Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You keep getting it wrong with respect to science and in the process you are spreading misinformation.
What we observe in nature is described by not only by observation but also by math.
Math is the language of the Universe. If you had a science background you would easily understand this.
You can look at a photograph of pond ripples and it will do a pretty good job of "describing" ripples. But a mathematician could do it with greater precision and predictive power.
There is a reason math is used to describe the Universe and nature....it's because we can gain a much better understanding from it. This is the big missing piece for you. Just because you don't get why science does what it does...don't make it our problem when discussing time.
I suggest you read up on how math is used to help us define what we observe. That's the way the world works and it's how we know Time exits.
I have proposed several theories and facts that science discovered about time...since time is a natural phenomenon it is described mathematically. This is why time is not considered a philosophy.
The obsession with describing everything with math, even when it is impossible or doesn't make sense. A result of westernized educational indoctrination. Math is put on a pedestal simply because it is good for making things including money. Math is useful but extremely limited when attempting to explain the nature of life.
As for time, it is entirely psychological in nature and can only be described by the person who is experiencing is as he/she is experiencing it. And it is always entirely described by using memory of events that have transpired.
Let me underscore with emphasis: math is entiely useless when it comes to describing the experience of time as understood by humans.
If I might add a couple of points,
Mata is correct, mathematics is extreemly useful in describing and Discovering unknown aspects of nature.
E.g. Mathematically understanding unexpected deviations in Uranus's orbit leads to the discovery of the unexpected planet Neptune. So here maths tells us more than we can directly observe.
However, and it is an extreemly big however!
Mata, you say "maths describes nature, which includes time"
In this statement you (IMO) show confirmation bias, ie you assume a thing called time exists, ... And assume that thus if maths describes nature , then it must describe time.
But here's the problem, all you actuall observe anywhere is a load of matter , existing, moving and interacting in all directions.
(Mata et al) You do not observe..
-anything coming out of a 'future'
-anything leaving a' temporal past'
-and you do not observe an invisible 4th dimensional 'thing' called 'time' 'flowing' 'through' the present.
Wherever you think you are observing someone mathematically using 'time', I'm pretty sure you will only in fact se someone comparing 2 or more examples of matter moving in some physical direction only.... And 'calling' one example of 3d motion 'time'.
(Eg if mathematically comparing the motion of a falling stone to the rotation of a hand on a numbered dial, a (non objective) person may instinctively write down the location of the falling stone object as a location , but write down the physical location of the rotating pointer as if it is not just a thing going round in circles (proving only that things can go round in circles) but "as if" it relates to some other thing called 'time' ('passing in another "dimension" )
(Typically while also providing no reason or proof of this)
Therefore Mata, I think you will find that mathematics can with extreme accuracy be used to compare and understand the motion of objects moving in any direction, but nowhere will you find mathematics showing the existence of a past, future or thing called time.
It is only where people (un scientifically) impose these ideas onto what we actually observe, and where we un scientifically accept our assumptions without checking them, that an 'invisible' 'intangible' poorly defined 'thing' called time may seem to exist.... Just as our own eyes can seem to confirm an emperor is indeed wearing an 'invisible robe' if we check our facts starting from a false assumption....in my carefully considered opinion....
Yours
M.Marsden
(Auth "A Brief History of Timelessness")
This video at location shows the problem of only observing matter moving in a physical direction- yet deciding to just call an example of motion 'time', and the error of assuming the accuracy of the mathematics proves something other than what it actually and only does (ie that things just exist and move)
And this video hopefully shows how relativity, and 'time travel' ideas can be interpreted sensibly in terms of the possibility of matter just existing and moving timelessly.
