Mystery Time travellers

[LicoriceAllsorts]

IMO

Time travel

Backwards in time? Impossible

Forwards in time? Possible, but not in the traditional sense. You can't go forwards in time and see future civilisations for example. Maybe if you go forwards in time you yourself will age, but that's it. Whatever it is that 'time travels' will age, everything else around them it stay the same.

You can not literally move yourself forward or backward on this human created concept which is the plane of 'time' as Procrastinator35 states.

 

[Procrastinator35]

IMO

Time travel

Backwards in time? Impossible

Forwards in time? Possible, but not in the traditional sense. You can't go forwards in time and see future civilisations for example. Maybe if you go forwards in time you yourself will age, but that's it. Whatever it is that 'time travels' will age, everything else around them it stay the same.

You can not literally move yourself forward or backward on this human created concept which is the plane of 'time' as Procrastinator35 states.

Or to put it simply, as Plato so eloquently stated & as also noted earlier on in this thread….."All there actually ever is, is the eternal present."

The trouble & delusion begins when we accept the Imperil notion of our lives being 'governed' by the clock....Which then becomes automatized unconsciously, as a pseudo narrative implanted in place of the true & actual state of reality.

Time is a human construct, as much as geometry is.

 

[Socrates2]

So they are ahead in time? They can see what will happen before us?

They can only go forward a few milliseconds and it's too short a time to be significant for anything.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Theoretically you "could" move backward and forward in time....if you had a device that allowed you to do so.

To give a silly example.....when you watch a movie, the movie is the expanse of human life, say, earth history. The recorded material that is the movie, could theoretically exist if there's PREDESTINY, which i subscribe to. The device that views the movie, allowing you to move back and forward with the move of the cursor, could be a time machine if indeed the predetermined entirety of history was coded like a computer program, and this time machine was able to decode that language.

Theoretically, time travel is still "plausible" given that analogy.

Tho personally i believe that once time ELAPSES there's no "going back".....again, a silly example....once you've aged, say, from 10 years old to 20 years old, you can't RETURN your state of existence/body to the 10 year old stage. But as you haven't (theoretically) aged yet from 20 to 30 years old, then perhaps you could.

Lastly, in response to Procrastinator35 .... again, "time" is the motion/movement itself. Not the measurement. Again it's patently obvious. Another silly example to hammer that point across...

Take away all measurements of time like minutes, years, decades etc....they don't exist....still, the human body will age from baby to adult to old and then die. There was an ELAPSE of something. That elapsing is TIME, which is just the word used to define that concept -- elapsing, the movement thru existence. Humans THEN find methods to MEASURE that huge sprawl of elapsing/motion by creating measurements small and large -- hence, seconds, days, etc. Again, this is even more obvious, that measurements of time are merely measurements, when you consider things like Dog years vs Human years. And how some cultures had 10 month years, some had 12. Etc. That all measure that motion differently.

Man based his math of measuring time around the rise and fall of the sun, and the specific spin of the earth. Jupiter's year is about 4,330 "earth days" long. Earthlings, using their own planetary cycle, measurement of time, are extrapolating that to Jupiter to get a comparison. Jupiterians would do the same backward when trying to wrap their heads around Earth. All this IS the measurements of time specific to the perception.

But it is obvious that Time exists per se, and that sentient beings have methods at hand to try to understand it and partition it into sensible formats.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Lastly, in response to Procrastinator35 .... again, "time" is the motion/movement itself. Not the measurement. Again it's patently obvious. Another silly example to hammer that point across...

Take away all measurements of time like minutes, years, decades etc....they don't exist....still, the human body will age from baby to adult to old and then die. There was an ELAPSE of something. That elapsing is TIME, which is just the word used to define that concept -- elapsing, the movement thru existence. Humans THEN find methods to MEASURE that huge sprawl of elapsing/motion by creating measurements small and large -- hence, seconds, days, etc. Again, this is even more obvious, that measurements of time are merely measurements, when you consider things like Dog years vs Human years. And how some cultures had 10 month years, some had 12. Etc. That all measure that motion differently.

