Time

[Hjarloprillar]

I see that it would be forces that interfere with/degrade/slow/speed up/change chemical reactions within the human body. I see everything as environmental, as certainly there are differing forces, in different relative positions, to any particular combination of specific forces.
------------------

like em and gravity and a swath of others.
time is just another variable by nature. As gravity is inverse square. time is tau equation.

Now Travelling in time. To past or future.. THAT is where true imagination is set free.

[SpheresOfBalance]

I see that it would be forces that interfere with/degrade/slow/speed up/change chemical reactions within the human body. I see everything as environmental, as certainly there are differing forces, in different relative positions, to any particular combination of specific forces.
------------------

like em and gravity and a swath of others.
time is just another variable by nature. As gravity is inverse square. time is tau equation.

Now Travelling in time. To past or future.. THAT is where true imagination is set free.

Time travel is not possible in my book!

[Arising_uk]

Thanks, but actually I'd read it some time ago, but I do appreciate the refresher. The question still remains, did it prove the slowing of a clock or that of time and how could man possibly know the difference between the two? If there is, or if there isn't? Sounds to me like someone touched the pendulum.

Fair enough but the experiment was not to confirm any metaphysical 'facts' about time, just to confirm Einstein's predictions about the measurement of 'it', so not inconclusive.

Was not meant to be a refresher as I assumed you knew such things, you asked my why I thought as I did and where I got my thoughts from so I told you and gave you an example of why I said what I did.

The thing about the discussion is that it matters not if theres a 'time substance' or not, the question is whether the whatever it is applies to us as it does to the clocks, as if it does then 'time' will be slower for the faster one of us. If it doesn't apply then the faster one will just be puzzling why s/he is getting older when the clock says the time has not passed.

[Arising_uk]

Wrong, you obviously forgot your netiquette, I thought you were once a USENET user, you did not quote him, but rather me. No need to tell me, I know of at least one button, it was he, that could not find them. Subconsciously you feel the need to tell me SOMETHING, ANYTHING, to appease your sense of self, or so it would seem, or you would have quoted him, to attach your message. As that is what the netiquette of old, the original, demands, despite it's bastardization by newbies .

Your paranoia is showing its slips again and you really need to move on from your past.

But I accept that I should have quoted him and was just too lazy so tagged onto yours, it's why I used the word "Also" to start my sentence.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Thanks, but actually I'd read it some time ago, but I do appreciate the refresher. The question still remains, did it prove the slowing of a clock or that of time and how could man possibly know the difference between the two? If there is, or if there isn't? Sounds to me like someone touched the pendulum.

Fair enough but the experiment was not to confirm any metaphysical 'facts' about time, just to confirm Einstein's predictions about the measurement of 'it', so not inconclusive.
There is no necessary measure of it, as it, has yet to be seen, quite possibly merely a construct of man, of no actual significance to the universe in which he finds himself, assuming he can.


Was not meant to be a refresher as I assumed you knew such things, you asked my why I thought as I did and where I got my thoughts from so I told you and gave you an example of why I said what I did.

The thing about the discussion is that it matters not if theres a 'time substance' or not,
Speaking for yourself of course!

the question is whether the whatever it is applies to us as it does to the clocks, as if it does then 'time' will be slower for the faster one of us. If it doesn't apply then the faster one will just be puzzling why s/he is getting older when the clock says the time has not passed.
Wrong, as to time, humans only address, because it is their ends, one cannot run from death, no matter how fast or slow they go. So it's moot as to your concern. But many just want to know the truth of the universe, for it's sake alone, such is physics, one of philosophies children.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Wrong, you obviously forgot your netiquette, I thought you were once a USENET user, you did not quote him, but rather me. No need to tell me, I know of at least one button, it was he, that could not find them. Subconsciously you feel the need to tell me SOMETHING, ANYTHING, to appease your sense of self, or so it would seem, or you would have quoted him, to attach your message. As that is what the netiquette of old, the original, demands, despite it's bastardization by newbies .

Your paranoia is showing its slips again and you really need to move on from your past.
Your characterization as you try and cover your tracks, with still more envy.

But I accept that I should have quoted him and was just too lazy so tagged onto yours, it's why I used the word "Also" to start my sentence.
Lazy didn't do it, you did, your netiquette still sucks, as you hide behind lazy, it's no excuse. Do I now remind you of yourself?

[Hjarloprillar]

"SpheresOfBalance"
Time travel is not possible in my book!

-----------------------------
Tipler's solution was for a cylinder of infinite length. He suggested that a finite cylinder might produce closed timelike curves if the rotation rate were fast enough[3] but he did not prove this.
Stephen Hawking in his 1992 paper on the chronology protection conjecture posited that closed timelike curves cannot be created, and thus cannot be used for time travel
----------------------------
Well it makes for interesting speculative fiction.