for the explanation as to how we may just be renaming examples of motion etc as 'time', and how we may thus mistakenly be assuming an extra such thing is involved in motion. http://youtu.be/pSJ8A-w78xM
(If you check special relativity carefully you may find that it only actually shows that 'moving oscillators' are "changing" at slower rates, and not that a thing called 'time', exists and is 'dilated'
(eg 'time' as something apparently in some way, involving a 'past' and/or 'future),
MM
for the explanation as to how we may just be renaming examples of motion etc as 'time', and how we may thus mistakenly be assuming an extra such thing is involved in motion. http://youtu.be/pSJ8A-w78xM
(If you check special relativity carefully you may find that it only actually shows that 'moving oscillators' are "changing" at slower rates, and not that a thing called 'time', exists and is 'dilated'
(eg 'time' as something apparently in some way, involving a 'past' and/or 'future),
MM
I agree and Bergson tried to explain this to Einstein in their famous debate. While popular press declared it a "victory" for Einstein, a reader of the derivate itself will observe that Einstein never addressed Bergson's points because he simply didn't understand them. Einstein was not a philosopher, be wa creative mathematician with obvious assists from his first wife.
But time does exist, and we all feel it as it presses from the past into the future.
I was exchanging emails with a friend and told him to do several things...and said" hop to it times a wastin'!"
His response: "Time can't be wasted because it doesn't exist."
Do you think there is no such thing as the past and the present? Are we in a perpetual state of 'nows?"
Based on other conversations I've had with him he has mentioned things I did to him in the past which make him hesitant to continue our friendship. Obviously we have mended our differences but is he contradicting himself by referring to the past experience yet not believing time exists?
This is new to me as I have little exposure to physics. I am Christian too but that shouldn't factor into this theory as He created physics....I'm confused!
Any thoughts?
I think of time as being the measurement of motion.
Last edited by Rotagivan; 08-05-2015 at 09:01 PM..
The obsession with describing everything with math, even when it is impossible or doesn't make sense. A result of westernized educational indoctrination. Math is put on a pedestal simply because it is good for making things including money. Math is useful but extremely limited when attempting to explain the nature of life.
As for time, it is entirely psychological in nature and can only be described by the person who is experiencing is as he/she is experiencing it. And it is always entirely described by using memory of events that have transpired.
Let me underscore with emphasis: math is entiely useless when it comes to describing the experience of time as understood by humans.
This entire post is just your opinion and none of it is factual.
Mata, you say "maths describes nature, which includes time"
No I did not say that. I said that we use math as a means to describe what we observe in the Universe and the world we live in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Marsden
But here's the problem, all you actually observe anywhere is a load of matter, existing, moving and interacting in all directions.
Tell that to yourself as you age. Observing time is not possible since it's not formatted for our limited 2 dimensional eyesight to observe. Just like we can't see many electromagnetic frequencies but they certainly exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Marsden
Wherever you think you are observing someone mathematically using 'time', I'm pretty sure you will only in fact see someone comparing 2 or more examples of matter moving in some physical direction only.... And 'calling' one example of 3d motion 'time'.
Again time is not observable to our limited 2d eyes. What you are describing is only how we measure time...measuring time is not defining it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Marsden
(Eg if mathematically comparing the motion of a falling stone to the rotation of a hand on a numbered dial, a (non objective) person may instinctively write down the location of the falling stone object as a location , but write down the physical location of the rotating pointer as if it is not just a thing going round in circles (proving only that things can go round in circles) but "as if" it relates to some other thing called 'time' ('passing in another "dimension" )
All we do when we measure time is use predictable motion or change to MEASURE time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Marsden
Therefore Mata, I think you will find that mathematics can with extreme accuracy be used to compare and understand the motion of objects moving in any direction, but nowhere will you find mathematics showing the existence of a past, future or thing called time.
Your argument is silly...like saying that length does not exist since we use some sort or measuring device to measure it. Or speed does not exist because we use a measuring device to measure it.
We certainly can use math to predict the future. Example: The Sun will rise at exactly X time.
We certainly can use math to understand the past. Example: We can use math uncover how fast a car was driving before it was involved in a deadly impact crash.
Like it or not, time exists.
Quote:
We know that time is closely linked to motion as well as forces. Theory of relativity introduced the concept of slowing of time with motion and gravity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Observing time is not possible since it's not formatted for our limited 2 dimensional eyesight to observe. Just like we can't see many electromagnetic frequencies but they certainly exist.