Man based his math of measuring time around the rise and fall of the sun, and the specific spin of the earth. Jupiter's year is about 4,330 "earth days" long. Earthlings, using their own planetary cycle, measurement of time, are extrapolating that to Jupiter to get a comparison. Jupiterians would do the same backward when trying to wrap their heads around Earth. All this IS the measurements of time specific to the perception.

But it is obvious that Time exists per se, and that sentient beings have methods at hand to try to understand it and partition it into sensible formats.

No....Time is the universal term we use to measure motion & change.

The 'elapsing' element in life & death is change.

The fact that human life - & all life for that matter - is finite, is what gives rise to the notion of time.....That we are mortal existential beings of a finite nature.

One cannot measure infinitude & the eternal present.....Though they are the fundamental underlying truths of the universe.

All human measurements are merely conceptual constructs.....Time is one of them.

 

[Exe Gesis]

You cannot deny the existence of "Time". Because you can verify that there WAS time taking place, by the fact that once there was a baby that evolved into an adult, to an old person, and then died. There was a literal elapsing of SOMETHING, which the sentient being traveled thru, to go from being a baby to being an adult, to being dead. Or, a grander sweep....once there was a small human population on Earth, and then there was a huge elapsing of something, where billions of billions of people eventually were born and died, many civilizations came and went, going from stoneage to dark ages to industrial age to modern era, and the billions of things that occurred inside that span of SOMETHING. There was an elapsing, a motion of LIFE from a point A to a point B and so on.

Existence moves THRU Time. There was a 'big bang' (or a creation point) and then there's this "2019" mark where we are now. All that transpired between those two points is the PASSAGE OF TIME. There's no other "passage" that it can move thru except Time.

 

[Procrastinator35]

You cannot deny the existence of "Time". Because you can verify that there WAS time taking place, by the fact that once there was a baby that evolved into an adult, to an old person, and then died. There was a literal elapsing of SOMETHING, which the sentient being traveled thru, to go from being a baby to being an adult, to being dead. Or, a grander sweep....once there was a small human population on Earth, and then there was a huge elapsing of something, where billions of billions of people eventually were born and died, many civilizations came and went, going from stoneage to dark ages to industrial age to modern era, and the billions of things that occurred inside that span of SOMETHING. There was an elapsing, a motion of LIFE from a point A to a point B and so on.

Existence moves THRU Time. There was a 'big bang' (or a creation point) and then there's this "2019" mark where we are now. All that transpired between those two points is the PASSAGE OF TIME. There's no other "passage" that it can move thru except Time.

You are merely describing Change & motion in the nature of life, which includes growth & decay.....These are truths of finite existence....what makes one moment different from the other is not 'time' itself.....It IS motion which causes a measurable change, that gives rise to the notion of measurement.

Again....Time is a human measurement of change, motion & relationship.

 

[Gibbke]

Time most certainly is a "thing", as is heat and brightness. The measurement of time is in minutes, seconds, etc, just as heat is degrees and brightness is lumens or magnitude, etc...

Einstein is considering time and space and timespace as concepts. Time has a function, because it's a component of his theories, a tangible variable or constant depending on which bit he's talking about. Time was a thing created from the Big Bang, so you can't be calling it a measurement unless by the same logic you're prepared to use rulers which can be variable in size when drawing up the plans for your new doghouse...

And if time is a measurement, what's it measuring...?

 

[Exe Gesis]

Time most certainly is a "thing", as is heat and brightness. The measurement of time is in minutes, seconds, etc, just as heat is degrees and brightness is lumens or magnitude, etc...

Einstein is considering time and space and timespace as concepts. Time has a function, because it's a component of his theories, a tangible variable or constant depending on which bit he's talking about. Time was a thing created from the Big Bang, so you can't be calling it a measurement unless by the same logic you're prepared to use rulers which can be variable in size when drawing up the plans for your new doghouse...

And if time is a measurement, what's it measuring...?

Thank-you! So eloquently expressed much better than I

 

[Procrastinator35]

Time most certainly is a "thing", as is heat and brightness. The measurement of time is in minutes, seconds, etc, just as heat is degrees and brightness is lumens or magnitude, etc...

