Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

New Proof for 'Time is Relative' Theory

CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 12:57:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 12:53:14 PM, Nosaj5q wrote:
i thought time had something to do with strings or something?

I believe you are thinking of the discovery of harmonic octaves, or possibly confusing time with an orchestra.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2012 2:36:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 1:08:17 PM, Nosaj5q wrote:
i stand corrected you do know sarcasm i must have been using a different dialect ;)

Dialects of sarcasm.. that's an ingenious idea! (not sarcasm)
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 7:57:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Our perception of time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Our perception of time is a relativistic construct.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 8:54:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 7:57:57 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Our measurement of time is entirely based on the patterns of the sun.
2.) The patterns of the sun are depicted by our visual observations.
3.) Our perception of the measurement of time is a relativistic construct.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Tlhedglin
Posts: 119
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 10:28:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

Measurements of a thing are always relativistic constructs, as it relies on human perception of the thing, but the measurement of a thing are not the same as the thing itself.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 11:04:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 10:28:17 PM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

Measurements of a thing are always relativistic constructs, as it relies on human perception of the thing, but the measurement of a thing are not the same as the thing itself.

Right, the measurement has nothing to do with the reality or non-reality, nor does it prove it's reality or non-reality - it's just a construct.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 11:22:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:13:54 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
We've known that time is relative for close to a century.

Man, in that case you are like at least 100 years more advanced than me.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 11:25:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

I don't quite get premise one. How do you define time? Time isn't dependent on the sun. Only measurements of years and months, but that's not neccesarily the basis of time. Like it would still take an hour for my sister to get out of the bathroom whether the sun existed or not.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 11:31:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:22:23 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 11:13:54 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
We've known that time is relative for close to a century.

Man, in that case you are like at least 100 years more advanced than me.

lol, yeah, it's relative to velocity I believe.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/25/2012 11:37:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
All of physical matter is just a superstition.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Tlhedglin
Posts: 119
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 1:14:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:04:42 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 10:28:17 PM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

Measurements of a thing are always relativistic constructs, as it relies on human perception of the thing, but the measurement of a thing are not the same as the thing itself.

Right, the measurement has nothing to do with the reality or non-reality, nor does it prove it's reality or non-reality - it's just a construct.

I believe it would be rather hard to measure something that didn't exist...

Conversely, we would probably try to measure nonexistent crap, mankind has a thing for measuring. One could almost say we get off on it...
tarkovsky
Posts: 212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 2:09:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:13:54 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:

lol, yeah, it's relative to velocity I believe.

Inversely proportional; V = D/T. This is even before Einstein.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 9:38:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 1:14:00 AM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/25/2012 11:04:42 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 10:28:17 PM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

Measurements of a thing are always relativistic constructs, as it relies on human perception of the thing, but the measurement of a thing are not the same as the thing itself.

Right, the measurement has nothing to do with the reality or non-reality, nor does it prove it's reality or non-reality - it's just a construct.

I believe it would be rather hard to measure something that didn't exist...

It's only the measurement of thought, and any astrophysicist will tell you that there is absolutely zero experiments that prove the actual existence of time.

Conversely, we would probably try to measure nonexistent crap, mankind has a thing for measuring. One could almost say we get off on it...
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 10:25:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:31:40 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 4/25/2012 11:22:23 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 11:13:54 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
We've known that time is relative for close to a century.

Man, in that case you are like at least 100 years more advanced than me.

lol, yeah, it's relative to velocity I believe.

Shh, let us have our fun proving the proof provide is poor even if time is truly relative. Lol.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 10:25:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 8:54:01 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 7:57:57 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Our measurement of time is entirely based on the patterns of the sun.
2.) The patterns of the sun are depicted by our visual observations.
3.) Our perception of the measurement of time is a relativistic construct.

