Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

What is time?Follow

#1 Jul 20 2009 at 9:32 PM Rating: Default
After having many discussions about this before, I would like to give this forum the opportunity to try its hand at convincing me. Everytime I have this discussion, the room divides into two halves. One half defines it as measurements, and that it wouldn't exist without humans. I disagree, because if humanity were to be obliterated, the planets would still revolve. That side devolves into a tree falling in the woods arguement. The other side of the room usually struggles endlessly with understanding physics and philosophy. Although I think the answer is with that half somewhere, it usually gets very painful in the brain before anything solid forms. So..

What is time? What is the definition of time?

The best scientific minds can't agree. What do you think?
#2 Jul 20 2009 at 9:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Time is a unit of measure, both relative and subjective depending on your frame of reference that allows us to have a framework for asigning reference to events and epochs. The best, most consistant measure of time would likely be measuring the duration it takes for the universe tor each a uniform 0 kelvin, then subdividing that duration into measureable units. But we have no way of knowing if or when that will ever occur.

I plan to bypass time and live forever personally.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#3 Jul 20 2009 at 9:55 PM Rating: Decent
In before Smash.




-NW
#4 Jul 20 2009 at 10:07 PM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
I think I want the time I spent reading that post back.
#5 Jul 20 2009 at 10:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
Quote:
and that it wouldn't exist without humans.

Which is why I never ask Pensive this type of question.
#6 Jul 21 2009 at 1:05 AM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Damn! Kao said what i was gonna say Smiley: bah
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#7 Jul 21 2009 at 1:11 AM Rating: Default
Kao - Thanks for the post. It sounds like you have a good definition for 'entropy' going. Mind taking a shot at time?
#8 Jul 21 2009 at 1:37 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Time turns a point into a line. It's fun envisaging atoms in 4 dimensions, they turn into a spiraling thread. Thinking about a whole solar system in 4 dimensions, it's like a spiralling tube made of a highly furled incredibly intricate tapestry. Very cool.

Edited, Jul 21st 2009 5:37am by Aripyanfar
#9 Jul 21 2009 at 2:06 AM Rating: Good
***
2,453 posts
MyTie wrote:
After having many discussions about this before, I would like to give this forum the opportunity to try its hand at convincing me. Everytime I have this discussion, the room divides into two halves. One half defines it as measurements, and that it wouldn't exist without humans. I disagree, because if humanity were to be obliterated, the planets would still revolve. That side devolves into a tree falling in the woods arguement. The other side of the room usually struggles endlessly with understanding physics and philosophy. Although I think the answer is with that half somewhere, it usually gets very painful in the brain before anything solid forms. So..

What is time? What is the definition of time?

The best scientific minds can't agree. What do you think?


Time is what I wasted reading your post.
#10 Jul 21 2009 at 2:38 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
Thanks for giving us the opportunity, very generous.
#11 Jul 21 2009 at 5:20 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
MyTie wrote:
I would like to give this forum the opportunity to try its hand at convincing me.
Can we talk about skin care instead?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#12 Jul 21 2009 at 6:15 AM Rating: Good
Time is a cranky old lady that looks like a young girl, with pretty green hair.
#13 Jul 21 2009 at 6:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Time is what you're dreadfully aware of while waiting outside of the only functional restroom at the only gas station within fifty miles with an imminent case of the whiskey *****, watching a blob of a woman straining and wheezing, sounding like she still has a drumstick stuck in her throat from the whole chicken she horked down for lunch, trying to unwedge her rusty powerchair from the restroom doorway while still seated in it.

Smiley: mad
#14 Jul 21 2009 at 6:42 AM Rating: Good
***
1,087 posts
Time is what the wealthiest among us cant buy.
#15 Jul 21 2009 at 6:48 AM Rating: Good
*****
10,359 posts
Allegory wrote:
Quote:
and that it wouldn't exist without humans.

Which is why I never ask Pensive this type of question.


You knew it was only a matter of time.

Anyway, time wouldn't exist without humans, but it's not because it's measurements (because it's not composed of measurements.) It's not really constituted of anything at all for that matter, because time is not a thing (though various ideas of time are things, time itself is not a thing.) It's debatably a theatre for the events of the universe, but I really don't think that such a description is adequate to describe it's function, and it also implies that time somehow exists for things other than sentient beings, which it doesn't.

Time is a means by which people cognize objects, and assert themselves against those objects. It's just a projection of the human mind onto the world so that it becomes ordered, allowing for us to make causal interpretations, and to make sense of how we can relate with other objects, including the ordering of our own thoughts. Time is what enables us to think of ourselves as contained, unified entities, instead of disjointed sensations.

