Why Time does not Exist

welcome to FES lol

I agree that Time exists only as a concept because we humans created it. However, there has to be something out there that forbids events from happening all at once.

I thought modern Physics puts space and time as connected in one dimension called space-time.

Quote from: divito the truthist on January 10, 2008, 05:19:30 AM

Finally, people get it!! The whole time being a dimension thing bugged me since elementary school.

* divito the truthist breathes a sigh of relief.

Time is too a dimension.  How is it not a dimension?  I may be different from a space dimension -- you can't see it --  but it still has a dimension.  That much is elementary, really, but time as a concept is not. 

Time exists merely as a consequence of the events taking place in it. Space is the same: it exists merely by the bodies and energies contained in it.  Einstein quantified this Aristotelean premise very well, as Germanicus said above. 

As far as human perception is concerned, time is made up of the recollection of memories in the present, the "now".  Time is a result of the way our minds process memories. 

Here's a little Heidegger for you:

Quote

Time is an unfurling whose stages stand in a relation of earlier and later to one another.  Each earlier and later can be determined in terms of a now which, however, is itself arbitrary.  What primarily the clock does in each case is not to indicate the how-long or how-much of time in its present flowing, but to determine the specific fixing of the now. 

(After that his shit gets really strange; he starts talking about pure Being and Dasein, which I think literally translates to "the-ness".  The the-ness of existence.  Jack Kerouac called this "IT! IT! IT! This is IT!")

So somehow is no events took place, would time still exist to contain these non-events? or would a non-event, in effect, be an event?

I agree that Time exists only as a concept because we humans created it. However, there has to be something out there that forbids events from happening all at once.

Something that forbids events from happening all at once... I think Kasroa is right in saying space-time is that something. 

So somehow is no events took place, would time still exist to contain these non-events? or would a non-event, in effect, be an event?

If no events took place there would be no way to measure time, which is about all we can do to get our grimy fingers around it.  So I suppose in that case there would be no time and also no events, no objects, no anything. 

This "time" thing seems to me to be just like another space dimension, except that we can only experience one point of its length: right now.  For some reason we are just slowly rolling through this 4th dimension at a constant rate.  We lack completely the ability to push ourselves around in this "time" dimension.  we can only look on as we, in our three visible dimensions, pass through the fourth just like the 3-D sphere passes through this 2-D plane: 


We know time because it exists.  Or it exists because we know time.  All things being relative, there is no difference between the two statements.  Reality is beyond words.  One must not confuse the world of things -- as we think about, talk about, and name -- with the world as it actually is.  The sound of rain needs no translation.  Time exists without us; it is we that are impermanent. 

Time does not exist if space does not exist. A second of time is a a measurement and exists as much as a meter or a kilogram does.

Lol time does not exist. It is simply a measurement of a movement. This movement can be warped with space which we measure in length. To make this thing that we measure with time simpler, I shall call it time.......

I found this in my book of quotes.  It's by a fellow named Thibault Damour.

The fact that time passes is only an illusion due to the irreversible character of how we commit things to memory: like the notion of temperature has no meaning if we consider it to be a system of few particles, likewise it is probably that the notion of time passing means something for only certain complex systems, which evolve out of the thermodynamic balance, and which handle the accumulated information in their memory in a certain way.

And by Jean-Henri-Samuel Formey:
Nothing proves that time has anything in common with the process whose unfolding it enables.

Time is only an abstract being, which is not endowed with the properties the imagination attributes it with. 

And by Hermann Weyl:
The objective world simply is; it does not happen.   It is only for my consciousness, crawling along the edge of my bodily universe, that a section of this world comes to life in a space like a transient picture, which constantly changes in time.

Concepts are not tangible reality. Thus, time does not exist.

I still agree and disagree.  It's as if there are two kinds of time, as Saint Raist alluded to in his last post.  It's similar to the gravity and gravitation argument, except in this case the two are both called "time". 

I like the idea of space-time as being one dimension. Your movement through space directly affects your movement through time. The two are inextricably linked. Just like energy and mass are.

It is all combined into a single manifold, but isn't space-time still four discreet dimensions? 

The time is different in the universe, scientist have shown this with atomic clocks.

I still agree and disagree.  It's as if there are two kinds of time, as Saint Raist alluded to in his last post.  It's similar to the gravity and gravitation argument, except in this case the two are both called "time". 

Mankind names a measurement of time passing, of something occurring in a certain order, with certain age associated with said events. This is a conceptualization of the reality in which we live. This is not tangible. Thus it cannot exist outside cultural and institutionalized mental concepts of itself.

Time does not exist.

Then how can it be warped? Warping a concept and measuring it, wow.

If time does not exist, why does it take more energy to move an object at a faster rate? Time is an illusion, this should not happen.

Quote from: EvilToothpaste on February 14, 2008, 09:13:30 AM

I still agree and disagree.  It's as if there are two kinds of time, as Saint Raist alluded to in his last post.  It's similar to the gravity and gravitation argument, except in this case the two are both called "time". 

Mankind names a measurement of time passing, of something occurring in a certain order, with certain age associated with said events. This is a conceptualization of the reality in which we live. This is not tangible. Thus it cannot exist outside cultural and institutionalized mental concepts of itself.

Time does not exist.

Mankind names a measurement of space passing, of something occurring in a certain order, with certain age associated with said events. This is a conceptualization of the reality in which we live. This is not tangible. Thus it cannot exist outside cultural and institutionalized mental concepts of itself.

Distance does not exist.

Nor time.

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

And accurate.

It exists because we created it.  Just the same as God. 

Quote from: Username on February 15, 2008, 06:05:13 AM

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

And accurate.

So nothing exists?

It exists because we created it.  Just the same as God. 

I'll think I'll pass on this one.

So is the consensus that nothing at all exists? 

When someone says that nothing exists I am convinced that their brain does not exist.

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

Just as arguing FOR the existence of it. Thus, this thread has no purpose and we can all go fuck someone and have a nice day.

/thread

Quote from: EvilToothpaste on February 14, 2008, 09:13:30 AM

I still agree and disagree.  It's as if there are two kinds of time, as Saint Raist alluded to in his last post.  It's similar to the gravity and gravitation argument, except in this case the two are both called "time". 

Mankind names a measurement of time passing, of something occurring in a certain order, with certain age associated with said events. This is a conceptualization of the reality in which we live. This is not tangible. Thus it cannot exist outside cultural and institutionalized mental concepts of itself.

Time does not exist.

This man would disagree

Quote from: Username on February 15, 2008, 06:05:13 AM

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

Just as arguing FOR the existence of it. Thus, this thread has no purpose and we can all go fuck someone and have a nice day.
/thread

Oh come on.  You can't point fingers back since it was times existence that was denied in the first place. 

As for the latter, and in the words of Merl Haggard: let's get drunk and screw. 

Quote from: Username on February 15, 2008, 06:05:13 AM

Nor anything by that measure, which means saying it doesn't exist is meaningless and silly.

And accurate.

Well shit, I'm glad this guy chimed in.  I don't know where we'd be without such a great moderator.  it's not accurate, it is wrong. 

Movement exists, thus time exists.  How can something that does not exist be measured? 

How can something that does not exist be measured? 

Are you kidding me?

Quote from: Smarmikus on February 16, 2008, 03:45:37 PM

How can something that does not exist be measured? 

Are you kidding me?

Taking a philosophical view on everything and calling it accurate is bullshit.