Go Back   Science Forums > General Science Forums > Philosophy Forums > Philosophy of Science
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-23-2008   #491 (permalink)
Overdog's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Virginia
 
Overdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to behold
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve View Post
modest: I guess what I'm saying is that either everything in existence is expending energy and attempting to reach a stable configuration and is riding on the momentum of the big bang or there's something else that is driving change. Something makes electrons spin and chemical reactions take place.

It seems like we just take all of that activity for granted without even considering that there might be a universal cause. And the things which we call laws of nature might actually have a cause.

And I think that a big clue is how we've handled the concept of time. It indicates that we might have had a blindspot here, and by 'we' I mean the masses including myself. I really can only speak for me though. Maybe others don't get confused.
Oh yes, there is a big blindspot there alright, and in a lot of other places, too, not just in Physics and the natural sciences.

"Compared to the pond of knowledge, our ignorance remains atlantic."
The Encyclopedia of Ignorance

Last edited by Overdog; 07-24-2008 at 05:49 PM.. Reason: Fixed quote, added link
Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2008   #492 (permalink)
Erasmus00's Avatar
Creating

Moderator

 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve View Post
Something makes electrons spin and chemical reactions take place.
I think this misunderstands the nature of "spin"- nothing is spinning in a traditional sense. Electrons carry angular momentum, but nothing is moving, and even at absolute zero, they still spin.

As to earlier notions of using the properties of the smallest particles to "define" measuring sticks for time, how do we know that fundamental particles have any extent at all? How do we know they aren't points?

Finally, to define time maybe one important thing to do is to figure out everything we know about that which we are trying to describe. I'll attempt a brief list

1. Time exists independently of measuring devices (for this observation we note that mechanical, electromagnetic, etc. Any device we make to measure time can be synchronized locally to any other device that we use to measure time). Because, for instance, electromagnetic devices can tell the same time as mechanical devices we can draw the tentative conclusion that the same "time" flows in both theories.

2. Time is wrapped up in space. The evidence for this is that if we set two synchronized clocks in relative motion, they are no longer synched. Similarly, if we put a clock on top of a mountain, it is no longer synched with the clock on bottom of said mountain. This is regardless of the measuring device used.

3. More tentatively because not directly observable, on extremely short durations time is uncertain (in the sense that quantum mechanical systems of definite energy cannot be localized in time).

Are there any other properties we can give to time?
-Will
Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2008   #493 (permalink)
Overdog's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Virginia
 
Overdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to behold
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erasmus00 View Post
Are there any other properties we can give to time?
If you read through the last few days of posts you will see we have been discussing what we can know about time and arrived to the conclusion that anything we try to say about it is an assumption.

EDIT:

But don't let that discourage you!

Last edited by Overdog; 07-23-2008 at 04:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2008   #494 (permalink)
Erasmus00's Avatar
Creating

Moderator

 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdog View Post
If you read through the last few days of posts you will see we have been discussing what we can know about time and arrived to the conclusion that anything we try to say about it is an assumption.

EDIT:

But don't let that discourage you!
I have read through the last few days, but I disagreed, as you can see by my post .

As far as I can see, we have to allow that there is some objective reality and that should allow us to infer very basic things from experiment.
-Will
Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2008   #495 (permalink)
modest's Avatar
Creating

Moderator

Location:
U.S. Midwest
 
modest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond reputemodest has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

As per usual; Will, your experience and contribution are indispensable.

I would add that time has a direction which has never been observed to change.

~modest


----------------
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008   #496 (permalink)
Overdog's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Virginia
 
Overdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to behold
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erasmus00 View Post
I have read through the last few days, but I disagreed, as you can see by my post .

As far as I can see, we have to allow that there is some objective reality and that should allow us to infer very basic things from experiment.
Oh, I have no problems with that statement. I don't think anyone was disputing that there is such a thing as objective reality (at least I wasn't).

My argument was only against claims about knowledge of unobserved, fundamental axioms of world views.

