Is Time An Illusion?

PeyoteReligion

Well-Known Member
Ok logic is no longer in the discussion. I must leave for that reason. Have fun with the debate fellas. Ill check in later...or wait I can't because later is a measure of time, which clearly IS NOT REAL...

Mmmmmmk!
 

Hepheastus420

Well-Known Member
Hey guys you should change your number of posts per page to 40 posts per page. It's really helpful to see how an individuals train of thought works. Like I'm serious, lol. I did it and it's pretty awesome.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
So because somthing is unchangeable then its not real? That's not very sound logic. Stephen hawking is stuck in a wheelchair and CANNOT change that, does that mean he's is not real. Use sound logic here and the discussion will go smoother. Also measurement is not real? Don't know what to say to that.
No, because there is no evidence of anyone ever doing ANYTHING with it. Makes it not real. Can you talk to Stephen Hawking, or did up his bones after he dies? Yes.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
No, time has no meaning without the concept of age. Your confusing my words.
I am trying not to. Age, or more generally consecution, is the handle by which we perceive and cognize time. Age is a consequence of time. I can't make it work the other way around. It's very possible I'm simply not getting your main point. In any case, no harm no foul, right? cn
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Ok logic is no longer in the discussion. I must leave for that reason. Have fun with the debate fellas. Ill check in later...or wait I can't because later is a measure of time, which clearly IS NOT REAL...

Mmmmmmk!
No you just can't check in past due to that fact. ONLY FUTURE.
 

Basshead

Well-Known Member
time is a constant. i call it a dimension. i do believe there are beings out in the cosmos who belong to different dimensions. but we developed in the 4D world. x+y+z+time is what our physical bodies explore. our operating systems are embedded into this environment. itd be really cool to breakout. but i doubt that'll happen soon.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
I am trying not to. Age, or more generally consecution, is the handle by which we perceive and cognize time. Age is a consequence of time. I can't make it work the other way around. It's very possible I'm simply not getting your main point. In any case, no harm no foul, right? cn
Age is a consequence of being made from organic materials. Time is a measurement of that process. That process is not called time. It is deterioration, and reproduction of cells.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
We are only measuring the movement of space though. TIME IS NOT REAL. Look at what people think time is online. Scientists think it is A SUBSTANCE. NO IT IS NOT.
Time, a substance? I have never heard of that. Could you provide a link?

I never envisioned time as a substance. It is not convertible into matter or energy. Space isn't substantive either but it's quite real. "Immaterial" and "unreal" are apples and macaroni imo. cn
 

Hepheastus420

Well-Known Member
Here I didn't write this....


Does Time Really Exist?
Question: Does Time Really Exist?
Sometimes people talk about how Einstein proved that everything is relative. In the bestselling book The Secret, it says "Time is just an illusion." Is this really true? Is time just a figment of our imagination?
Answer: Time is certainly a very complex topic in physics, but there is no real doubt among physicists that time does really, truly exist ... they're just divided a bit on what causes this existence.
The Arrow of Time and Entropy

The phrase "the arrow of time" was coined in 1927 by Sir Arthur Eddington and popularized in his 1928 book The Nature of the Physical World. Basically, the arrow of time is the idea that time flows in only one direction, as opposed to dimensions of space which have no preferred orientation. Eddington makes three specific points in regards to the arrow of time:
It is vividly recognized by consciousness.
It is equally insisted on by our reasoning faculty, which tells us that a reversal of the arrow would render the external world nonsensical.
It makes no appearance in physical science except in the study of organisation of a number of individuals. Here the arrow indicates the direction of progressive increase of the random element.
The first two points are certainly interesting, but it's the third point that captures the physics of time's arrow. The distinguishing factor of the arrow of time is that it points in the direction of increasing entropy, per the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Things in our universe decay as a course of natural, time-based processes ... but they do not spontaneously regain order without a lot of work.
There's a deeper level to what Eddington says in point three, however, and that is that "It makes no appearance in physical science except..." What does that mean? Time is all over the place in physics!

While this is certainly true, the curious thing is that the laws of physics are "time reversible" ... which is to say that the laws themselves look as if they would work perfectly well if the universe were played in reverse. From a physics standpoint, there's no real reason why the arrow of time should by necessity be moving forward.

The most common explanation is that in the very distant past, the universe had a high degree of order (or low entropy). Because of this "boundary condition," the natural laws are such that the entropy is continuously increasing. (This is the basic argument put forth in Sean Carroll's 2010 book From Eternity to Here: The Quest for the Ultimate Theory of Time, though he goes further to suggest possible explanations for why the universe may have started off with so much order.)

The Secret and Time

One common misconception spread by an unclear discussion of the nature of relativity and other physics related to time is that time does not, in fact, exist at all. This comes across in a number of areas that are commonly classified as pseudoscience or even mysticism, but I'd like to address one particular appearance in this article.
In the best-selling self-help book (and video) The Secret, the authors put forth the notion that physicists have proven that time does not exist. Consider a few of the following lines from section "How Long Does It Take?" in the chapter "How to Use the Secret" from the book:

"Time is just an illusion. Einstein told us that."
"What quantum physicists and Einstein tell us is that everything is happening simultaneously."

"There is no time for the Universe and there is no size for the Universe."

All three of the statements above are categorically false, according most physicists (especially Einstein!). Time is actually an integral part of the universe. As mentioned earlier, the very linear concept of time is tied into the concept of the Second Law of Thermodynamics ... which is seen by many physicists as one of the most important laws in all of physics! Without time as a real property of the universe, the Second Law becomes meaningless.
What is true is that Einstein proved, through his theory of relativity, that time by itself was not an absolute quantity. Rather, time and space are united in a very precise way to form spacetime, and this spacetime is an absolute measure that can be used - again, in a very precise, mathematical way - to determine how different physical processes in different locations interact with each other.

This does not mean that everything is happening simultaneously, however. In fact, Einstein firmly believed - based on the evidence of his equations (such as E = mc2) - that no information can travel faster than the speed of light. Every point in spacetime is limited in the way it can communicate with other regions of spacetime. The idea that everything happens simultaneously is exactly counter to the results that Einstein developed.

This and other physics errors in The Secret are perfectly understandable, because the fact is these are very complex topics, and they are not necessarily completely understood by physicists. However, just because physicists don't necessarily have a complete understanding of a concept such as time does not mean that it's valid to say they have no understanding of time, or that they've written off the whole concept as unreal. They most assuredly have not.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Yes. Time is a measurement, not anything REAL
Yes, measuring change and the change is real, therefore time is real. Time is merely the name we give to the fact that things change. No one has said it is material or substantive but time is real because it passes.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
So you're saying time is a measurement of an illusion?
NOO. Time is a measurement. Which we have the illusion of being real. BECAUSE of things like deterioration, clocks, the sun, age. We believe in it. But all of those things are just side effects of the invention of time. YES we still age and deteriorate without time. But that is because time is not there to effect it to begin with.
 
Top