It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Time

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Treatid
Posts: 40
Joined: September 11th, 2014, 7:21 am

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by Treatid »

Ben Saint-Clair wrote:I have to say, Treatid, that i feel we are on the same page but both reading in a different language. :D

That is, we both agree with each other, but it feels like we disagree because we are talking to each other in different terms and from different viewpoints. I'm not exactly frustrated with physics and mathematics like you seem to be (no doubt because you are deeply passionate about your subject area), but i feel that my argument does act in a very strong way to highlight this century old issue by making the case for the inexistence of time in the framework of McTaggart's old argument - seeing as McTaggart was met with universal disagreement in the Philosophical community.

It is my intention to shake things up a bit. Perhaps if enough people like us make a ruckus then we can start to make real change towards resolving this problem.
I agree that we are both on the same side of an argument against some entrenched, but poorly founded, ideas in physics.

However, merely pointing out unfounded assumptions in mathematics and physics is too little.

Having fully grasped the non-existence of axiomatic knowledge - the path is now opened to properly understanding physics.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

Axioms are impossible. Without axioms, we are left with very little. Which is quite handy - because with virtually nothing to choose between, working out what to do next isn't nearly as complicated as one might expect.

Since we cannot define anything at a fundamental level, we must describe the universe in terms that do not rely on definitions.

Describing the universe as specific changes in a network of relationships is not "/a/ way of looking at things". It is the only possible way of looking at things.

[One may feel that this requires "change" and "a network of relationships" to be defined - which seems to go against the non-existence of definitions. In practice we have a "by our bootstraps" situation. The meaning/significance of concepts only becomes (sort-of) clear once we have built the context (which consists of these concepts). The distinction between this construction and axiomatic constructions is not entirely dis-similar to the distinction between Newtonian Physics and General Relativity. While both systems appear to contain similar concepts - the thinking for one system simply does not apply (let alone work) for the other system).]
TimBandTech wrote:Time is unidirectional, and so long as the real value is used as its representative then an early conflict in representation is bound to have consequences, and hence much of the nonsense arguments on time, including respected physicists who are obsessed with the laws of physics working backwards in time. The real line is bidirectional and so cannot be an accurate representation of time; particularly not its geometrical quality.
Many of the individual words you use sound good. I'm inclined to agree with the sentiment of some of your sentences.

But... You cannot define anything.

You cannot define "continuous". It can't be done. No one can do it.

The Real number line is an impossible fantasy. As fundamental postulates, dimensions don't mean or describe anything.

Mathematics and mathematicians are mistaken in thinking that they have ever defined a dimensions, or numbers or anything else.

You are right to challenge the real number line as fundamental. It isn't anything except a set of ad-hoc rules that we find to be conveniently similar to real world experience (in certain places).

Tell me what you mean by "continuous".

I'm sure you have a solid intuition about what 'continuous' means. But any attempt you make to explain that intuition to me will mean explaining the word by reference to other words. And then I'll ask you to define those words... and the ones after that... and after that... until you run out of words or try to re-use a word that we are in the middle of defining.

This is the difference between a relative understanding and an absolute definition.

We have direct experience of what distance is. Of velocity. Of Time. But that experience isn't the same as defining distance, velocity and time.

We can define time as being what clocks measure. This is technically correct - but not all that helpful in understanding time. Since clocks were made to measure time, defining time with reference to clocks is a tad tautological.

Every possible definition is tautological in a similar way. A 'continuous' thing is a thing that has the property of being 'continuous'. No matter how much indirection and obfuscation we manage to pull over our own eyes - this is the only thing you can say about the concept of 'continuous'.

Distance is velocity times time. Velocity is distance divided by time. Time is distance divided by time.

Does this tell us what Distance, Time or Velocity are?

It specifies a set of relationships. This isn't worthless (although it is tautological still). Our relationships with distance coupled with our relationships with time informs our sense of what velocity is. This is meaningful and significant to us humans. What it profoundly isn't, is a definition of any of distance, time or velocity.

Which is to say, there are things that we can know. Life is not without meaning and significance for us.

However, that meaning and significance does not come from axioms. There cannot be a fixed starting point from which we build... anything.

"There are continuous wires in my computer that form circuits that carry electrons."

We understand what this sentence means. "Continuous" has a significance that we can use to communicate concepts with.

Yet we know that matter is not continuous. We know that what appears to be an unbroken smoothness at large scales breaks up into molecules, atoms, quarks and other fictitious ideas.

Our concept of 'continuous' only works for certain scales.

You might argue that we can extrapolate the concept from what we do know. This is what mathematics and physics currently do whether consciously of unconsciously.

When extrapolating a curve or trend one is assuming that the curve or trend will continue in a predictable way.

There are infinitely many curves. As much as we might prefer consistently self-similar curves - that is our bias - in an absolute sense one curve is as significant as any other curve.

And trends can be tricky to fit a curve to. The same trend in different contexts may well warrant a quite different curve.

...

It may seem odd to have a clear concept of what you think 'continuous' means and yet be unable to define the term in an absolute sense. Most mathematicians and physicists are right there with you in thinking that their intuitive understanding of terms must be backed up by some definable meaning.

Indeed the terms are meaningful and significant to us as humans.

