Page 10 of 11

What exactly is the nature of time in physics?

timedefiner Leave a comment

The only tangible empirical evidence of ‘Time passing’ is change. Time references change in two core contexts:-

  1. The dimension of change. Time calibrates and indexes change and events in standard units. Hence rate i.e. miles per hour. The per hour bit is the calibration of change rate.
  2. The collective ‘flow’ of change events. Time is to change-events what traffic is to vehicles….a non-specific collective term. Does Traffic actually exist? Fundamentally all that exists are individual vehicles. Does Time actually exist..fundamentally all that exists are quantum change-events.

So Time references change in two contexts…both are abstract. So the nature of Time is that it is abstract. The tangible reality is change and change-events.

(Though try telling a taxi driver late for the airport that fundamentally neither Traffic nor Time actually exist)

If time prevents everything from happening at once and space prevents everything from happening at the same place, does spacetime prevent everything happening at the same place and same time?

timedefiner Leave a comment

Whoever said everything would happen at once? How can sequentially dependent events happen at once?…You can’t eat your cake until you’ve baked it.

And happening in the same place??? How can relative motion happen ‘in the same place’ ?

And, more significantly, Time is abstract in both its core meanings. It’s how we reference change. Change is reality. Time is abstract. Time doesn’t cause anything. Time can’t prevent anything. It only exists in our collective minds.

If Time is the dimension of change (hence rate…’miles per hour’ is time calibrating changing position).

Space (in this context) is the dimension of (relative) position…hence xyx-axis.

So merge the dimension of position (space) with the dimension of change (time) you get spacetime the dimension of changing position aka motion. Spacetime is the (abstract) dimension of motion.

And abstract dimensions can’t prevent anything. They only exist in our collective minds.

https://qr.ae/pGqZsj

In a universe where nothing changed, would time cease to exist? Would the concept of spacetime become meaningless? Is time simply a way for accounting for change (physical motion)?

timedefiner Leave a comment

“Is time simply a way of accounting for change (physical motion)?” Almost.

Motion is only one type of change, that is change of (relative) spatial position. There is other types of change..change of colour, of weight, of mass, of density, tone, radioactivity etc etc.

Time calibrates all change…in standard units of, say, years, days, seconds etc. (I.e.miles PER HOUR…change rate is measured in time units).

And the word time actually has two core meanings, both referencing change.

To expand:-

As you touch on, The ONLY empirical evidence of Time is change / change events (look around you – earth spinning, you breathing, quarks decaying – all change event series). Change can be quantum or compound, depending on your reference-frame.

Time represents TWO distinct contexts of change:

1.The calibration of change (i.e. the dimension of change – hence ‘rate’ e.g. miles PER HOUR – the calibration of change of position aka motion) i.e. Time is to change what temperature is to heat, a dimension/calibration set. Temperature is abstract, heat is real, Time is abstract, change is real. (This is more or less what you say); and

  1. Time is the collective ‘flow’ of change. Time is to change-events what ‘River’ is to water molecules – a collective term. But, fundamentally the word River is an abstract collective, water molecules are real. Time is a collective abstract, change-events are real. Time, the ‘flow’ of change.

Time, one word, two distinct meanings, both reference change.

And so, Space is the dimension of (relative) position (hence xyz axis). And Time is the dimension of change.

So merge Space the dimension of position, with Time the dimension of change and you get spacetime the dimension of changing position aka motion.

Is time simply a way of accounting for change (physical motion)?” Almost.

Motion is only one type of change, that is change of (relative) spatial position. There is other types of change..change of colour, of weight, of mass, of density, tone, radioactivity etc etc.

Time calibrates all change…in standard units of, say, years, days, seconds etc. (I.e.miles PER HOUR…change rate is measured in time units).

And the word time actually has two core meanings, both referencing change.

To expand:-

As you touch on, The ONLY empirical evidence of Time is change / change events (look around you – earth spinning, you breathing, quarks decaying – all change event series). Change can be quantum or compound, depending on your reference-frame.

Time represents TWO distinct contexts of change:

1.The calibration of change (i.e. the dimension of change – hence ‘rate’ e.g. miles PER HOUR – the calibration of change of position aka motion) i.e. Time is to change what temperature is to heat, a dimension/calibration set. Temperature is abstract, heat is real, Time is abstract, change is real. (This is more or less what you say); and

2. Time is the collective ‘flow’ of change. Time is to change-events what ‘River’ is to water molecules – a collective term. But, fundamentally the word River is an abstract collective, water molecules are real. Time is a collective abstract, change-events are real. Time, the ‘flow’ of change.

Time, one word, two distinct meanings, both reference change.

And so, Space is the dimension of (relative) position (hence xyz axis). And Time is the dimension of change.

So merge Space the dimension of position, with Time the dimension of change and you get spacetime the dimension of changing position aka motion.

https://qr.ae/pGq3RF

How can time be the 4th dimension if time isn’t real?

timedefiner Leave a comment

You’ve hit on one of the fundamental misunderstandings that bedevil this area of science…

All dimensions are abstract (i e. only exist in our collective minds). So many people struggle to differentiate between what is real and tangible (‘concrete’ nouns) and what only exists in our collective minds (‘abstract’ nouns).

We overlay reality with standardised calibration frameworks in order to calibrate and index an aspect of reality.

For example, we calibrate and index heat using the dimension of temperature. Heat is real, temperature is abstract.

We calibrate position, and relative position, using the three vectored dimension we call Space. [The word Space has (at least) two distinct meanings. Yes, it is a word that, vaguely, refers to ‘outer space’, i e.something ‘real’…though its never quute clear what].

But its meaning here, in context of dimensions, is clear. We calibrate and index [spatial] position, relative position, and changing position (motion) using the three vectored abstract dimension of Space (calibrated on standard units of miles, kilometres, inches etc etc)…the xyz axis only exists in our mind, like temperature does.

And so to Time (another word with multiple meanings). Time calibrates and indexes change and events. In the example of changing position (motion) we use, say, miles per hour to measure the rate of change. The ‘per hour’ bit is time calibrating change. And we index events using the same framework of standard units (years, days, hours etc) to reference an event..be it Big Bang (14 billion years ago) or lunch date next week (tuesday at 1).

So ALL dimensions are abstract overlays which calibrate, index and reference an underlying aspect of reality.

If people can’t simply point to what underlying aspect of reality their ‘dimension’ references, then it probably ain’t a dimension…just hectic maths.

https://qr.ae/pGq38r