After reading the thread "Does time exist?" I think the consensus and agreement (or final vote) is that time does not exist and that it is merely a mental concept or tracking system.

With the tracking of objects in space, in relation to each other an event can be located in the holograpic matrix.

Now the next time someone tells you that they don't "have enough time" you can just tell them that nobody has any time because it essentially does not exist.

If you are the one who always says that you don't have enough time you will have to change that to: "I can't because I am too busy."

If they ask you when you will be unbusy, just tell them, you will let them know when that condition is met.

You can no longer make appointments "in time." You must say, "I will meet you at such and such a place after so many complete rotations of the earth when the clock's hands positioned with the small hand on the six and the large hand on the 12. etc.

That is basically what you are telling them anyway when you point to a date and clock time. Our clock and calendars are only tracking objects moving through space... not time.

You may as well get used to it because we are approaching Dec. 21 2012 when it is rumored that "time as we know it" will change or cease to exist.

THE TRINITY
time,space,and matter
they would all have to be created at once or else nothing would exist

Yes space, time and matter are so intricately connected you can't separate them at all. They are actually only one thing.

I think matter is the first thing that arises out of energy and with its manifestation, the attributes of space and time are automatic, as they are part of the body of matter.

no thread left behind


www.livejournal.com
just a suggestion


bttt
yes - time is a concept invented by man...correct-a-mondo

and if you really want to get your gears spinning from a sky-high / layman's perspective... read "hyperspace" ;o)

Its to bad science isn't a democratic affair.

Nevertheless

Oh but it is. If there were no agreement, there would be no science and no facts.

Time is the measure of all existence. Without time there can be no existence of any kind.


Instantaneous existence does not exist.



Howzat???

Precisely, very well put creative.


Time is a measure, a measure of what? Of one part of spacetime, with distance being the other side of the coin.


Beautiful.

to try to understand something, that the awareness percieve, and say it is not real, lead to a path, that deny many things in time???

ALL THINGS EXIST THAT THE HUMAN NATURE PERCIEVE???

the degree of importance that ANY ONE THING HAVE WITHIN ANY EXISTENCE, does not matter in solving and understanding, as ALL THINGS COMBINED, LARGE AND SMALL, STILL MAKE UP THE COMPLETE ESSENCE???

it is most natural to think that since hot water is not hot water without cold water, that HOT DOES NOT ACTAULLY EXIST???

the same as to say TIME DOES NOT EXIST???

IT IS NOT MOST IMPORTANT WHAT BE A TRUE DEFINITION OF ANY ONE THING, AS THIS LEAD TO INFINITE POSSIBLE ILLUSIONS, THAT DANCE AS GHOSTS THAT CANNOT BE CONTAINED, BUT RATHER SEEING TOTAL UNDERSTANDING CAN NEVER BE THOUGHT AS HAD, LESS IT EXPLAINS HOW ALL WORK IN UNISON, AND ERASES NOTHING TO ACHIEVE IT???

It does exist but only as a concept of measurement. But the "time" that we know (and track)~here on earth is not the only time.

You are saying that existence requires movement and time is a measure of that. I agree. (Certainly an event requires movement and existence is an event)

As Billy said, the process of time in the rocket going around the earth at 80% of light speed is not the same as the process of time happening on the earth.

And he also said that at light speed, there is no time. You won't age.

Does that mean you can't move or does it mean that you are at the one and only stationary point in the universe that is not moving?

I am suggesting that light has no "speed." It only appears to have speed when it moves through warped space.

Matter creates warped space. Matter creates the illusion of light speed.

Neither...

According to the same theory, no thing can travel at light speed except light. This is a result of the fact that an object gains mass and speed simultaneously. As the speed of an object increases, so does it's mass. The more mass an object has, the greater the energy required to move it. Any object which increases in speed would require more and more energy in order to continue increasing it's speed. The amount of energy that is required to move an object at light speed is infinite, therefore impossible.



If light has no speed how can it move through space?



How do humans see?

With their eyes.

I think you have to get out of this spacetime universe to find the place where light has no speed.

(I know, its a metaphoric (imaginary) journey but I am talking about the attributes of light itself and not the effect that warped space has on it.)

The laws you site are within the boundaries of spacetime as we know it.

(In spacetime as we know it everything moves slower than the speed of light.)

(E-mc2 tells us that energy and mass are the same thing in that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.)

If light has a speed, it only has a speed because of the space and matter it is traveling through.

If you can imagine light without matter or space, it would have no speed. It would be pure energy.

I'm sure many people will assert that this condition or state does not exist. I am not so sure about that.

Quite correct Creative!

No "thing" made of matter will ever know what it is to be light.

Light does not age, yet moves. It is the single thing known positively to man that defies all reality as we know it.

Light special place of the tipping point of time is truly a remarkable quality.