I don't need to know the difference between an inline and a rotary internal combustion engine in order to drive a car. You don't need to know how to build semi-conductor junctions in order to type on a computer.

Mathematicians don't need to understand why mathematics works in order to design a bridge or calculate taxes.

A river doesn't need to be conscious to flow, nor a bacteria to multiply.

However, if we wish to claim to be conscious; if we desire to have genuine understanding of our place in the universe; then we cannot be satisfied with pretending to know.

Physics cannot be described axiomatically. No-one can define anything as a fundamental property.

Starting with a continuous space, or one-signed numbers has no meaning. There is nothing you can construct from this basis - because there is no basis.
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by Present awareness »

The fundamental principle of the universe is flow. Everything is in constant motion. Air flows in and air flows out of the lungs, blood flows thru the vines and electrical impulses flow thru the nervous system. Earth around the Sun, Sun around the Galaxy and Galaxy flowing away from other Galaxy's.

Thoughts flow thru consciousness, but trying to use thoughts to determine what consciousness is, is like getting into your car to go look for your car.

We may take any arbitrary point in the past and say that we have moved away from it, so now it is gone. However, it is still here now, only seperated by distance. The light that bounced off your body as a child is still travelling thru space. The space that our body will be in next year, is already here and now, we just haven't reached it yet.

Using the concept of time, we may say that 13 billion years into the past once existed and that 13 billion years into the future will exist. However, the reality is that they are both here and now, only seperated by space.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
User avatar
Atreyu
Posts: 1737
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by Atreyu »

Time vanishes for the perceiver when he acquires the ability to perceive additional dimensions of space. Then, what was formerly called the "past" or the "future" is now called the "present". When awareness can perceive all the moments of time simultaneously, time disappears.
User avatar
A_Seagull
Posts: 949
Joined: November 29th, 2012, 10:56 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Heraclitus

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by A_Seagull »

Ben Saint-Clair wrote:
A_Seagull wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Yes, good point and one that I was aware of.

However if you substitute "god" for "time" in the sentence: " that it [time] has the same meaning for all of us.", it becomes " that god has the same meaning for all of us." and I think it results in a false statement. I would think that each person who uses the word "god" , would use it with a different meaning.

Whereas there is really very little ambiguity in the term "time". Einstein once said that "Time is what a clock measures". And we are all familiar with clocks and their usage. The same cannot be said about 'god'.

Your main point is that Time is a non-ambiguous subject, but i have to differ from you here. I think what different people mean when they talk about time can be vastly different. Take for example the conversation me and Treatid have been having - our conception of time is situated within the context of Physics as opposed to an everyday understanding...
So you do have a concept of time! And one that is similar enough to that of Treatid that you can have a meaningful conversation!

I rest my case. :)
The Pattern Paradigm - yer can't beat it!
User avatar
Ben Saint-Clair
Posts: 20
Joined: October 21st, 2014, 11:07 am

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by Ben Saint-Clair »

A_Seagull wrote:
Ben Saint-Clair wrote: (Nested quote removed.)



Your main point is that Time is a non-ambiguous subject, but i have to differ from you here. I think what different people mean when they talk about time can be vastly different. Take for example the conversation me and Treatid have been having - our conception of time is situated within the context of Physics as opposed to an everyday understanding...
So you do have a concept of time! And one that is similar enough to that of Treatid that you can have a meaningful conversation!

I rest my case. :)
Cheeky... :)

It is the concept of time in physics that we discuss as well as an intuitive notion of time that i attempt to disprove or in the former case demonstrate to be of little use to us. In order to disprove anything, be it time, god, or unicorns, one must at first have a concept of what one is trying to disprove along with some form of definition or at the very least a series of relations that concept has linguistically with other concepts to bear it some holistic weight.

But I challenge you to read my dissertation and the posts given by me and Treatid so that you can grapple with the real issues at hand, rather than attempt to ensnare me in linguistic traps and the minor potholes of superficial point scoring. :wink:
User avatar
HZY
Posts: 261
Joined: January 30th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by HZY »

Seems to me that a time-frame represents a snapshot of the universe which is moving (rearranging its particle elements) as measured in space-time (like frames in a movie film strip). Since time is one of the axis in space-time dimension, you can't have time vanish without the space vanishing also, for they belong to the same dimension (just like you can't have x-axis vanish without having the y- and z-axis vanish also in a 3-dimensional framework). So, in the case of a film strip, the entire movie vanishes and there is a no show.
User avatar
Atreyu
Posts: 1737
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: It's Time For Time To Vanish - The Real Unreality Of Tim

Post by Atreyu »

HZY wrote:Seems to me that a time-frame represents a snapshot of the universe which is moving (rearranging its particle elements) as measured in space-time (like frames in a movie film strip). Since time is one of the axis in space-time dimension, you can't have time vanish without the space vanishing also, for they belong to the same dimension (just like you can't have x-axis vanish without having the y- and z-axis vanish also in a 3-dimensional framework). So, in the case of a film strip, the entire movie vanishes and there is a no show.
By eliminating one axis you merely eliminate that particular dimension of space. So if you eliminate the w-axis in a four dimensional system you still have three dimensions of space left --- the x,y, and z axis remains, leaving three dimensions of space with no corresponding time dimension. Eliminate the x-axis and you can still have a plane, and so on.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021