Back
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi
I agree about what you say but not about your conclusion
First it shall be agreed what we understand for “real”. Let asume “real” is anything that exist and can be accessed by us, either out or in of our bodies.
Time is the measurement of change in the universe. That measure is relative to each observer and it is affected by gravity, speed and so on.
But independently of what it is observed by one individual, and a given universe configuration is now present for me and future for somebody else , it does not mean that a given universe configuration exist after its change. When it changes that configuration disapear. That is independent of when that configuration os perceived by one observer or another.
If we consider that “reality” is the perception for each individual of the “real” , yes my past reality exist for an observer receiving it after that concrete universe configuration have change and dissapear for me. My reality exist for others in my past.
But can we say that the given configuration of the universe still exist?, or just only that, a given configuration of the universe is perceived differently according to the observer position in that universe?
This point of view I try to explain, does it implies an absolute time? I do not think so. If we accept that entropy increases we are accepting with the arrow of time ( not absolute time) we are accepting that a given configuration of the universe dissapear after another. Time is the measurement of change of universe configuration.
If we do not upfront accept time as some thing real, since what we perceive as observer is only the change of the universe, then we can not say future, past are real.
Another discussion is reality of time inside the humans or intersubjective tiem perception and as as such it could or not be considered as real, although it is a reality, understanding “reality” for what is perceived by the human. I think that if we think about what it is time we can say if it it is some thing Resl, real as a phisical fact out of our mind
Time is always just a measure made by comparaison of two changes We can convert time in space using speed of light, so time is a way of expressing space measurements in a different unit
Can the measure of anything be call something real existing out of our minds? It is an error to think that time which is only a measure of change of the real measure done by comparaison of two movements that measure can be considered as some thing existing out of our mind and scientific calculations
Some scientific explain that time and space are the same measured with different units. The conversion of units of time to units of space is the speed of light “c”
World changes continuously and we measure that changes in units of time comp airing different changes The question to be answer require precision about the term Real
The word Real did not was utilized with its present meaning until XVI century
Today we understand by real some thing that exist out of our mind , some thing that can be search by science and as well philosophically.
But what it is reality for a human being it is what iit is received by our mind through the sens , and process by our mind and body.
So yes Time it is a Reality , present, past and no so clear future. But it does not mean it is Real at all. What it is Real is the measurement of time which it is a comparaison of movements.
But since what we do is just compare changes in the space and we call it time. And as well since instead of time we can express in different units those changes in units of space, scientifically time and space are two ways to express in different units the same physical fact.
So time as Reality for human being shall not be confused with the measurements of changes in the physical world which can be given in units of time or space. What it is Real (not Reality) is the constant change of the physical world.
We easily can suppress the word time in our conversations and nothing happens. For example instead of years : turns around Sun. Instead of seconds fractions of the movement of the clock.Etc
Real is the constant change not a physical unit we define to measure it.
Talking about Reality, what it is named time for humans beens it is a philosophical discussion. Again we are in the problem of using the words “real” “exist” “past” “present” and ” future” “now”. These terms can be scientifically defined or philosophically, or common sense current daily life defined. But first we must agree on those uses and understanding.
When saying present instant here, in science terms means measured at a given physical time, which implies, ¿what precision in the measurment? 10 to minus ??? ”nanoseconds? true you can say that “now” can be syncronus for two observers in the same reference. If time is as well cosidered as a quantum, yes then we have a minimal measurement of time. Asuming time is as well quantum, physically you can talk about a present instant in a given reference. But in what concern the reality for a human observer there is not a present, any perception of human beings are perceptions of a change, what it is perceived is a change, so there
is not an instant for human beings. Bergson in his discussion with Eistein about time, he introduced the idea that for the humans the primary perception and aprehension of reality it is “duration”, statement which I fully share. For the humans duration plus memory constitue the reality and the time. Kant said that time and space are ideas a priory, those we now know after the science of evolution of living beings, that this ideas a priory in our brains are absolutly neccesary for survival and normal life. When we pass from that reality for humans to think about if the time is or not an object a physical object, a phisycal entity, then we are in a complete different field.
I need to advance more in this course to answer to you if time is a physical entity or as some scientist afirm, it is just the measure of space with a different unit, since finally time is always a comparaison of movements, it means comparaison of measurement of space. If finally space is quantum, then time will be as well quantum.
But in any case what can not be perceived by any observer is a state of the world which have not yet in its own local reference ocurred. The universe evolve but according to entropy law do not go back against the arrow of time. It is not he same to say you or me see things before or later, than to affirm an observer can see the state of the universe,which have not yet ocurred in the arrow of time. True the arrow of time is not the time we have up to this lesson analyzed. A distant observer can see the collapse of a Star which is in the future to myself, but nobody can see the collapse of that star if it have not happened in its reference system. Ok, happened for whom? : for the start itself.
So my conclusion is that nobody can see the future of a given referece system calling future of that system an state of facts of that system which have not ocurred for itself. Just to note that always what happens is that WE SEE that other clock is faster or slower than ours, but not that the clock is faster or slower, not that the time goes slower or faster, only that we see one clock different form the other. Since there is not fix and unique reference system it can not be affirm that one clock is faster or slower or the time is faster or slower, only that we measure it differently. The light does not take an horizontal speed when the box move, we SEE that trajectory because our relative movement. Since there is not an absolute space we can not affirm that the light have this or that trajectory, only that in relation to us we measure that trajectoy in our reference.
I know this is implicity in the explanation. 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.
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. To afirm the existence is something that requires to define what it is existence, not an easy philosofical statement. One thing is the reality for a human and another thing is what is it real.The word real is modern word not use before XVth century. The object independent of us, and the reality of that object for us, are different things, science try to know what the object is itself. Time is a reality for the humans, but is it a real object? a physical entity, or is it just space?
At the end of this course I hope to understand if time is a phisical object or if it is just a compairaison of movements a concept created to be able to measure movements of objects. Since speep of light is a constant movement then we discover relativity of simultaneity.