Way beyond my paygrade of math.
i'll stick with solid ground of mere time dilation.

[tillingborn]

i'll stick with solid ground of mere time dilation.

Me too. It's one thing to treat time like a spatial dimension, basically a 2D plane that can be stretched and twisted and crawled all over in any direction, but quite another to infer that that is what it is.

[SpheresOfBalance]

"SpheresOfBalance"
Time travel is not possible in my book!

-----------------------------
Tipler's solution was for a cylinder of infinite length. He suggested that a finite cylinder might produce closed timelike curves if the rotation rate were fast enough[3] but he did not prove this.
Stephen Hawking in his 1992 paper on the chronology protection conjecture posited that closed timelike curves cannot be created, and thus cannot be used for time travel
----------------------------
Well it makes for interesting speculative fiction.

Way beyond my paygrade of math.
i'll stick with solid ground of mere time dilation.

I'm no math wizard either, but I just don't see it, a necessarily solid ground, again, was it merely a clock, or the, so called, 4th dimension, (time), that was supposedly slowed millionths of a sec.? No one may ever 'know,' with 'certainty.'

I just used a magnet to slow the pendulum on my Black Forest Cuckoo Clock, which slowed down time, as it's certainly different, now, than my Computer Clock, which is synchronized with the atomic clock in Colorado, USA. Did you guys feel it? he he he he he If you guys really piss me off, I'll stop the clock altogether, and you'll be frozen in time. he he he he he

I don't really see that it's possible to be only a localized event, if in fact it is space-time as Einstein calls it. OK, if so, have you ever seen a dilation of the other three dimensions, other than some unproved theory regarding gravity or worm/black holes? I don't believe in a 'fabric' of space either. Mathematical models may mimic effects, but that doesn't mean that it's what's actually physically happening, as space is three dimensional, how could a three dimensional mass of matter distort space-time fabric equally in all directions, isn’t it space-time that’s between all the atomic particles that make up all massive bodies of matter. Isn’t it space-time that electrons are spinning within?

[Arising_uk]

Your characterization as you try and cover your tracks, with still more envy.

Oh! Please! You miss no chance to mention your IT past. Who cares, its over and done, old hat.

Have you noticed that you actually quote the way I do, the only difference is that you keep a couple of nests. If you were true to your thought you'd requote the whole thing every time but as you've obviously found this quickly becomes too unwieldy and involves having to use colours to identify new points. Messy. Its because I early on found the embedded quote limitation of this forum engine that I adopted the style I do, as its then easy to scroll back thorough my posts to recap whats been said about a particular point or the whole discussion.

Lazy didn't do it, you did, your netiquette still sucks, as you hide behind lazy, it's no excuse. Do I now remind you of yourself?

Nope, as I'd not care about such a trivial thing as I'd have understood that you were just adding to my advice.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Your characterization as you try and cover your tracks, with still more envy.

Oh! Please! You miss no chance to mention your IT past. Who cares, its over and done, old hat.

Have you noticed that you actually quote the way I do, the only difference is that you keep a couple of nests. If you were true to your thought you'd requote the whole thing every time but as you've obviously found this quickly becomes too unwieldy and involves having to use colours to identify new points. Messy. Its because I early on found the embedded quote limitation of this forum engine that I adopted the style I do, as its then easy to scroll back thorough my posts to recap whats been said about a particular point or the whole discussion.

Lazy didn't do it, you did, your netiquette still sucks, as you hide behind lazy, it's no excuse. Do I now remind you of yourself?

Nope, as I'd not care about such a trivial thing as I'd have understood that you were just adding to my advice.

I can see that your magic book hasn't done you much good.

[Arising_uk]

I can see that your magic book hasn't done you much good.

That's because you haven't read it so misunderstand what it's about.

[Osric]

Hmmm, what I think time is. I picture time as a circle sometimes. The existence expanding and then coming back together. I don't understand what a black hole is, but I think it pulls existence back together with it's pull. Maybe all black holes are one. When critical mass is achieved the big bang happens and the universe expands again. This ever pull and push ensures no loss of energy?

[Cerveny]

I see that it would be forces that interfere with/degrade/slow/speed up/change chemical reactions within the human body. I see everything as environmental, as certainly there are differing forces, in different relative positions, to any particular combination of specific forces.
------------------

like em and gravity and a swath of others.
time is just another variable by nature. As gravity is inverse square. time is tau equation.

Now Travelling in time. To past or future.. THAT is where true imagination is set free.

Time travel is not possible in my book!

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=9654&start=25 :)

[SpheresOfBalance]

I can see that your magic book hasn't done you much good.

That's because you haven't read it so misunderstand what it's about.

I meant that it hasn't cured you of at least several ills, that your messages betray.