Last edited by Overdog; 07-24-2008 at 03:59 AM.. Reason: clarification
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008   #497 (permalink)
ldsoftwaresteve's Avatar
Explaining


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

I guess where I've been coming from on this subject of time is the point of view that everything we observe is an effect of the inputs to our observational machinery. The conclusions we draw are automatically built upon the objects our perception gear generates.

Contemplation from the causal point of view attempts to focus on the things which give rise to observation. To look at the component parts, so to speak.

I was looking out my window at my car which is red. It occured to me that my car's redness was not exactly what it seemed. I felt that the redness was part of its makeup, when the truth is exactly the opposite: it reflects red light and in fact rejects it. It absorbs all other colors. I am, of course, working within the worldview that contains the identity 'photon'. I believe that part of my worldview to be correct.

I am not trying to attack the efficacy of the machinery of observation, don't get me wrong here. But I am trying to point out that what we perceive is really an effect from a different process, one which is easy to ignore because we naturally work with derivative perceptions. And we tend to think that those derivations are actually the ontology or the real-ness that is underneath. It would follow that all of our worldviews, if not taking into consideration the nature of perception, are going to be less than they should be and missing a more fundamental understanding.

It takes an act of will to contemplate the derivation process and to view all of this from 'under the hood'. The upshot, I guess, is that when we say 'characteristic' or 'attribute' or 'property' after contemplation from this point of view, the meaning changes slightly. How slight? I suppose in some cases it's about as subtle as an elephant taking a dump in a bakery.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008   #498 (permalink)
Overdog's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Virginia
 
Overdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to behold
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

I see what you are saying about the senses and perception. Don't know if you saw this link I posted in another thread...

The Infallibility of Sense Perception

But I thought it was pretty interesting....

Last edited by Overdog; 07-24-2008 at 11:52 AM.. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008   #499 (permalink)
ldsoftwaresteve's Avatar
Explaining


 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overdog View Post
I see what you are saying about the senses and perception. Don't know if you saw this link I posted in another thread...

The Infallibility of Sense Perception

But I thought it was pretty interesting....
Assuming I understood what I just read, I agree with him completely. Very excellent article. Our interpretation of our percepts should change as our understanding grows. Our percepts are infallible since they are just the raw material that we interpret and integrate into our world views using logic. And we cannot prove them wrong (by that I mean the act of perception) or fallible because in order to do so we have to use percepts to do it, which would essentially be a contradiction because it would have to be valid and invalid simultaneously. Again, assuming I understood it.

The interesting thing about time is that it isn't directly perceived. It's a result of the perception of a conception which makes it like a second level perception. Maybe a better description would be that time is a conclusion.

Perhaps a better way of looking at it might be that our "mind's eye" generates perceptions of a subtly different nature than our actual eyes. It is my belief that we confuse the two of them sometimes and time is an example of this.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008   #500 (permalink)
Overdog's Avatar
Explaining


Location:
Virginia
 
Overdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to beholdOverdog is a splendid one to behold
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: What is time?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve View Post
...Perhaps a better way of looking at it might be that our "mind's eye" generates perceptions of a subtly different nature than our actual eyes. It is my belief that we confuse the two of them sometimes and time is an example of this.
Could be. It seems we do have some innate sense of it, perhaps just because we remember the past, see the present, and anticipate the future.

Who knows. I'm not sure we'll ever know.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Does Time Fly? Antti Astronomy and Cosmology 65 10-10-2009 11:27 PM
The Theory of Special Relativity for the Totally Confused Beginner Damo2600 Strange Claims Forum 30 08-04-2006 07:59 PM
Beyond the Singularity pihunter Astronomy and Cosmology 3 03-08-2005 10:44 AM
"Freezing" time Thelonious Physics and Mathematics 21 01-27-2005 05:43 PM
expansion of space through time =gravity? deamonstar Physics and Mathematics 1 07-31-2003 07:58 PM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 30.00%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 40.00%
4 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 30.00%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 10
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:54 PM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network