What is time?

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by Kriminal99

You could wake up to find that the "real" universe really has physics completely different than what existed in the "VR world" that we are currently experiencing. Apply any of your arguments to this situation. Do any of them still address the concern? No.

As for "realistically provide an alternative", the problem here is that what is a "realistic alternative" is not something that you or anyone else is really capable of judging due to a similar argument as I am using regarding the "time is a function of perception issue". Why? Well lets single out the Virtual Reality version and try your reasoning on it. Is that realistic? You might say "No thats not realistic, because noone knows how to interact with the mind that way etc". But then oh yeah... Thats in the world we are experiencing now... In fact ALL of your reasoning and intuition is based on the world you are experiencing now. Therefore it is impossible for you to determine if any alternative explanation is "realistic" or not. How can you tell what is "realistic" if you don't know what is "real"?

I admit reasoning is relative to context, again. So what? To what purpose is the assumption recognition? Where does it alter any interpretations of anything? In my view it would not only limit my interactions with other people objects and food as imaginative, but would beg the question: what other reality is there that produces my consciousness? Without answering that question, speculation of such extra-realism is pointless.

[dasraiser]

hi folk

i just have to except
reality=perceived reality, unless otherwise realized

if life and these questions are ever realized, i guess the human race will create a VR far removed from this which allows for new conjecture and discussions to develop.

regards

[Southtown]

Very plainly put. HAHA

[Doctordick]

Time is no more than a mental mechanism we use to delineate changes in what we know!
The Past is what we know; the future is what we don't know and the present is a change from not knowing some particular to knowing that particular.

Have fun -- Dick

Knowledge is Power
and the most common abuse of that power is to use it to hide stupidity

[lindagarrette]

I understand, mainly from studying theoretical physics and quantum theory, that time isnot a perception, it is a measure of sequences of events in the universe. It has existed ever since the BB (and possibly before if you believe SS theory). What doesn't exist, is the present. There is no moment in time. And, in QM, time doesn't enter the equations. Right?

[Kriminal99]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

I understand, mainly from studying theoretical physics and quantum theory, that time isnot a perception, it is a measure of sequences of events in the universe. It has existed ever since the BB (and possibly before if you believe SS theory). What doesn't exist, is the present. There is no moment in time. And, in QM, time doesn't enter the equations. Right?

I agree with the no present part as far as time is concerned, but the idea we are discussing is that since a person is always percieving the sequence of events in the universe it is a perception weather we try and define it to be or not. Practically it simply IS a percieved sequence of events.

And to simplify the arguments we have been having, an example of why this matters as opposed to say how global skepticism seems to be of little consequence, is because if something were to alter the order in which we percieved events our idea of time would not model the sequence of events taking place in the universe. But most importantly, we might never know the difference because as previously stated our idea of time practically is dependent on the order we percieve events. This has nothing to do with the world not being real, the example of the world not being real is just to prove that we don't have any 1st person connection to external systems on which time can be based on.

If you want to have a belief set where you define time is dependent on external sequences of events, you can of course. However you have absolutely no evidence to work with in that case as to what this time would be. You could try and rig some system which gives a signal to you when something occurs in some other system. But you are still percieving the signal, and your organization of this system is still dependent on your perception of how events are typically ordered.

[infamous]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

I understand, mainly from studying theoretical physics and quantum theory, that time isnot a perception, it is a measure of sequences of events in the universe. It has existed ever since the BB (and possibly before if you believe SS theory). What doesn't exist, is the present. There is no moment in time. And, in QM, time doesn't enter the equations. Right?

I totally agree Linda, the instant you try and define the present, it has already become the past. And because the past seems to be such a difficult thing return to, the future is, in reality, all that we have. This direction which time is traveling can be closely associated with the character of Entropy. I therefore surmise that time is evidence that chance has occured and is closley related to the character of Entropy because they are both unidirectional.

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by Kriminal99

I agree with the no present part as far as time is concerned, but the idea we are discussing is that since a person is always percieving the sequence of events in the universe it is a perception weather we try and define it to be or not. Practically it simply IS a percieved sequence of events.

And to simplify the arguments we have been having, an example of why this matters as opposed to say how global skepticism seems to be of little consequence, is because if something were to alter the order in which we percieved events our idea of time would not model the sequence of events taking place in the universe.

Events occur in natural sequence whether we are there to perceive them or not. What could possibly alter the order? a god?

[Jay-qu]

well actually... In the book 'About time' by Paul Davies, he says that the simple act of getting up and walking across your room (if your room lines up so that when you walk you walk away from andromeda) then the time dilation that you cause your body to experience will be magnified over long distances - ie the order of events can be different when considering two objects in seperate galaxies... very interesting read

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by Jay-qu

well actually... In the book 'About time' by Paul Davies, he says that the simple act of getting up and walking across your room (if your room lines up so that when you walk you walk away from andromeda) then the time dilation that you cause your body to experience will be magnified over long distances - ie the order of events can be different when considering two objects in seperate galaxies... very interesting read

... sounds like it. I got told to google him once. Maybe I'll give it another shot.