This still doesn't prove anything about time itself.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 10:27:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 10:25:46 AM, Mestari wrote:
At 4/25/2012 8:54:01 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 7:57:57 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Our measurement of time is entirely based on the patterns of the sun.
2.) The patterns of the sun are depicted by our visual observations.
3.) Our perception of the measurement of time is a relativistic construct.

This still doesn't prove anything about time itself.

It says that 'time itself' is a perception, not an actuality.
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Nosaj5q
Posts: 175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 11:18:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
of course it's an actuality have you ever heard of the twin paradox it wouldn't make sense if time was only in our heads.
Slimy yet satisfying"
CrazyPerson
Posts: 1,114
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 12:24:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 11:18:48 AM, Nosaj5q wrote:
of course it's an actuality have you ever heard of the twin paradox it wouldn't make sense if time was only in our heads.

good point
But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.
- - - Watts
The moralist is the person who tells people that they ought to be unselfish, when they still feel like egos, and his efforts are always and invariably futile.
- - - Watts
Tlhedglin
Posts: 119
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2012 11:31:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 9:38:16 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
It's only the measurement of thought, and any astrophysicist will tell you that there is :absolutely zero experiments that prove the actual existence of time.

Your post is a testament to the fact that the phenomenon we call "time" exists. Without said phenomenon, IE no time, NOTHING nor ANYTHING would NEVER happen. "Time" is a concept just as "Distance" is, but they are BOTH concepts based on real phenomena. Stating that time does not exist isn't much different than stating that distance does not exist.

You couldn't possibly be saying that the phenomena doesn't actually exist, could you?
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 1:54:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

Counter-syllogism through proof by contradiction:

P1 - (assuming) Time is based on the observed patterns of the sun:
P2 - The Sun is contingent
C1 - Therefore, it is possible that the sun will stop exiting
C2 - Therefore, if the sun stopped existing, time would cease
P3 - Conclusion 2 is illogical.

#############

P1 - It is possible that aliens exist.
P2 - If aliens exist, they are susceptible to time.
C1 - If time is relative to the sun, then they must be in super-slow-motion.
P3 - It makes more logical sense that time is relative on the stars than The Sun.

###############

P1 - The description of time is constricted by (relative) language
P2 - If something is described by language, then it , through the inherent nature of its origin of being described through language, is relative.
C1 - Time is relative.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 1:54:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/26/2012 11:31:37 PM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/26/2012 9:38:16 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
It's only the measurement of thought, and any astrophysicist will tell you that there is :absolutely zero experiments that prove the actual existence of time.

Your post is a testament to the fact that the phenomenon we call "time" exists. Without said phenomenon, IE no time, NOTHING nor ANYTHING would NEVER happen. "Time" is a concept just as "Distance" is, but they are BOTH concepts based on real phenomena. Stating that time does not exist isn't much different than stating that distance does not exist.

You couldn't possibly be saying that the phenomena doesn't actually exist, could you?

Relative =/= Doesn't exist: it means varies between culture to culture.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
tarkovsky
Posts: 212
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 3:09:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
CrazyPerson, I think what you're really out to prove is that time is 'ontologically subjective'. That is to say, time is such that that it would not exist without the mind (read: perception) upon which it is contingent. You're not necessarily trying to demonstrate that it is "relative", for as OMGJustinBieber said, we've know this for almost a century now. Look up "The Theory of Relativity".

I don't want to discourage you, but I will say, I don't see how you're going to prove the aforementioned statement. It's really just not a tenable position. I'd say at best you can argue from the Kantian Transcendental Aesthetic and say that time is just a feature of the human mind, upon which all experience is predicated. It seems by asserting this you forfeit a few points you weren't originally willing to give up, but you establish that time is contingent upon the mind, hence 'ontologically subjective'. The problem is, anyone up to snuff with math will tell you that the Transcendental Aesthetic has been brought under intense scrutiny, if not disproved altogether, by time's relativity and spaces' polymorphisms.
Tlhedglin
Posts: 119
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 8:51:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/27/2012 1:54:53 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 4/26/2012 11:31:37 PM, Tlhedglin wrote:
At 4/26/2012 9:38:16 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
It's only the measurement of thought, and any astrophysicist will tell you that there is :absolutely zero experiments that prove the actual existence of time.

