I don’t think that the future has a “real” existence now if by “real” we mean what we are familiar with in our reality. However, the future might exist in a very different form that can be envisioned only at speeds close to the speed of light. Put differently, the future might exist in a different “dimension” or a set of dimensions of reality that is not accessible to us. These dimensions might exist but, if they do, they are not “real” in the ordinary sense of the word.
They have proven it by taking an atomic clock that was synchronised with another atomic clock, one was put on a aeroplane while the other left on the ground. The clock on the aeroplane was flown around the world, upon return checked against the clock left on the ground and found to have lost time compared to the one left on the ground. Religion on the other hand requires faith. ( Faith is belief in the absence of evidence ).
Its always the other guy’s clock that is going slow relative to my inertial frame. So if something happens in the other guy’s frame at say 1PM it will happen at 1:01PM according to my clock. But does this mean it happens in MY past? It hasn’t happened before 1:01Pm according to me so it hasn’t happened in my past. And nothing seems to happen in my future either. So obviously my PAST is real (having experienced it) but not the other guy’s, and not my FUTURE.
I will try with my no so good english to explain something. You say the clock goes slowly when moving. The light does not change its direction and speed due to the movement of the box. The light always reach the top of the box because teh speed of the box can not be more than the speed of light. But the light only reach the top of the box later according to the fix reference system since the box is moving and from that external system the lengh is not just the verticl but the diagonal. So the light only have a longuer trajectory seem from outside, but it has the vertical trajectory in the box from inside. So you can not say the clock is slowler when moving you can only say the clock is moving slowly from the point of view of an external observer. It is a very different affirmation. Measurement of time is relative to the observer, clear, but it does not mean the clock is slower or faster itself when moving. It is faster or slower from each observer. If we deny the absolute time, we can only say tieme is slower for us when clock moving.But not that the clock is slower.
Please comment about this understanding.
We shal be precise when talking about real or existing. If we supose something is somwhere, it is an object, and that object is an actual object, today we say it is real. Not before the XVI century the word real was almost not used. The object have realitas, which are , let say, it charasteristics for the observer, but as well it is real for the observer, but this realitas for the observer ara not the object itself. The science tries to prove tht the object has an entity and its realitas, which very often is something very diferent tht the what is real for a common observer. Then to enter in discussion about the existence of past present and future, must make the distinction form what past present and future is for a observer and what it is for the science.
The clock is Really ticking slower in the moving clock, the person moving with the clock doesn’t detect the slowing down of time due to the small amount of variation. But if the person with the moving clock was travelling close to the speed of light, let’s say 86% that person time would slow by approximately 50% then he would feel the slowing of time. Hope this helps you understand.
You must be logged in to reply to this discussion.
Send this to a friend