Jump to content

TIME, what is it.


bobb
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, ink said:

 

Interesting .... I did wonder if you would reply to the whole post or just one aspect .... and which in that case it would be?

 

No surprise that you quoted the latter.

 

You can find the information regarding your reply very simply.

 

When I have time of course, awwww they get worse you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2021 at 5:27 PM, Truthspoon said:

You can't have 'absolute zero' IN the universe, it's one of the absolute limits of material reality like the speed of light

 

My incredibly dim witted brain said JUST ABOVE absolute zero

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another perplexing attribute about time, when we sleep time is irrelevant in our dreams, you can nod off for five minutes and yet dream about something fantastic that seems to be forever and then we wake look at the clock and find only five minutes has passed, and yet we were immersed in this thing called time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/24/2021 at 6:19 AM, Truthspoon said:

 

Light DOES transcend time and space because it travels at the speed of light.

 

At the speed of light, time = 0 (eternity) and no longer exists.... therefore it is transcended.

 

There's a cool video with Carl Sagan which demonstrates what happens to the universe when you travel near the speed of light:

 

 

 

 

I like Carl Sagan, he is a very interesting person that has had an extraordinary life, and he is the author of one of my all time favourite films Contact, but what you have posted here is absolute hog wash and explains nothing other than Doppler shift!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2021 at 8:12 PM, ink said:

memory contained in water

 

Is this what you're on about, Water memory it looks interesting so I will get more involved when I can, and surprisingly it does indeed relate to what I was on about by this Gentleman Masaru Emoto, I am no expert so I have only touched upon these subjects and I think Charles Babbage, was on about how things dissipate away but are never truly annihilated by conversion to heat at least, but alas my stumbling around the web of mental doom has failed me once again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2021 at 9:29 PM, bobb said:

 

I like Carl Sagan, he is a very interesting person that has had an extraordinary life, and he is the author of one of my all time favourite films Contact, but what you have posted here is absolute hog wash and explains nothing other than Doppler shift!

 

You are even stupider than I thought.

 

Doppler shift was only a small part of the video. It focussed mainly on time dilation and the shrinking of the observable universe into a smaller and smaller field of view, when approaching the speed of light. The implication is within the bounds of even mainstream science, that at light speed, light is omnipresent and time becomes 0. It's you who doesn't know the fundamentals of modern science. I learned this at A level. It's not new info.

 

But you're pretending to be clever. Maybe you got a GCSE in science or watched a BBC 2 programme with Brian Cox.

 

I'll  be off now. Leave you to talk to no-one because you have nothing interesting to say.

 

Edited by Truthspoon
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2021 at 6:29 PM, bobb said:

 

I like Carl Sagan, he is a very interesting person that has had an extraordinary life, and he is the author of one of my all time favourite films Contact, but what you have posted here is absolute hog wash and explains nothing other than Doppler shift!

I also like this movie a lot. Especially from 1:59:42 to 2:00:30. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Truthspoon said:

 

You are even stupider than I thought.

 

Doppler shift was only a small part of the video. It focussed mainly on time dilation and the shrinking of the observable universe into a smaller and smaller field of view, when approaching the speed of light. The implication is within the bounds of even mainstream science, that at light speed, light is omnipresent and time becomes 0. It's you who doesn't know the fundamentals of modern science. I learned this at A level. It's not new info.

 

But you're pretending to be clever. Maybe you got a GCSE in science or watched a BBC 2 programme with Brian Cox.

 

I'll  be off now. Leave you to talk to no-one because you have nothing interesting to say.

 

 

Well you posted that load of coffolloxs, are you admitting to a secret love affair with Brian mandroid Cox?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/30/2021 at 2:07 PM, Origin said:

I also like this movie a lot. Especially from 1:59:42 to 2:00:30. 

 

I just watched this bit again, I guess you're on about the translucent effect of the light on the craft's walls revealing a Galaxy outside, or was it Jodie Foster's close up mug shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2021 at 10:27 PM, Truthspoon said:

Doppler shift was only a small part of the video. It focussed mainly on time dilation and the shrinking of the observable universe into a smaller and smaller field of view, when approaching the speed of light. The implication is within the bounds of even mainstream science, that at light speed, light is omnipresent and time becomes 0. It's you who doesn't know the fundamentals of modern science. I learned this at A level. It's not new info.

I know it has nothing to do with the subject,or maybe it does ,but according to new observations  in the last 12 months with the Hubble telescope objects have been observed traveling faster than the speed of light, and that intern has led some to believe that the red shift of cosmological objects is nothing more than an artifact of distance and has nothing to do with actual speed.

 

Having said that, time is a very interesting subject, one could say that time does not exist and is a construct of the brain so as to produce a linear progression between events  in time so confusion does not reign supreme and therefore it allows us to navigate this reality  , others would say that without memory there can be no past or future only the present and therefore time does not exist. However if you subscribe to the notion of universal conciseness, there must be a universal memory and if so time must exist irrespective of human  conciseness.

We could also say  that because all matter  is made up of atoms spinning at the speed of light  time should not exist. You can also throw space time into the mix and also the Plank field (the infinite energy in the space between sub atomic particles) and also the illusion of movement with regards to the speed of light and time it all becomes very interesting indeed but I don't see a definitive answer on the horizon anytime soon as to what time actually is and personally I don't have a clue

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I am not mistaken, I do not believe the objects are travelling faster than light, it's just that the ongoing expansion of the universe is moving things apart at faster than light speeds....

 

But nothing is actually moving faster than light, it's the 4d universe which is expanding and therefore creating greater distance between objects and those objects are being moved further apart in 3dimensional space.