Einstein is considering time and space and timespace as concepts. Time has a function, because it's a component of his theories, a tangible variable or constant depending on which bit he's talking about. Time was a thing created from the Big Bang, so you can't be calling it a measurement unless by the same logic you're prepared to use rulers which can be variable in size when drawing up the plans for your new doghouse...

And if time is a measurement, what's it measuring...?

Motion!....More specifically, matter in motion....Time is definitely not a 'thing'....It is not a pre-existent ontological given.....It's merely a human conceptual tool for measurement.

And using the so-called 'Big-Bang' theory as the grounds & basis for positing 'time' itself, pre-supposes that theory as true & creditable to begin with….Which is rather begging the question altogether & the worst kind of circular argumentation you could get.

Such will always be the case when theoretical physicists attempt to practise philosophy in their theorems.

Einstein was no philosopher & he was wrong!

Space & matter are the 2 ontological pre-existent givens.....All else is bunkum.

 

[Gibbke]

Fact -Einstein was no philosopher.

Up For Grabs Because Scientists Never Label Their Work As Finished:
1) He was wrong.
2) Space & Matter are 2 ontological pre-existent givens.

You are seriously flying in the face of current scientific thinking, and with it continually supporting evidence, if you go with the two UFG notions. What's your proof?

 

[Procrastinator35]

Fact -Einstein was no philosopher.

Up For Grabs Because Scientists Never Label Their Work As Finished:
1) He was wrong.
2) Space & Matter are 2 ontological pre-existent givens.

You are seriously flying in the face of current scientific thinking, and with it continually supporting evidence, if you go with the two UFG notions. What's your proof?

The evidence of the senses as opposed to conceptual human constructs.....That's what ontological givens are.

Perceptions are prior to conceptions in all epistemic claims.

Kids have to learn about time....It's a social construct ffs.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Stephen Hawking not only believed Time was a real thing, he also believed Time Travel backward, and fast journeying thru space, were possible due to M-Theory -- which ultimately could provide a framework for a "unified theory" of everything.

Time Travel possible because of 7 hidden dimensions beyond the known 4 dimensions...which when factored in can provide an access point to travel time.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Stephen Hawking not only believed Time was a real thing, he also believed Time Travel backward, and fast journeying thru space, were possible due to M-Theory -- which ultimately could provide a framework for a "unified theory" of everything.

Time Travel possible because of 7 hidden dimensions beyond the known 4 dimensions...which when factored in can provide an access point to travel time.

Points for citing the biggest theoretical physicist fraud theres ever been.

 

[Exe Gesis]

And what would you classify Carlo Rovelli?

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

Has anyone here seen the German series on Netflix called Dark?

 

[Quokka]

You are merely describing Change & motion in the nature of life, which includes growth & decay.....These are truths of finite existence....what makes one moment different from the other is not 'time' itself.....It IS motion which causes a measurable change, that gives rise to the notion of measurement.

Again....Time is a human measurement of change, motion & relationship.

Time itself is malleable, it is not a clock on the wall ticking. Time experiences change and motion in the same way space, matter and energy do. And yes, like space, matter and energy you can attempt to measure time if that makes you happy. For me time may not be as far removed from the other three as you say it is.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Time itself is malleable, it is not a clock on the wall ticking. Time experiences change and motion in the same way space, matter and energy do. And yes, like space, matter and energy you can attempt to measure time if that makes you happy. For me time may not be as far removed from the other three as you say it is.

Time is only 'malleable' as you put it, because it's a human measurement of change & motion....It's application is relative to which ever motion you are measuring.....A year for example is merely the earth's orbit around the sun.....We refer to the 365 revolutions it takes to do that, as a year....One revolution we refer to as a day, even though it also encompasses a night within the 24 hours it takes to complete a single revolution....It is however, the movement of the revolution itself, of the earths spinning upon it's own axis, that gives rise to the notion of a 24 hour cycle.....All of our time measurements are dependent upon the duration & nature of the motion of the thing itself, of matter - in this case the Earth- through space.

When scientists refer to space-time, they are speaking about measurements that pertain to the movements of constellations beyond that of our own Solar System.