Quote:
I disagree, because if humanity were to be obliterated, the planets would still revolve.


No one who I have ever met, who believes that time is subjective, disputes the truth of this matter, nor do I. What is in question is the worth of the fact that objects will exist without human perception of them; just because an object is out there doing it's own thing without ever being perceived is not adequate proof for the objective existence of time (or space.) All it really does is assert that objects exist, in accordance with what it means to be merely an object, and not a subject (mere objects being things that don't percieve.)
#16 Jul 21 2009 at 6:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Anyway, time wouldn't exist without humans...


Plants and animals recognize time. They may not divide it up into days, hours, minutes, and seconds, but they recognize seasons, aging, and night and day. What is that if it's not time?

#17 Jul 21 2009 at 7:07 AM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Anyway, time wouldn't exist without humans...


Plants and animals recognize time. They may not divide it up into days, hours, minutes, and seconds, but they recognize seasons, aging, and night and day. What is that if it's not time?



Knowledge limitations. I have the right to talk about only human experience at best, and sometimes not even that. Trying to both imagine the experiences of a cat as well as maintain my human understanding of time may very well be theoretically impossible, and it's definitely practically impossible.

If plants and cats do have concepts of time, they're likely radically altered from our own, and it's really not being honest to even call it "time" at that point. It's "cat time" instead of "human time."
#18 Jul 21 2009 at 7:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
It's "cat time" instead of "human time."


I freakin' hate cat time. Every morning at exactly 6:30 the damn thing comes and sits on my chest while I sleep, staring at me until I wake up and feed it.

***** cat time. Smiley: motz
#19 Jul 21 2009 at 7:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Knowledge limitations. I have the right to talk about only human experience at best, and sometimes not even that. Trying to both imagine the experiences of a cat as well as maintain my human understanding of time may very well be theoretically impossible, and it's definitely practically impossible.

If plants and cats do have concepts of time, they're likely radically altered from our own, and it's really not being honest to even call it "time" at that point. It's "cat time" instead of "human time."


Really...?

I don't find it difficult at all to recognize that, while a bear might not look at a watch to find out how many hours he has left in the day, he still knows when to eat, when to sleep, when to hibernate, and when to hunt.

Every living thing, human or not, is ruled by time. The same time as everything else. The seasons, the sunlight.

Not that my different opinion doesn't give you the "right" to talk about something, of course.

Edited, Jul 21st 2009 10:15am by Belkira
#20REDACTED, Posted: Jul 21 2009 at 7:23 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Terrifying,
#21 Jul 21 2009 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Knowledge limitations. I have the right to talk about only human experience at best, and sometimes not even that. Trying to both imagine the experiences of a cat as well as maintain my human understanding of time may very well be theoretically impossible, and it's definitely practically impossible.

If plants and cats do have concepts of time, they're likely radically altered from our own, and it's really not being honest to even call it "time" at that point. It's "cat time" instead of "human time."


Really...?

I don't find it difficult at all to recognize that, while a bear might not look at a watch to find out how many hours he has left in the day, he still knows when to eat, when to sleep, when to hibernate, and when to hunt.

Every living thing, human or not, is ruled by time. The same time as everything else. The seasons, the sunlight.

Not that my different opinion doesn't give you the "right" to talk about something, of course.

Edited, Jul 21st 2009 10:15am by Belkira



Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're confusing time as a measure and time as a concept. As humans, we think of time as intervals between one event and another, a measure. Bears, however, only know that then is not now, and now is what matters. They react to changes in season, however a bear in summer will not know that he has only a few months until he needs to prepare for winter.

A better analogy would be to use distance. A bear may walk a mile, but it doesn't know that it did. It's an old quantum parable, something doesn't have a value until it is measured.
#22 Jul 21 2009 at 7:32 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Time
It's on my side
Yes it is!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#23 Jul 21 2009 at 7:32 AM Rating: Good
Tzemesce the Meaningless wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you're confusing time as a measure and time as a concept. As humans, we think of time as intervals between one event and another, a measure. Bears, however, only know that then is not now, and now is what matters. They react to changes in season, however a bear in summer will not know that he has only a few months until he needs to prepare for winter.

A better analogy would be to use distance. A bear may walk a mile, but it doesn't know that it did. It's an old quantum parable, something doesn't have a value until it is measured.


I disagree, again.

First, the question is "what is time." I don't think that time is something withtout value until it is mesasured, espeically by, again, what we see in nature. Animals only take care of their young for a certain amount of time. Then they are off on their own. They know when they are to mate. They know when they shouldn't have offspring. They know when they are to hibernate, when they are to hunt. They are ruled by the passage of the sun. Just like we are. They may not have sectioned the day up into little bits, but it's the same thing. When the sun is here, we do this. When it's here, we do this.