Your post is a testament to the fact that the phenomenon we call "time" exists. Without said phenomenon, IE no time, NOTHING nor ANYTHING would NEVER happen. "Time" is a concept just as "Distance" is, but they are BOTH concepts based on real phenomena. Stating that time does not exist isn't much different than stating that distance does not exist.

You couldn't possibly be saying that the phenomena doesn't actually exist, could you?

Relative =/= Doesn't exist: it means varies between culture to culture.

A) I was replying to his post about the existence of time, so the question is warranted.

B) Yes measurements of time vary from culture to culture, but as far as I am aware, there is not a single cultural group that does not die of old age. So the thing itself seems pretty objective.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 9:11:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/24/2012 12:53:14 PM, Nosaj5q wrote:
i thought time had something to do with strings or something?

String theory. That's theoretical quantum mechanics, not classical physics, which include considerations of time.

Time has very little meaning at the quantum level, and in fact, little rips in spacetime theoretically happen at the level in which you'd find strings, or even a few steps above that.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 9:11:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:22:23 PM, CrazyPerson wrote:
At 4/25/2012 11:13:54 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
We've known that time is relative for close to a century.

Man, in that case you are like at least 100 years more advanced than me.

He's talking about Einstein...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2012 9:33:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/25/2012 11:25:38 PM, phantom wrote:
At 4/24/2012 11:45:30 AM, CrazyPerson wrote:
1.) Time is entirely based on the observed patterns of the sun.
2.) The observed patterns of the sun are relative to our visual perception.
3.) Time is a relativistic construct.

I don't quite get premise one. How do you define time? Time isn't dependent on the sun. Only measurements of years and months, but that's not neccesarily the basis of time. Like it would still take an hour for my sister to get out of the bathroom whether the sun existed or not.

He's conflating two different things.

Let's talk music, since someone brought that up.

There's the force we know as time that we've mathematically defined and include in several physical models, and then we have the vector measurements in timespace that we keep measures with. This is analogous to counting measures in a song to determine beats per minute, but it does not belie the existence of an actual bassline.

To be more specific, we keep time using clocks and calendars, both of which operate based on our interaction with the sun. Crazy is assuming his proves that time is relative, when in fact, it proves that the time we've been keeping is fallacious. In fact, each day's duration does vary, as does the duration of each year, and one of the habits we've developed to accomodate this imprecision is adding a day to our calendars every four years, and term them "leapyears." It's almost like the people who came up with it were like "we weren't wrong, time is just moving faster!"

Anywayyyy...

Mechanical clocks, unfortunately, were derived based on a faulty equation as well. In forgetting to accomodate some factor (I forget what it was), most clocks are a tad imprecise. The only ones that aren't are atomic clocks and sundials (and fancy, they're based on natural mechanisms rather than those human borne), and every time you check your watch against either of those types of clocks, they will always be slightly off for that reason.

So, essentially, our measurement of time, which is essentially our concept of time as we interact with it, is based on the Earth's interaction with the Sun, and imprecise equations derived from that.

However, time in the physical sense is almost like... it's almost the physical manifestation of a vector direction. It's like...

Okay, put it this way. Time is one of the forces that define our movement through space. You must traverse distance for a given amount of time, which yields a rate, and that is essentially movement.

So, if we say that this dimension is a 3-axis Cartesian plane, time is the sheet of paper. Seriously. And, you must traverse an amount of paper, as well as a given distance within the plane, and the combination of the two yields a definition for what has manifested.

If we say that this dimension is a 3-dimensional hologram, then time is the computer program that produces the hologram.

Time interacts with other forces. Gravitons bend spacetime, while photons exist despite it.