QM: Does Time exist?

CosmicVibration wrote: progaardvark wrote: I read Barbour's book back when it came out. I remember it being a rather dry, difficult read. If I'm remembering it correctly, much of it had to do with Planck length (or maybe Planck time?) and the "nows" were separated by this. It's an interesting idea, but I sometimes wonder if this is just mathematics trying to find a different reality that may not actually be there. I never read Smolin's book. Valdez wrote: <span style=": rgb248, 248, 252;">If consciousness (as we reckon it) didn't exist, then time wouldn't either. </span> That's a curious idea worthy of thinking about. It sort of reminds me a bit of Donald Hoffman's studies on this in which he considers consciousness as something fundamental in the universe and the physical world emerges from that. It's kind of hard to wrap my brain around that, but curious nonetheless. <p ="Msonormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:107%">Science boils down everything to just 2 components, energy and consciousness.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">  </span>All matter is energy fluctuations. Matter is not solid or motionless. If matter is comprised of energy, then can energy be comprised of consciousness? <span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>If so, the physical world emerges from it, along with the universe and anything in creation.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes">  </span>Tis all a dream..<o:p></o:p></span>

Isn’t Hoffman the guy who says (in essence) that we are in a construct similar to a video game, limited by a VU headset (our brains eyes and senses) that isn’t capable of giving us the entire view of our surroundings? That our perception is limited and basically created by our collective consciousness? Maybe it is a dream like Einstein said “a very persistent dream” lol

^ Or the universe & natural world is God. In other words there is no God.

^ Which implies there is no 'God'.

I have not read either of the 2 books, but they seem fascinating.  Both authors could be right in their own way.

 

Space and time are inseparable. The faster you travel through space, the slower you travel through time. This has been experimented with and demonstrated many times over.  Theoretically, if you can travel at the speed of light, time would essentially stop.  Does this mean that time does not really exist?

 

I think that it exists experientially but not in “reality”.  Similar to matter not being real, only existing experientially.  

 

“Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.”  - Alber Einstein

...then watch them in rapid sequence.

"Rapid sequence" is a time-dependent operation. You're using something that depends on time to define time.

Edited by wiz_d_kidd - 14 hours 24 minutes ago at 06:40

I don't and never will smoke weed for two reasons.

1. It's strictly banned in my country.
2. I'm poor and have a tendency for addictions. Weed would drain all my money in no time. I mean, it's not dirt cheap.

Edited by Hrychu - 19 hours 36 minutes ago at 01:28

Valdez wrote: (Takes long hit off bong… cough cough)

Nice.   I smoked for years but had to stop due to a condition that causes terrible stomach pain & nausea called Cannabis Hyperemises.   I occasionally miss it but the cravings pass.   Now I just drink Scotch.

Lewian wrote: octopus-4 wrote:   The conclusion is that Everything may exist simultaneously.   People seem to think that it's crystal clear what it means to "exist". I don't think that at all. Also, I wonder whether "simultaneous" itself is a notion that relies on a concept of time?

I agree. The notion of simultaneousness would rely and depend on measurable time. Existence itself is a given even if we don’t fully understand the how and why.

yam yam wrote: Time must exist, otherwise how would geologists have been able to dig up the fossilised remains of all these creatures that existed on Earth countless millions of years ago?

Geologists use various techniques to date rocks and fossils (such as radiometric dating) and analyse them within their current context. This methodology does not require belief in the existence of time as an entity featuring past, present, and future, but rather focuses on what can be observed 'now.' Because those remains are part of our observable reality. Geologists can dig up fossilised remains because these fossils exist as tangible objects in the present moment. I mean, what we call 'time' is actually countless 'nows.'

Valdez wrote: I wrote it all down in great detail once when I was high on pot about 40 years ago

Lol! I've never tried the stuff myself as a lifelong non-smoker, but I imagine the whole universe - never mind just time - takes on a whole new perspective when you're three sheets to the wind on the green goddess!