Re: About time
- From: lebel@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 30 Aug 2006 12:55:12 -0700
Gert Baars wrote:
I may be a total rookie to physics but on a former question
here: 'What is Time' no one has an answer (and should not).
If time can not be understood then how can anything related
to time (like the whole lot) be 'understood' or discussed.
Gert,
Your question is very much a valid question. It simply is not a valid
question in physics.
The answers pf physics can support the questions raised by our
experience, not the questions raised by our need for logical
understanding.
You see, the question of what something IS by itself is opposite to how
something is experienced. Since physics is acquiring knowledge by
experience, this type of question is somehow ignored. Physics could ask
the same question, but the answer would have to be modified so much in
order to make it physically testable that it would loose its meaning.
Lets face it; everything we know about the universe is in fact about
how we conceive and perceive it. What it is by itself is something
else....
But one can address this question by using empirically acquired
knowledge and by removing from it that part that we contributed to it
just by being observers. It is possible to remove this artefact of our
presence and come up with a simplified logical explanation.
My metaphysical questions are: What is the universe made of and what
internal rules of constraint does it follow. This is a requirement for
understanding a spontaneous self evolving universe; it contains both
substance and cause.
IMHO, time is a continual explosive process we live in. The Big Bang
was not a punctual event but rather the beginning of a process, still
happening as shown by the acceleration of the universe expansion
BTW, time duration is our integration of a dynamical phenomenon, the
passage of time.
The first one is our synthetic clocking, the other is real . This is
the catch!
If you can physically interact with it, it is an experience, a binary
relationship of which you are an inseparable part. Then, it is not real
because it cannot exist without you to experience it! So is the
passage of time. You may infer its existence, but cannot experience it
directly ..... other than by integrating it as time duration.
Hope this help,
Marcel,
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: About time
- From: Henry Haapalainen
- Re: About time
- References:
- About time
- From: Gert Baars
- About time
- Prev by Date: Re: Is "Spacetime" a misnomer?
- Next by Date: Re: Is "Spacetime" a misnomer?
- Previous by thread: Re: About time
- Next by thread: Re: About time
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
