i know it probably makes you feel edgy and different to argue that time doesn't exist, but its just a reality you have to accept
I know it may take time to look at the reasons give throughout the thread, and it may make you edgy that majority of physicists think time is real but its just a reality you have to accept. Though i have to give you props on ignoring every argument given.
I disagree.
Because you didn't read the rest of the thread.
Sorry, but time is a construct. You can argue to high heaven, but like heaven, it doesnt actually exist.
I want to facepalm, but I'm going to headdesk instead.
Take any measurement of distance. Its only that distance because of what we are and our ability to perceive at this level of reality.
Can you elaborate?
And just for the record, if you can tell me for a fact that gravity and black holes warp time, you will be rich. In fact, prove either exists. You would also be rich.
Both have been proven.
nobody knows what goes on in a black hole, you cant say it warps time.
Let me give you a good proof that time exists and warping it isn't just " warps our ability to perceive it in the same way than we usually would". Einstein's theory of relativity states that time is not relative, and as you approach the speed of light, time slows down. Not our perception of time, we still see it the same speed, but time it's self is changed. This is because light is a constant, which means no matter what speed your traveling at, it's still 299,792,458 mps. So if you travel at 100 mps, then time would have to slow down so that light is still going at 299,792,458 mps. You wouldn't notice the change, you would still see everything the same speed, but if you traveled the speed of light for a year, you would age a year but everyone around you would would be exactly as you left them, not even realizing you were gone. Don't try denying this theory because it's been proved many a time. There are countless theories about time, created by people ten times smarter then you could ever hope to be, that you wouldn't begin to understand without studying years and years of physics. Stop trying to deny science.
How bout this then... Saying that a black hole warps time is not an argument for the existence of time because you will have a hard time proving the black hole even exists... see? That is what I mean.
i backed up your statement by saying i agreed with you, then said that black holes and gravity werent what this discussion was about. please try to keep up, im defending you from yourself
honestly, it seems at this point we all agree that time exists, and were arguing our points against other people who are making similar points
and the gravity and black hole discussion is going off topic
I want to facepalm, but I'm going to headdesk instead.
I wouldnt. Killing brain cells is no way to continue a discussion.
and the gravity and black hole discussion is going off topic
In a way, yes, in a way, no. It was part of the discussion, an argument for the existence of time. I was arguing that it was not an argument for the existence of time. I also dont need to be saved from myself, not yet anyway
Because you didn't read the rest of the thread.
Why are you assuming this? I might have to assume that you cant think properly about what I am saying if you start assuming what I have done. Dont do it again.
Take any measurement of distance. Its only that distance because of what we are and our ability to perceive at this level of reality.
[quote]Can you elaborate?
[/quote]
Do you accept there are levels of reality that we have not even begun to understand, where our current laws break down and act in a way that shakes the very foundations of theories made by the smartest people in the world? If so, then you might actually be able to understand the concept that Im talking about. Im not smart, but I can think.
Also, when you can give me a measurement in my hand, I will bow to you.
Both have been proven.
Actually, I take it back, please headdesk, over and over again.
Why are you assuming this? I might have to assume that you cant think properly about what I am saying if you start assuming what I have done. Dont do it again.
Because there have been so many arguments about the existence of time and yet you say it like there is no argument that can prove time is real.
Do you accept there are levels of reality that we have not even begun to understand, where our current laws break down and act in a way that shakes the very foundations of theories made by the smartest people in the world? If so, then you might actually be able to understand the concept that Im talking about. Im not smart, but I can think.
Why don't you send me a link explaining what you are trying to say.
Actually, I take it back, please headdesk, over and over again.
You wouldn't notice the change, you would still see everything the same speed, but if you traveled the speed of light for a year, you would age a year but everyone around you would would be exactly as you left them, not even realizing you were gone.
Actually the people around you age faster than you if you're travelling near the speed of light. This is because -like you said- moving clocks tick more slowly (which has been demonstrated in experiments).
Actually the people around you age faster than you if you're travelling near the speed of light. This is because -like you said- moving clocks tick more slowly (which has been demonstrated in experiments).
Well if you want to be literal, yes, they would see you aging slower then them (if you are going at a speed they could see at all), but they won't see everything in slow motion.
For the fools that say that gravity dosen't change time, clocks on NASA satelites are purposely set a few milliseconds fast to stay equal to the standard time on the ground.
I dont use a link because this is not something that can be proven thru some random article.
Like I said. Give me a Meter. Or a second. Or any measurement.
But you cant. Because it doesnt exist.
What gravity does to say, for example, the light from a star travelling to us, is warp the way it travels to us. There is not an actual force called time that literally changes it.
And we think gravity is a real force but cannot actually prove its existence. However Im pretty certain that gravity exists in some form or another.
Time is a measurement for the passing of state. Its not a force. It doesnt actually change. Punt a clock at the speed of light and yes, the time will be different, because the very fabric of space will be different, not because time was a force that acted upon it. None of your links prove anything towards an argument that time, as a physical object, exists. We use time as a tool. It does not exist. Einstein's theory doesnt prove the existence of time, it proves what happens to reality when you change its state.