If such a thing as a Tachyon exists, then light has an evil twin. A particle that cannot move slower then the speed of light, a particle that travels through time backwards from normal matter.


___________________

( >>>>- BBC Talking out his ass)

JB I have had many of the same ideas about light.

Higher dimensional objects could completely fill a lower dimensional object at any given time, however it could also hover just out of the lower dimension, and only dip down with disturbed. Or even pierce through it at many angles, or even many different dimensions passing through it at different angles. (my perhaps lame idea?)
>> Kinda Crapy didn't watch firsthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4

>>> Love Sagan!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9KT4M7kiSw&feature=related

I think energy is more fundamental then light.

When a great enough disturbance of energy happens, it can vibrate the electromagnetic field. Perhaps this field is invisible until it is disturbed? (field theory deff not my idea) When this field is disturbed it then sends a pulse through lower dimensions. From the frame of reference of lower dimensions it has speed.

From the higher dimension it has none and happens at all places at once.

The higher dimensions would have to pass through ours at every angle that a ray of light could pierce us . . . or permeate all space and only interact when "disturbed" (again field theory and let me say only requires 3 dimensions of space to work)

(I may have got this idea from somewhere else do not count it as mine lol, I read too much to be sure anymore)

We should send this topic in to the Reader's Digest. They have a page for this sort of thing.

I have often thought about different "directions" besides the ones we know in this 3-dimensional world.

These directions become infinite when you move in and out because each imagined increment inward or outward discovers a different flat world or 3-dimensional world.

But lets just consider the directions we know of and add inward.

In order to better imagine these directions you must take on the "body" (or identification) of a point (in space?) rather than your three dimensional body.

This point in space can move on a flat plane or it can branch out and move in all directions opposite itself.

Since itself has no mass or size even those directions are infinite. Also since it has no mass or size it can also travel into the next two directions... inward and outward.

But with no mass or size, how can it do this? You can ask the same question of it in three dimensional directions.

Without anything as a reference point, no movement is determinable any way so how can you call it movement? You can't really, until some sort of reference points are established or manifested.

A body is manifested according to the perception available to the unit of awareness. If it can only perceive and project two dimensions, that is how it will function and that is how it will perceive the world and itself.

When its awareness is expanded, then it can function in a 3-dimensional world. When it is further expanded, it can function in a 4 and 5 dimensional world.

But the unite of awareness (the point) is always the same at its core. (Just a massless, sizeless point of awareness.)

This is the so-called "nothing" that the universe arises from. It is also what you will find when you travel back to the beginning of existence.

Just some thoughts...

The point of awareness I spoke of above seems similar to what we call "particles" which have no mass, yet seem to vibrate and produce waves.

It also brings to mind the Tachyon that travels faster than light and thus appears and disappears, perhaps going back into its own dimension, which some call "time" but may simply be a place where light speed is different.

I hold that time is real. This hold on my views is mostly dominated by the sense that what are absolute laws cannot be maintained as such. This stems primarily from the notion that the sciences are running into quite a mess when it comes to a unification theory. Either stipulations which seem ad hoc are used, or the ideas embark on a complexity that makes one agree with (excuse the faulty qoute memory) a spanish king who when presented with a Platonists epicircle plan of the solar system said that it seemed to work, though if he were the creator he would have made it simpler. I think that if laws are alowed to develop, if time is the origin of the things that we call laws, then it would decrease the baggage around all of the currently held majority views in the scientific community. Time would be something of a fount, and there would not be a master key to understanding relity, no purely deterministic equation that applies at all times. I would go as far to say that a sensible approach might be to try to give time some physical significane, and then go from there. As far as I am concerned, the idea of a timeless universe is a product of the philosophy of a block universe mindset, started in the twenties, and that has yet to shift into a new view. It was a way to respond to completely the revolution in relitivity and quantum mechanics. It has been tried, in those domains, and in sufficient thoroughnesss in more modern developments, and the fact that all kinds of genuises have gotten not very more near a adequate unified theory is another clue that a different approach should be taken problems. And as far as voting goes, I have to go in the manner of Jeanette Rankin about being at least on to oppose a majority vote on war that she had long convictions about "I felt the first time the first woman had a chance to say no to war she should say it."

Speed is relative. It is not an illusion.

Amoscarine keeps finding old posts from 2008 and 2009. Its hard to believe I have been on this site that long.

Metalwing, yes speed is relative to whatever you decide to make it relative to.

But since all of matter moves, the only constant is light. Therefore, it is matter that has speed. Light is the constant.

The movement of matter is also relative. The speed of light in a vacuum is set as a constant. It's actual speed in the universe is relative. Space/time is elastic.

Consider the thought experiment.

Can two galaxies speed away from each other at ten times the speed of light? Is light traveling away from each galaxy traveling at the same speed? Is the light traveling towards one of the above galaxies ever able to reach the other galaxy?