Once again....Time is not a pre-existing ontological phenomena....It's a human conceptual construct, the same as geometry is.

Geometry measures matter, time measures it's motion.....Both of them in graspable human terms, in measures applied to the level of our own existential being.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Has anyone here seen the German series on Netflix called Dark?

i saw the first season.

 

[Quokka]

Time is only 'malleable' as you put it, because it's a human measurement of change & motion....It's application is relative to which ever motion you are measuring.....A year for example is merely the earth's orbit around the sun.....We refer to the 365 revolutions it takes to do that, as a year....One revolution we refer to as a day, even though it also encompasses a night within the 24 hours it takes to complete a single revolution....It is however, the movement of the revolution itself, of the earths spinning upon it's own axis, that gives rise to the notion of a 24 hour cycle.....All of our time measurements are dependent upon the duration & nature of the motion of the thing itself, of matter - in this case the Earth- through space.

When scientists refer to space-time, they are speaking about measurements that pertain to the movements of constellations beyond that of our own Solar System.

Once again....Time is not a pre-existing ontological phenomena....It's a human conceptual construct, the same as geometry is.

Geometry measures matter, time measures it's motion.....Both of them in graspable human terms, in measures applied to the level of our own existential being.

They are referring to the integration of time into our fundamental understanding of reality. As real and tangible as any other concept used to experience the universe. Space can be warped/curved by different phenomenon and in doing so time is not left hanging above as some abstract concept, waiting for someone to take notice of it again, it is instead warped/curved along with everything else. An inherent quality of space itself.

If time was no more than a human construct then there should be no disagreement about time between someone standing on the Earth's surface and someone standing inside the international space station. An hour should be an hour and if two clocks were correctly synchronized they should be able to tick along together from that point on, marking off the changes in agreement. This is not what happens.

Interestingly light does not experience time, we can watch light take millions of years to cross the universe. Light itself is instantly experiencing all of its existence, without time or change. (* this would only be true if light moved at the speed of light, which it rarely does as space is a lot less empty than it seems). Coming back on topic for just a moment and a newly created anti-neutrino may experience time backwards, whatever that turns out to mean.

If time is merely a human construct then so is every other method that attempts to understand and describe reality. For me, there is a significant amount of information that supports the idea that time is more than that. That time is a fundamental aspect of reality.

 

[Procrastinator35]

They are referring to the integration of time into our fundamental understanding of reality. As real and tangible as any other concept used to experience the universe. Space can be warped/curved by different phenomenon and in doing so time is not left hanging above as some abstract concept, waiting for someone to take notice of it again, it is instead warped/curved along with everything else. An inherent quality of space itself.

1. If time was no more than a human construct then there should be no disagreement about time between someone standing on the Earth's surface and someone standing inside the international space station. An hour should be an hour and if two clocks were correctly synchronized they should be able to tick along together from that point on, marking off the changes in agreement. This is not what happens.

2. Interestingly light does not experience time, we can watch light take millions of years to cross the universe. Light itself is instantly experiencing all of its existence, without time or change. (* this would only be true if light moved at the speed of light, which it rarely does as space is a lot less empty than it seems). Coming back on topic for just a moment and a newly created anti-neutrino may experience time backwards, whatever that turns out to mean.

3. If time is merely a human construct then so is every other method that attempts to understand and describe reality. For me, there is a significant amount of information that supports the idea that time is more than that. That time is a fundamental aspect of reality.

1. Space is only warped & curved because of the material objects it needs to bend around. That is measurable....It's also a symbiotic relationship.....All matter reverts to the spherical shape both at a microcosmic & macrocosmic level, and space 'bends' in order to accommodate it.

2. If light travels at the quickest measurable speed we can conceive, then of course it isn't delineated by time, as it becomes the standard bearer for our measurement of time....The notion of the eternity of space & matter also transcends the human construct of measurable time.....Time as a measurement depends upon measurable limitations.

3. It is obvious that all conceptual human constructs exist as a means to communicate meaning to one another....But we can arrive at certain set ontological givens that all knowledge is fundamentally dependant & prefaced upon.....These are the 3 Las of Metaphysics that Aristotle alluded towards. I. Identity 2. Contradiction 3. either/Or.

