand the reality it is meant to represent, I hope.
No. If you try to treat reality like that it doesn't work.

You really should be grateful for people who don't fall for the simplistic "I have access to reality, it's how it seems to me" nonsense. If it weren't for us, you wouldn't have the technology you're using to preach your blind faith to the world. I mean, seriously, if you can't get your head around space-time, quantum mechanics would make your brain explode. Yet it is the basis for all those little electronic 'chips' you use every day. :D
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
Oh, right, I see, you alone have magical access to reality itself. Right.


No. If you try to treat reality like that it doesn't work.

You really should be grateful for people who don't fall for the simplistic "I have access to reality, it's how it seems to me" nonsense. If it weren't for us, you wouldn't have the technology you're using to preach your blind faith to the world. I mean, seriously, if you can't get your head around space-time, quantum mechanics would make your brain explode. Yet it is the basis for all those little electronic 'chips' you use every day. :D
No, that's not what I tried to convey.

Reality is what it is, one doesn't treat reality.

Reality is simply reality, thinking about reality can have purpose, but beyond that it just muddies the waters. Reality is unmuddied when you do not conceptualize it, ie., meditate on it, not think about it.
 
Top