If you don't think that a bear knows how far it walks, you're crazy. He may not have the concept of a mile in that word, but he knows how far he's gone and how far he has to go to get back to his den.

So, no. I don't think I have anything confused. I think I just see things differently than you do.
#24 Jul 21 2009 at 7:47 AM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
Yesterday doens't exist, all I have is the memory of yesterday. For all I know it never actually happened. All I have is now, and everything is new. My life is a new experience every day. I have memories of past times, but who knows if they are real or not, everyday is a surprise.

I really like that book.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#25 Jul 21 2009 at 7:56 AM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:
Knowledge limitations. I have the right to talk about only human experience at best, and sometimes not even that. Trying to both imagine the experiences of a cat as well as maintain my human understanding of time may very well be theoretically impossible, and it's definitely practically impossible.

If plants and cats do have concepts of time, they're likely radically altered from our own, and it's really not being honest to even call it "time" at that point. It's "cat time" instead of "human time."


Really...?

I don't find it difficult at all to recognize that, while a bear might not look at a watch to find out how many hours he has left in the day, he still knows when to eat, when to sleep, when to hibernate, and when to hunt.

Every living thing, human or not, is ruled by time. The same time as everything else. The seasons, the sunlight.

Not that my different opinion doesn't give you the "right" to talk about something, of course. [/i]


When I talk about the right to talk about something, I'm recognizing our limitations as human beings. We don't have the "right" to talk about plants as subjects in the same way that we don't have the "right" to phase through solid objects like Kitty Pryde. We probably have a little bit of right to talk about other conscious animals, but it's not very much; the experience of consciousness is just way too different. I'm not trying to be anthropocentricly arrogant or anything though: we're different from cats in the same way we're different from god, or telepathic aliens.

It's really hard for me to find the words to express what I'm trying to here... The seasons and sunlight and bears hibernating in the winter aren't really um, temporal. They're just things, that do stuff in the world. They'll keep doing stuff until the sun explodes, and then other things will do different stuff. None of that is really indicative of time though, and, as in the previous paragraph, we aren't really in the position of talking about that stuff as happening by itself, in a vacuum, with no human perception. Time's really just an order that we impose on the universe to force it into making sense, and in that regard, it's an essential part of the human consciousness, which constitutes our understanding of all of that stuff that's happening out there.

I guess i'd say it constitutes experience. In any case, the much cooler part of this mental ******* is deciding what to do with time once you've identified it; the practical effect is to give meaning to our lives. Of course, you probably don't care a whit about it, because you don't need that mental ******* to give meaning to your life, and that's cool too.


Quote:

It's an old quantum parable, something doesn't have a value until it is measured.


That's one way of looking at it, but it's not what I'm getting at, because the last time we discussed this that's what everyone thought I was trying to say, and it's not. It would be stupid of me to try to make an argument from physics anyway, because I don't study physics, and the idea that time is a thing, out there, to be measured and dissected by humans is directly at odds with what I think anyway. It's not that time simply doesn't mean something without being measured; it's that a human actually creates it, substantially, and not just linguistically or practically, through living and thinking.
#26 Jul 21 2009 at 7:56 AM Rating: Good
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
I disagree, again.

First, the question is "what is time." I don't think that time is something withtout value until it is mesasured, espeically by, again, what we see in nature. Animals only take care of their young for a certain amount of time. Then they are off on their own. They know when they are to mate. They know when they shouldn't have offspring. They know when they are to hibernate, when they are to hunt. They are ruled by the passage of the sun. Just like we are. They may not have sectioned the day up into little bits, but it's the same thing. When the sun is here, we do this. When it's here, we do this.

If you don't think that a bear knows how far it walks, you're crazy. He may not have the concept of a mile in that word, but he knows how far he's gone and how far he has to go to get back to his den.

So, no. I don't think I have anything confused. I think I just see things differently than you do.


You're arguing the same point I am. You agree that while the bear may live a day and walk a mile, it doesn't know that is was specifically 24 hours and 5,280 feet. No one is saying those events didn't occur, what we're saying is that without someone there to assign a value to them, then they are no different any other day or any other mile. I think the confusion may be on the weight that's being placed on the concept of value, here. When I say value I'm mean it as an empirical standard by which other events can be measured against. When you say value I think you're meaning the presence of those events, and so when I say that they have no value, you're assuming that I mean they didn't happen. Which I'm not.

Edited, Jul 21st 2009 10:57am by Tzemesce
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 233 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (233)