Time doesn't have any Ontological status as a pre-existing thing in itself....It's an abstract concept which refers to nothing in reality, save for an observable human applied measurement, of matter in motion in relation to something else....It's the relationship that is dependent upon the application of human consciousness.....You're confusing abstract concepts for Ostensible ones.

 

[Quokka]

1. Space is only warped & curved because of the material objects it needs to bend around. That is measurable....It's also a symbiotic relationship.....All matter reverts to the spherical shape both at a microcosmic & macrocosmic level, and space 'bends' in order to accommodate it.

2. If light travels at the quickest measurable speed we can conceive, then of course it isn't delineated by time, as it becomes the standard bearer for our measurement of time....The notion of the eternity of space & matter also transcends the human construct of measurable time.....Time as a measurement depends upon measurable limitations.

3. It is obvious that all conceptual human constructs exist as a means to communicate meaning to one another....But we can arrive at certain set ontological givens that all knowledge is fundamentally dependant & prefaced upon.....These are the 3 Las of Metaphysics that Aristotle alluded towards. I. Identity 2. Contradiction 3. either/Or.

Time doesn't have any Ontological status as a pre-existing thing in itself....It's an abstract concept which refers to nothing in reality, save for an observable human applied measurement, of matter in motion in relation to something else....It's the relationship that is dependent upon the application of human consciousness.....You're confusing abstract concepts for Ostensible ones.

Not really what I am doing is disagreeing with you, hopefully as part of a constructive discussion. I am not trying to convince you (or anyone) of anything I am simply adding my own point of view to the mix because I enjoy the discussions. To be honest I agree with a lot of what you've said about time as a human construct. I would simply argue that this is the human perception of time and that it is the perception that is limited. As with most concepts it will likely turn out to have only the most surface of relationships and understandings to what time is.

You have stated that space and matter are ontological pre-existent givens. I could argue that by any objective assessment time would also meet the same requirements. But more importantly time already sits within your own classification.

To define space without the inclusion of time is simplistic and if I am being pedantic incorrect. There is no symbiotic relationship between time and space, these are expressions of a single entity that you are trying to separate.

And neither expression holds any debt to the human consciousness..... imo.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Not really, what I am doing is disagreeing with you. Hopefully as part of a constructive discussion, I am not trying to convince you (or anyone) of anything, I am simply adding my own point of view to the mix because I enjoy the discussions. To be honest I agree with a lot of what you've said about time as a human construct. I would simply argue that this is merely the human perception of time and that it is the perception that is limited. As with most concepts it will likely turn out to have only the most surface of relationships and understandings to the reality of what time is.

You have stated that space and matter are ontological pre-existent givens. I could argue that by any objective assessment time would also meet the same requirements. But more importantly time already sits within your own classification, a silent partner.

To define space without the inclusion of time is simplistic and if I am being pedantic incorrect. There is no symbiotic relationship between time and space, these are expressions of a single entity that you are trying to separate.

And neither expression holds any debt to the human consciousness..... imo.

First of all, you cannot perceive time, as it is not an ostensible existent.....Hence my point about it being an abstract concept....Do you comprehend the notion of abstraction in this context?.....What we can perceive is matter & matter in motion, in all it's various manifestations. We then infer the existence of space through which we both perceive those material objects & their movements; & through which we ourselves move thru in our own bodies....Space is in fact the invisible silent partner, not time.

Matter & Space are the pre-existent ontological givens in all Metaphysical considerations.....The third element that entails a grasp & comprehension of that relationship is human consciousness itself....Or spirit if you will.

Without that conscious invisible component, then we could not discuss much less apprehend the basis of our own being, much less the ontological foundations upon which our existence depends & pre-supposes.

Again.....Time is a human measurement of the relationship between material objects in motion through space....It is merely a measurement, in spite of all of Hawking's' absurdist theories to the contrary, prefaced upon a fundamental ontological misconception as they are.

Anyone conversant in Aristotelian Metaphysics can debunk Hawking in an instant.....His theories are total theoretical nonsense.

 

[Gibbke]

Bullshit.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Bullshit.

Care to elaborate?