 

Imagine the 4d universe is a balloon and galaxies on the 3d surface of the balloon appear to move further apart as the balloon inflates, I believe that's the case, it was the last time I looked into it.

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Truthspoon said:

If I am not mistaken, I do not believe the objects are travelling faster than light, it's just that the ongoing expansion of the universe is moving things apart at faster than light speeds....

That would mean that an object is indeed traveling faster than the speed of light retaliative to the observer.

With the statement the ongoing expansion of the universe, if the red shift we see is simply an artifact of distance that means the universe is static if indeed it is expanding it just may be doing so in our particular neck of the woods, it could be shrinking somewhere else (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction), interesting isn't it.

That analogy of the universe as a balloon with pennies stuck to the outside was first postulated in the book Gravity by Wheeler ,Thorne and Misner as the balloon is inflated the the pennies ( galaxies) move apart, but what is happening in the interior of the balloon (universe) , and what is causing the balloon to inflate in the first place, I forget who said give us one miracle (the big bang, which I personally think is bullshit) and we'll take care of the rest

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Origin said:

Time does not matter for something very sophisticated. Then it can only mean that humans are not aware of something..

Could you please expand on that statement, I'm not aware of how many bacteria have colonized my left eyebrow, however I fail to see how time does or doesn't matter or is indeed relevant in that instance.

Also the use of the word sophisticated is rather subjective ,you would have to define sophisticated and set boundaries or parameters as to the level of sophistication you are referring to, something may be more sophisticated than something else but never the less both things are sophisticated in their own right 

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, peter said:

You've been in too many hospital waiting rooms

 

Why do you say that? I can't see what this has got to do with the post you replied to, so what's your point? Do you disagree time is created?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RobSS said:

 

Why do you say that? I can't see what this has got to do with the post you replied to, so what's your point? Do you disagree time is created?

 

 

I'm sorry if you fail to see the relevance of that statement , I admit it is a bit tung in cheek but if you think about it, you'll get it. I'll give you a hint ,the key word is patience

You can read my previous posts to see what I think about time,but if you say it is created  I would ask what is the method of creation  by who or what and for what end

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, peter said:

I'm sorry if you fail to see the relevance of that statement , I admit it is a bit tung in cheek but if you think about it, you'll get it. I'll give you a hint ,the key word is patience

 

Yes, I thought that's the word you had zoomed in on but I couldn't see the overall relevance of the comment, so thanks for elaborating.

 

5 minutes ago, peter said:

You can read my previous posts to see what I think about time, but if you say it is created  I would ask what is the method of creation  by who or what and for what end

 

God created time. God has no beginning or end. If you want to know how God created the universe, I've got no idea. Regarding to what end, time affords the opportunity for souls to develop and mature.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RobSS said:

God created time. God has no beginning or end. If you want to know how God created the universe, I've got no idea. Regarding to what end, time affords the opportunity for souls to develop and mature.

I nearly put in my reply please don't say god .

Now I'm going to have to ask ,how do you know  god created time  and if so which god did it ,there is plenty to chose from, was it your god or someone's else's etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, peter said:

I nearly put in my reply please don't say god .

Now I'm going to have to ask ,how do you know  god created time  and if so which god did it ,there is plenty to chose from, was it your god or someone's else's etc etc

 

I'm only saying what I believe to be the case.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RobSS said:

I'm only saying what I believe to be the case.

Sorry but beliefs don't cut it when evidence is the name of the game , in my book the term god is used when people haven't got a clue and wont admit as such.

just my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peter said:

Sorry but beliefs don't cut it when evidence is the name of the game ,

 

Do you have evidence there is no God?

 

1 hour ago, peter said:

 

in my book the term god is used when people haven't got a clue and wont admit as such.

 

Sounds a bit vague, as if you believe science itself is some kind of god, and if anyone doesn't believe in science being the be all and end all, then they don't have a clue about life. If that's what you believe, isn't that a bit dismissive? I'm not saying science doesn't have a place, but it should not seek to become a know-it-all. There's more to the meaning of life than just science.

 

1 hour ago, peter said:

just my opinion

 

I also think of God as being the best possibility, unless you can present something better?

 

What does science really know anyway? Does science know anything about the soul, for example, or the purpose of life? What does science know about the true nature of consciousness?

 

Science can only discover what already is, and should stop trying to control every aspect of human life, otherwise it becomes scientism and creates a scientific tyranny. Science should keep an open mind and not impose its views on others.

 

That's my opinion.

 

 

Edited by RobSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, peter said:

That would mean that an object is indeed traveling faster than the speed of light retaliative to the observer.

 

 

No because it isn't travelling, or moving in space, it is the space itself that is 'moving', or rather 'expanding'.

 

The curved nature of what they call 'space-time' can be observed by seeing how light bends over distances and also explains gravity.... the curved nature of space is pretty much accepted now, and the fact that this accounts for gravity and that heavy objects create wrinkles by displacing space-time accounts for gravity wells. I believe Einstein subscribed to this view and may have even originated it.

 

Rupert Sheldrake has been quoting 'give us one free miracle' don't know if he originated the phrase.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Truthspoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RobSS said:

Do you have evidence there is no God?

Do you have evidence there is

 

1 hour ago, RobSS said:

Sounds a bit vague, as if you believe science itself is some kind of god

No I don't I believe that, a lot of so called science is a load of shit

 

1 hour ago, RobSS said:

Science should keep an open mind

exactly, and go where the evidence leads ,not look for a predetermined conclusion as most science does these days

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...