Physics of Time and advancements in computing

When are we going to see any real breakthrough with theory of time?

Is past real?
Is past, now and future happening at the same time as bible says?

When are we going to get some real answers?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no the past is not real, time compresses with 50% each 3 hours. but data storage system about what happend long time ago are real.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I heard stephen hawking invented imaginary time in between epstein island visits
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_time#:~:text=Imaginary%20time%20is%20a%20mathematical,and%20in%20certain%20cosmological%20theories.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Cult of Passion

      >imaginary time
      That was a major part of my space-time theory, and the only way I could describe was "sideways time". Was in essence 'all that could be for all times', a very VERY large number.

      Force, motion, time, gravity, magnetism, electro left a little out because I dont believe in the elect.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I dont believe in the elect
        Pussy.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Cult of Passion

          >Pussy.
          "Dont worry, history was them not us."

          The arrogance (pride) of the borg collective is they truly see themselves and individuals but until you can discern the programming from the biology you are under demonic influence, scientifically speaking.

          Insistance is futile.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've seen some suggestions that time is an artifact of consciousness and not part of fundamental physics. I HAVEN'T seen anyone actually formulate a consistent theory of that, though. It's an interesting idea, though.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If it isn't obvious that "time" is an idea that comes from being aware of memories, and not a tangible real thing I don't really know how else to explain it to you.

      confounding the concept of time with real physics is probably the worst invention and pop-sci repitition people have ever made and been subjected to.
      >inb4
      >but the clocks on a satellite compared to the clock on the ground!
      The only thing relativity proves is that velocity affects the energy of a given object inside of whatever forces make that object a singular entity.
      Hence the "inertial reference frame."

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I mean it's hardly a new thing. If anything, NOT assuming that time is a fundamental component of existence is the weird version.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          time isn't real, and assuming it is is the weird thing.
          it defies logic.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what's an argument that it isn't real? I agree it might not be real in principle but I'm not aware of any particular reason to believe it isn't.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            time is not a physical object
            time is an abstract ideation borne from the mind's memory

            time is not a physical construct. it has no particle, no force, no interaction
            "time" is not "real"

            Spacetime is incorrect.

            That is all.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I want to add to my reply

            Gravity is real.
            Electroforces are real
            The strong nuclear is real.

            Time is not. It does not exist.
            Time is just a semi-logical description of a procession of events.
            Time is not physical.
            The other forces are, physically real.
            Time is not real.

            So what's the proper formulation for the things spacetime tries to describe?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            "two" does not exist.
            Two rocks exist.
            I have two rocks, one in each hand.
            But "two" is not real.
            I know I have "two" rocks. I have one rock in my left, one in my right.
            But "two rocks" is not real. It's an imaginary description.

            Two seconds is imaginary in the same sense.
            Two seconds for a recorder travelling at 98,000km/s compared to two seconds for a recorder travelling at 1,000km/s is only relative to the difference between the energy in motion between both objects.
            "Time" is an aftereffect - an illusion. A slower object's time is slower,? , than a faster object's time? It sounds like velocity force-energy is the cause for a faster object -decaying- faster than the slower object.

            Time. Is. Not. Real.
            There is no "Space Time"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Reality moves and that movement is known as time. If we say we can remove time because it's not physical then we can remove other things that affect movement but aren't physical too like temperature. Time is a fundamental phenomenon of reality

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I want to add to my reply

            Gravity is real.
            Electroforces are real
            The strong nuclear is real.

            Time is not. It does not exist.
            Time is just a semi-logical description of a procession of events.
            Time is not physical.
            The other forces are, physically real.
            Time is not real.

            "two" does not exist.
            Two rocks exist.
            I have two rocks, one in each hand.
            But "two" is not real.
            I know I have "two" rocks. I have one rock in my left, one in my right.
            But "two rocks" is not real. It's an imaginary description.

            Two seconds is imaginary in the same sense.
            Two seconds for a recorder travelling at 98,000km/s compared to two seconds for a recorder travelling at 1,000km/s is only relative to the difference between the energy in motion between both objects.
            "Time" is an aftereffect - an illusion. A slower object's time is slower,? , than a faster object's time? It sounds like velocity force-energy is the cause for a faster object -decaying- faster than the slower object.

            Time. Is. Not. Real.
            There is no "Space Time"

            So what's the proper formulation for the things spacetime tries to describe?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No.

            The point is "spacetime" is an erroneous label.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            so what's the correct label[s]?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you're devolving this to try and suit your needs

            Simple fact is - time is not real and thus conflating physics as spacetime is an erroneous fabrication

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Is space not real, either?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            define "Space"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the thing in which things are arranged at what appears to us to be "the same time" (although I don't know what you would say actually corresponds to what we think of as "at the same time")

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            in-frickin-correct

            Space is empty. Relatively.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what's the thing things are in then, if space is empty?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Space is space.
            It is empty.
            Space is empty.

            Things exist.
            For what scale, quantized value, we can only measure.
            Things exist.

            Spacei s not things.
            Quantized things are not space.

            Time is not real.

            THAT. IS. ALL.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You're not giving me any reason to think time isn't real, though. What happens if we think of it as real that's bad?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you're wasting your own time with this

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            maybe, but I'd hoped I'd learn something.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            In the time we spent arguing I raced an 8 lap ferrari F1 car race and cooked a steak quesadilla with saute'd peppers and onion.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I want to add to my reply

            Gravity is real.
            Electroforces are real
            The strong nuclear is real.

            Time is not. It does not exist.
            Time is just a semi-logical description of a procession of events.
            Time is not physical.
            The other forces are, physically real.
            Time is not real.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    science alone will never get real answers as it will never ask the real questions without philosophy.

    Why do you presuppose the existance of things such as past and future?

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There is only the current moment, time is an illusion caused by movement and information processing methods of a brain

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *