Universe and Time

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Universe and Time

Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 2:53 am

    Universe and Time.

    One of the basic facts of our life is that the future looks different from the past. But under a cosmological point of view this asymmetry of time is perhaps only a local phenomenon.

    The universe looks somehow not as it should. That sounds strange when one considers that cosmologists have little to compare with. How do we know how the universe should look like? Nevertheless, we have developed over time a strong sense of what is „natural“, and the surrounding universe does not meet this claim. Mind you, the standard cosmological model describes - more or less successfully - the consistence of the universe and how the universe develops. Approximately 14 billion years ago the universe was hotter and denser than the interior of a star. Since then the space has been expanding, cooling, and losing density. Although this model explains virtually any observation made so far, but a number of unusual properties, especially of the early universe, suggests to us that we do not yet fully understand the development of the universe.

    Perhaps there is symmetry of time in our universe.
    Image
    User avatar
    Arminius
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 5732
    Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
    Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

    Re: Universe and Time

    Postby James S Saint » Tue May 27, 2014 3:06 am

    What does "symmetry of time" mean? :-k
    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
    Else
    From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

    The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

    You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
    The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
    It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
    As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

    Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
    Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

    The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
    .
    James S Saint
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 25976
    Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

    Re: Universe and Time

    Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 11:18 am

    James S Saint wrote:What does "symmetry of time" mean? :-k

    "Symmetry of time" means that past and future are symmetric.

    The rules of physics - the basic laws of physics - are time-symmetric. They apply to forward and backward running time equally. So the past and the future have to be the same.

    We experience time as asymmetric. We say that In our universe the time of an ordered initial state to a disordered final state.

    The time asymmetry violates the basic laws of physics. Perhaps the asymmetry of time is just a local problem.
    Image
    User avatar
    Arminius
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 5732
    Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
    Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

    Re: Universe and Time

    Postby Flannel Jesus » Tue May 27, 2014 9:16 pm

    Arminius wrote:The time asymmetry violates the basic laws of physics.

    I can think of one reasonable ways of re-phrasing this (there are probably more):

    "The time asymmetry violates what we think are the laws of physics."

    But I hear the kind of phrasing you used all too often, and I don't think I'm being pedantic by bringing it up -- I think many people read that and do take it completely literally.

    Reality doesn't violate the real laws of physics; that's pretty much a tautology. If what we think are the laws of physics don't accurately describe reality, it is our thoughts which violate reality, not reality which violates our thoughts.
    User avatar
    Flannel Jesus
    For Your Health
     
    Posts: 5161
    Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 11:32 pm

    Re: Universe and Time

    Postby James S Saint » Tue May 27, 2014 9:49 pm

    Arminius wrote:
    James S Saint wrote:What does "symmetry of time" mean? :-k

    "Symmetry of time" means that past and future are symmetric.

    The rules of physics - the basic laws of physics - are time-symmetric. They apply to forward and backward running time equally. So the past and the future have to be the same.

    We experience time as asymmetric. We say that In our universe the time of an ordered initial state to a disordered final state.

    The time asymmetry violates the basic laws of physics. Perhaps the asymmetry of time is just a local problem.

    I'm having to guess, but it seems that you are saying that someone is perceiving or defining "time" as a measure of decay...??

    In my world:
    Time ≡ the measure of relative change.

    I don't really see "symmetry" having anything to do with it.
    Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
    Else
    From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

    The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

    You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
    The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
    It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
    As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

    Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
    Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

    The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
    .
    James S Saint
    ILP Legend
     
    Posts: 25976
    Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

    Re: Universe and Time

    Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 9:54 pm

      Reversal of causality.

      Probably you know what that means.
      Image
      User avatar
      Arminius
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 5732
      Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
      Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 10:19 pm

      What about the arrow of time?

        "The past is different from the future. One of the most obvious features of the macroscopic world is irreversibility: heat doesn't flow spontaneously from cold objects to hot ones, we can turn eggs into omelets but not omelets into eggs, ice cubes melt in warm water but glasses of water don't spontaneously give rise to ice cubes. We remember the past, but not the future; we can take actions that affect the future, but not the past (we can't undo our mistakes). We are all born, then age, then die; never the other way around. The distinction between past and future seems to be consistent throughout the observable universe. The arrow of time is simply that distinction, pointing from past to future.

        Why is there such an arrow?

        Irreversible processes are summarized by the Second Law of Thermodynamics: the entropy of a closed system will (practically) never decrease into the future. It's a bedrock foundation of modern physics.

        What's "entropy"?

        Entropy is a measure of the disorder of a system. A nice organized system, like an unbroken egg or a neatly-arranged pile of papers, has a low entropy; a disorganized system, like a broken egg or a scattered mess of papers, has a high entropy. Left to its own devices, entropy goes up as time passes."
        - Sean Carroll.
      Do you believe in Sean Carroll's point of view?

      For those who don't want to read Carroll's texts:



      Do you agree with him?
      Last edited by Arminius on Tue May 27, 2014 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
      Image
      User avatar
      Arminius
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 5732
      Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
      Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 10:49 pm

      Flannel Jesus wrote:"The time asymmetry violates what we think are the laws of physics."

      The laws of physics are always thoughts, thus: what we think. That is tautological.
      Image
      User avatar
      Arminius
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 5732
      Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
      Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby James S Saint » Tue May 27, 2014 11:02 pm

      No.

      Entropy is conserved in the same sense that energy is conserved, and actually for the same reason.

      In a "closed energy system" we say that "energy is conserved", because that is what "closed" means.
      We never talk about a "closed entropy system" because... They don't. The average amount of entropy throughout the entire universe per volume is a constant.

      So his "Arrow of Time" is merely an "Error of Mind".

      Given a system of a particular entropic state, the highest probability will be that its entropy will not change - UNLESS there exists something to change it - either higher or lower. It really is just tautological rhetoric that confuses people into thinking that they have said something profound.

      On average, non-life forms fall into higher entropy, because life IS the complex (macroscopic) effort into anentropy. But even on the subatomic level, particles form "all by themselves" into anentropic, "stable" particles. When a particle begins to form, it "freezes the chaos" and for an instant is anti-entropic. That behavior is due to the "MCR", Maximum Rate of Change.

      The universe has a maximum possible rate of changing (which is why the speed of light is a constant). Any chaos (or entropic forces) that try to exceed that MCR, only make it stronger. A particle grows because chaos wouldn't leave it alone. Once established, chaos can't get rid of it.

      The idea that all things fall to entropy is an exaggeration and certainly not fundamental to physics or the universe.


      The Eternal Universe - An Ocean of Motion.
      Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
      Else
      From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

      The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

      You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
      The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
      It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
      As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

      Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
      Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

      The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
      .
      James S Saint
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 25976
      Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 11:15 pm

      James S Saint wrote:So his "Arrow of Time" is merely an "Error of Mind".

      It's NOT "his" arrow of time, because the concept of the arrow of time has been existing since the 1920's.

      James S Saint wrote:The idea that all things fall to entropy is an exaggeration and certainly not fundamental to physics or the universe.

      Interesting. Would you mind going into details?
      Image
      User avatar
      Arminius
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 5732
      Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
      Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby James S Saint » Tue May 27, 2014 11:20 pm

      Arminius wrote:
      James S Saint wrote:So his "Arrow of Time" is merely an "Error of Mind".

      It's NOT "his" arrow of time, because the concept of the arrow of time has been existing since the 1920's.

      James S Saint wrote:The idea that all things fall to entropy is an exaggeration and certainly not fundamental to physics or the universe.

      Interesting. Would you mind going into details?

      I edited in a link, did you see it? I wrote that long ago (wasn't my best), but I can go into any extreme of detail concerning any part of (I think).

      Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
      Else
      From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

      The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

      You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
      The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
      It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
      As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

      Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
      Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

      The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
      .
      James S Saint
      ILP Legend
       
      Posts: 25976
      Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

      Re: Universe and Time

      Postby Arminius » Tue May 27, 2014 11:50 pm

          "The Never End.

          That is how your universe got here and how the other distant universes are forming. And as this universe dissipates from its initial explosion to become extremely thin in mass density, the whole process is already reoccurring elsewhere, fore the attraction effects never really stop - ever. Every new cluster of galaxies forms in its own vast segment of space from its own Big Bang. Infinity is a very, very large place.

          It is all an eternal dynamic process that never began and will never end. The larger infinite beginningless and endless universe view is that of clouds forming until rain drops fall upon the surface of an endless ocean that in turn generates more clouds. Each splash is another Big Bang and to us, an entire universe." - JSS
        To you there is no end of the universe. And what about the time? Can you imagine that there is a backward running time? Can you imagine that there is a reverse of cause and effect, so that there is at first the effect and at last the cause?

        Somewhere in the universe there probably is such a reverse. The arrow of time is what we experience - perhaps wrongly experience -, and the arrow of time as the experienced asymmetric time violates the basic laws of physics. What's wrong?

                        1.) Our laws of physics,
                        2.) our experience of the arrow of time,
                        3.) our laws of mathematics,
                        4.) our thoughts,
                        5.) some of them,
                        6.) all of them,
                        7.) nothing.
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Wed May 28, 2014 3:10 am

        Arminius wrote:To you there is no end of the universe. And what about the time? Can you imagine that there is a backward running time?

        No.

        I would have to think about it more, but I'm pretty certain that there is no combination of changes that you could make that would cause a given state of the universe to roll backwards in time, even a small limited universe.

        It is kind of an interesting problem, part of which would involve reversing the following;

        Image

        To reverse that occurrence, one would have to reverse the vector of the photon and also reverse absolute infinity with absolute zero. The vacuum of space would become solid and mass would be a hole in that solid. And also if you did that, "2+2" would equal "0" and "2-2" would equal "4". And that wouldn't be a problem except for the fact that it would reverse distance addition. If you added the distance between A and B twice, you would have less distance than what is between A and B. And that would then require that you defy logic itself such that "A = !A". And by making "A = !A", the photon is everything but the photon. If the photon is everything but the photon, then the photon isn't running backwards. But that is okay because running backwards is not running backwards (A=!A).

        So in the long run, I suspect that an attempt to reverse time would reverse the attempt to reverse time and yield nothing.

        Thus, no, I don't believe that there can ever be any region of space wherein time is reversed. Logic cannot be used against itself (else it wasn't logic to begin with). What we experience as the "real laws of physics" is the only possible way it can ever be anywhere at any time.

        What is being called "The Arrow of Time" (whoever labeled it) is merely the effect of logic itself and can never be altered. But that is a slightly different issue than entropy reversal.

        So I guess that means;
        4.) our thoughts - is the problem. Once logic is fleshed out concerning physical existence, there is a total lack of alternatives. No universe can be any other way (except its current state, which must always be different).
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby Arminius » Wed May 28, 2014 2:34 pm

        James S Saint wrote:
        Arminius wrote:To you there is no end of the universe. And what about the time? Can you imagine that there is a backward running time?

        No.

        I would have to think about it more, but I'm pretty certain that there is no combination of changes that you could make that would cause a given state of the universe to roll backwards in time, even a small limited universe.

        It is kind of an interesting problem, part of which would involve reversing the following;

        Image

        To reverse that occurrence, one would have to reverse the vector of the photon and also reverse absolute infinity with absolute zero. The vacuum of space would become solid and mass would be a hole in that solid. And also if you did that, "2+2" would equal "0" and "2-2" would equal "4". And that wouldn't be a problem except for the fact that it would reverse distance addition. If you added the distance between A and B twice, you would have less distance than what is between A and B. And that would then require that you defy logic itself such that "A = !A". And by making "A = !A", the photon is everything but the photon. If the photon is everything but the photon, then the photon isn't running backwards. But that is okay because running backwards is not running backwards (A=!A).

        So in the long run, I suspect that an attempt to reverse time would reverse the attempt to reverse time and yield nothing.

        Thus, no, I don't believe that there can ever be any region of space wherein time is reversed. Logic cannot be used against itself (else it wasn't logic to begin with). What we experience as the "real laws of physics" is the only possible way it can ever be anywhere at any time.

        What is being called "The Arrow of Time" (whoever labeled it) is merely the effect of logic itself and can never be altered. But that is a slightly different issue than entropy reversal.

        So I guess that means;
        4.) our thoughts - is the problem. Once logic is fleshed out concerning physical existence, there is a total lack of alternatives. No universe can be any other way (except its current state, which must always be different).

        Interesting, James. But if our thoughts are merely the problem, then it is difficult to say, that our laws of physics and especially our laws of mathematics are no problem because laws of physics and laws of mathematics are products of our thoughts, and we really don't know with safety whether the laws of physics and the laws of mathematics reflect the realitiy or not and whether the reality is "really" real or not. :!: :-k :idea:

        We have the subject-object-dualism. In order to overcome the subject-object-dualism Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) established his existence-philosophical concept "In-der-Welt-Sein" ("To-Be-in-the-World") as an existential of human beings' "Dasein", as a human existence in the world.
        Last edited by Arminius on Wed May 28, 2014 11:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Wed May 28, 2014 6:18 pm

        Arminius wrote:Interesting, James. But if our thoughts are merely the problem, then it is difficult to say, that our laws of physics and especially our laws of mathematics are no problem because laws of physics and laws of mathematics are products of our thoughts, and we really don't know with safety whether the laws of physics and the laws of mathematics reflect the realitiy or not and whether the reality is "really" real or not. :!: :-k :idea:

        We have the subject-object-dualism. In order to overcome the subject-object-dualism Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) established his existence-philosophical concept "In-der-Welt-Sein" ("To-Be-in-the-World") as an existential of human beings' "Dasein", as an human existence in the world.

        Sounds like a good reason to get "our thoughts" in order, doesn't it? 8)

        If you get the thoughts straight (form a consistent, comprehensive, and relevant ontology), the proposed laws of logic, mathematics, and physics will be the accurate laws of logic, mathematics, and physics, right? But if you merely got the laws of physics right, how would you know if your thoughts are still eschewed? And the thoughts being eschewed leaves you with not even knowing whether the laws were right. You end up searching past what you were looking for.

        Heidegger was a serious thinker (despite looking like a demonic psychiatrist). I'll give him that credit along with many of that era, but with a little perspective, you have to realize that they were "breaking ground" and not entirely coherent yet in their thoughts. The object/subject dualism is not really a very complicated issue to resolve and is actually a bit irrelevant other than removing potential confusion concerning what is really going on. Once one gets his thoughts straight on what the conscious mind is and fundamentally how it works, it becomes sort of an "Oh okay, no big deal". The fantasies of days past fade into memories of youthful, misguided musings, ("womanly").

        For example, Einstein described time as "how fast one clock turns relative to another". That is more or less right but can be a little misleading. Time doesn't really have anything to do with what clocks do or don't do. He could have said that "time is the measure of relative change". That is a more fundamental and universal truth. But no doubt, the question was relatively new to him and his response was understandable and not really wrong, just not totally precise - yet.

        It seems that the world wants to stop all thought at the "enlightenment era" as though all truth to be found was found and is irrefutable, "YOU can't know anything THEY didn't already know!!". Well sorry, but "Homey don't play that game". They were in an "Enlighten-ing Era" but never really woke up before wandering off into dreams and fantasies of world conquest and are now dreaming of their glory - "day-dreaming" as the evening fades to night.

        Get the thoughts straight (a proper ontology) and everything gets straight (and pretty quickly).
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby zinnat » Wed May 28, 2014 7:29 pm

        James S Saint wrote:In my world:
        Time ≡ the measure of relative change.


        I beg to differ slightly, James.

        You are giving the impression that the change predates time but i see it otherwise.
        As far as i am able to think, no event can take place without time being existed in the first place.
        I see time as a form of matter, while your concept of time is totally imaginary because it exists only in our mind, not in real world.

        What we see aound as as space is time, in different densities, both materialized and unmaterialized, and that includes the dark matter too.

        with love,
        sanjay
        User avatar
        zinnat
        Philosopher
         
        Posts: 3514
        Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Wed May 28, 2014 7:36 pm

        zinnat13 wrote:
        James S Saint wrote:In my world:
        Time ≡ the measure of relative change.


        I beg to differ slightly, James.

        ...love to make them beg... :evilfun:

        zinnat13 wrote:You are giving the impression that the change predates time but i see it otherwise.

        No. A measure is "a distinguishable difference", not "a measuring". You are thinking of the actual measuring process being after the changing took place. I am talking about the "amount of difference in the changing" is what we call "time". The amount of difference in changes occurs at the same moment as the changes occur.

        zinnat13 wrote:I see time as a form of matter, while your concept of time is totally imaginary because it exists only in our mind, not in real world.

        What we see around as as space is time, in different densities, both materialized and unmaterialized, and that includes the dark matter too.

        Well, make a coherent ontology out of that, and I will consider its usefulness. 8)
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby zinnat » Wed May 28, 2014 8:05 pm

        James S Saint wrote:So his "Arrow of Time" is merely an "Error of Mind".


        I agree with that.

        James S Saint wrote:When a particle begins to form, it "freezes the chaos" and for an instant is anti-entropic. That behavior is due to the "MCR", Maximum Rate of Change


        I agree with that too but with one caveat.

        This MCR is not uniform or fixed accross the universe but tends to differ according to the density of time particles in that particular zone. As a submarine has to put more energy in denser water to move forward than thinner water, in the same way, events tend to take more time to happen in denser time zone than thinner time zone.

        It menas that if there would be any inhabitance in the universe, except earth, in any such planet, which mass is 100 times to the earth ( quite possible), or even moving 100 times more speed than the earth in its orbit ( again possible), events would have to happen quite slowly there to our perception. In other words, we can also say that if someones like humans would be living there, their life span may be easily 10 mines more than us, if not 100 times more.

        That is precisely what happens to a space traveller in a very fast moving spaceship. As he his moving very fast, thus he has to go trough manytime more time particles than a person on the earth, and his life becomes slow than others.

        with love,
        sanjay
        User avatar
        zinnat
        Philosopher
         
        Posts: 3514
        Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby Arminius » Wed May 28, 2014 8:13 pm

        James S Saint wrote:
        Arminius wrote:Interesting, James. But if our thoughts are merely the problem, then it is difficult to say, that our laws of physics and especially our laws of mathematics are no problem because laws of physics and laws of mathematics are products of our thoughts, and we really don't know with safety whether the laws of physics and the laws of mathematics reflect the realitiy or not and whether the reality is "really" real or not. :!: :-k :idea:

        We have the subject-object-dualism. In order to overcome the subject-object-dualism Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) established his existence-philosophical concept "In-der-Welt-Sein" ("To-Be-in-the-World") as an existential of human beings' "Dasein", as an human existence in the world.

        Sounds like a good reason to get "our thoughts" in order, doesn't it? 8)

        If you get the thoughts straight (form a consistent, comprehensive, and relevant ontology), the proposed laws of logic, mathematics, and physics will be the accurate laws of logic, mathematics, and physics, right? But if you merely got the laws of physics right, how would you know if your thoughts are still eschewed? And the thoughts being eschewed leaves you with not even knowing whether the laws were right. You end up searching past what you were looking for.

        Heidegger was a serious thinker (despite looking like a demonic psychiatrist). I'll give him that credit along with many of that era, but with a little perspective, you have to realize that they were "breaking ground" and not entirely coherent yet in their thoughts. The object/subject dualism is not really a very complicated issue to resolve and is actually a bit irrelevant other than removing potential confusion concerning what is really going on. Once one gets his thoughts straight on what the conscious mind is and fundamentally how it works, it becomes sort of an "Oh okay, no big deal". The fantasies of days past fade into memories of youthful, misguided musings, ("womanly").

        For example, Einstein described time as "how fast one clock turns relative to another". That is more or less right but can be a little misleading. Time doesn't really have anything to do with what clocks do or don't do. He could have said that "time is the measure of relative change". That is a more fundamental and universal truth. But no doubt, the question was relatively new to him and his response was understandable and not really wrong, just not totally precise - yet.

        It seems that the world wants to stop all thought at the "enlightenment era" as though all truth to be found was found and is irrefutable, "YOU can't know anything THEY didn't already know!!". Well sorry, but "Homey don't play that game". They were in an "Enlighten-ing Era" but never really woke up before wandering off into dreams and fantasies of world conquest and are now dreaming of their glory - "day-dreaming" as the evening fades to night.

        Get the thoughts straight (a proper ontology) and everything gets straight (and pretty quickly).

        The object/subject dualism is not really a very complicated issue to resolve?
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Wed May 28, 2014 8:18 pm

        zinnat13 wrote:This MCR is not uniform or fixed accross the universe but tends to differ according to the density of time particles in that particular zone. As a submarine has to put more energy in denser water to move forward than thinner water, in the same way, events tend to take more time to happen in denser time zone than thinner time zone.

        That "MCR" doesn't ever change with the density of any water. It is 100% "uniform", "universal".
        And there is no such thing as a "particle of time".

        zinnat13 wrote:It means that if there would be any inhabitants in the universe, except earth, in any such planet, which mass is 100 times to the earth ( quite possible), or even moving 100 times more speed than the earth in its orbit ( again possible), events would have to happen quite slowly there to our perception. In other words, we can also say that if someones like humans would be living there, their life span may be easily 10 times more than us, if not 100 times more.

        It would take a whole lot more than merely 100 times, but yeah, they would appear to us differently than we would appear to them. But the speed of the relative entropy (aging) might not change at all, or it might. That is actually a different issue. Time =/= Entropy.

        zinnat13 wrote:That is precisely what happens to a space traveller in a very fast moving spaceship. As he his moving very fast, thus he has to go trough many times more time particles than a person on the earth, and his life becomes slow than others.

        That's not really why.



        Arminius wrote:The object/subject dualism is not really a very complicated issue to resolve?

        ?? Do you think it is??
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby Arminius » Wed May 28, 2014 11:20 pm

        I think the subject/object dualism is one of the fundamental problems. Heidegger as the last great philosopher tried to overcome the problem with his „Existenz(ial)-Ontologie“ („existenc[e]ial ontology“), also called „Fundamentalontologie“ („fundamental ontology“), especially with his concept ›In-der-Welt-Sein‹ (›To-Be-in-the-World‹) as an existential of human beings' ›Dasein‹, as a human existence in the world. I really don't know whether Heidegger succeeded in that case. Probably it is not possible to resolve that problem.
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Thu May 29, 2014 6:34 am

        Arminius wrote:I think the subject/object dualism is one of the fundamental problems. Heidegger as the last great philosopher tried to overcome the problem with his „Existenz(ial)-Ontologie“ („existenc[e]ial ontology“), also called „Fundamentalontologie“ („fundamental ontology“), especially with his concept ›In-der-Welt-Sein‹ (›To-Be-in-the-World‹) as an existential of human beings' ›Dasein‹, as a human existence in the world. I really don't know whether Heidegger succeeded in that case. Probably it is not possible to resolve that problem.

        So that I don't have to guess, what do you think the confusion or "problem" is?


        And btw, that "Ocean of Motion" blog was talking about an "ocean of light and dark matter/energy".
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby Arminius » Thu May 29, 2014 3:35 pm

        James S Saint wrote:
        Arminius wrote:I think the subject/object dualism is one of the fundamental problems. Heidegger as the last great philosopher tried to overcome the problem with his „Existenz(ial)-Ontologie“ („existenc[e]ial ontology“), also called „Fundamentalontologie“ („fundamental ontology“), especially with his concept ›In-der-Welt-Sein‹ (›To-Be-in-the-World‹) as an existential of human beings' ›Dasein‹, as a human existence in the world. I really don't know whether Heidegger succeeded in that case. Probably it is not possible to resolve that problem.

        So that I don't have to guess, what do you think the confusion or "problem" is?.

        I think that the subject/object dualism is one of the greatest philosophical problems - perhaps even the greatest.

        How can we and especially each of us ever experience whether the subjective or the objective side is the "truth"?

        What makes me sure that I and the experiences I make with myself "really" exist, or the world and the experiences I make with it "really" exist? And especially: Which of both sides is true, or are both true? Which? (1.) The subjective one? (2.) The objective one? (3.) Both?

        Do I think, or does the world think in me, or are both sides true? Is the world my will and my representation / idea (cp. Arthur Schopenhauer, "Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung" ["The World as Will and Representation"], 1818), or merely nothing but my thoughts, or both?
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby James S Saint » Thu May 29, 2014 4:13 pm

        Arminius wrote:How can we and especially each of us ever experience whether the subjective or the objective side is the "truth"?

        What makes me sure that I and the experiences I make with myself "really" exist, or the world and the experiences I make with it "really" exist? And especially: Which of both sides is true, or are both true? Which? (1.) The subjective one? (2.) The objective one? (3.) Both?

        Do I think, or does the world think in me, or are both sides true? Is the world my will and my representation / idea (cp. Arthur Schopenhauer, "Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung" ["The World as Will and Representation"], 1818), or merely nothing but my thoughts, or both?

        Well, I'm glad that you explained that, because I would not have guessed that to be a serious "problem" for you.

        But I would have guessed that you believe in an objective reality; a reality distinct from whatever you might think of it. Is that right? If so, the whole thing is pretty easy to resolve by understanding consciousness and ontologies.

        I had a thesis here long ago about "Consciousness: Remote Recognition", but it got shifted around to who knows where now since the forums changed. The OP was something like this;
        Consciousness: Remote Recognition wrote:The issue of what constitutes consciousness is a common topic in philosophy. The word “consciousness” merely means “with-awareness”.
        con·scious (knshs)
        adj.
        1.
        a. Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts. See Synonyms at aware.
        b. Mentally perceptive or alert; awake: The patient remained fully conscious after the local anesthetic was administered.
        2. Capable of thought, will, or perception: the development of conscious life on the planet.
        3. Subjectively known or felt: conscious remorse.
        4. Intentionally conceived or done; deliberate: a conscious insult; made a conscious effort to speak more clearly.
        5. Inwardly attentive or sensible; mindful: was increasingly conscious of being watched.
        6. Especially aware of or preoccupied with. Often used in combination: a cost-conscious approach to further development; a health-conscious diet.




        The Question
        But a common question arises concerning the limits of that definition. If something reacts to touch, it is displaying an awareness of such touch, else how could it respond? So is it conscious of its environment?

        In the case of a charged particle such as an electron, a behavior is noted that indicates that an electron is very aware of any other charged particle nearby, even without being directly touched. So is an electron conscious?

        In the case of a person in a comatose state, it is hardly ever argued that they are conscious. Some will argue that there is a degree of mental activity still going on and thus perhaps a degree of consciousness, but certainly not what we call fully conscious. Yet the ears still react to sounds and send signals through nerves into the brain. They are in a sense, aware that their environment has touched them. So are the ears and nerves conscious?

        The Distinction
        There is a clear distinction that can be made between the more common usage of the term “consciousness” and the apparent awareness that inanimate objects display. That distinction can be made by the attempt at recognition of the source of stimulation.

        In the case of the electron, it has been shown that an electron will not actually respond to the removal of a nearby charged particle until enough time is given for the field of that remote charge to also fade away. After the field immediately surrounding the electron has changed, the electron will respond accordingly. This indicates that such particles are not actually aware of the remote particle, but rather aware of the field immediately surrounding them.

        But also there is strong evidence that an electron cannot distinguish any one charged particle from another as long as the charge field is the same. In fact, as long as the field surrounding the electron is the same, no remote particle need be involved. The electron reacts merely to the field itself regardless of source. There appears to be no evidence that an electron is attempting to recognize anything.

        Also in the case of the comatose person, the ears and nerves make no attempt to recognize the remote cause of the sounds to which they respond. Recognition requires memory, association, and locating algorithms not present in the ears or signaling nerves.

        Thus it can be said that inanimate objects and creatures that have a disabled mental functioning, are not conscious even though there is still purely physical awareness of environment.

        Since that distinction can be made, other philosophical issues can be clarified.

        The Universe
        It has been long argued that the universe itself is a conscious entity regardless of any people or living creatures within it. The universe is certainly an entity that reacts to stimulation. It can be argued that the universe is made of nothing but such reactions. So is the universe conscious?

        There is strong evidence that the universe does not attempt to recognize any source of stimulation any more than that electron does. It merely reacts to immediate surrounding conditions and nothing more. As long as the immediate surroundings are the same, the reactions are the same. Thus it can be concluded that the universe itself is not conscious.


        And an ontology is an inner map produced through remote recognition with which an entity guides itself through an outside reality. When trying to confuse the populous, people preach that the map itself is the "only reality" (conflating the map with the terrain), which of course makes it pointless and yields a lack of reverence for the actual outside world in favor of an imagined media production - the virtual reality magic show. The end effect is to reduce the ability to think and make muppets of men.

        And "Truth" is determined by;
        An ontology is an understanding of existence and is built upon predefined concepts proposed to be useful in the long run. Many varied ontologies (Truth Maps) can be built and be useful but can only be valued as true if they conform to the following stipulations;

          A) Consistent within the ontology
          B) Comprehensive in including details
          C) Relevant to the needs at hand
        Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
        Else
        From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

        The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

        You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
        The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
        It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
        As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

        Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
        Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

        The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
        .
        James S Saint
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 25976
        Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

        Re: Universe and Time

        Postby Arminius » Thu May 29, 2014 5:25 pm

        James S Saint wrote:
        Arminius wrote:How can we and especially each of us ever experience whether the subjective or the objective side is the "truth"?

        What makes me sure that I and the experiences I make with myself "really" exist, or the world and the experiences I make with it "really" exist? And especially: Which of both sides is true, or are both true? Which? (1.) The subjective one? (2.) The objective one? (3.) Both?

        Do I think, or does the world think in me, or are both sides true? Is the world my will and my representation / idea (cp. Arthur Schopenhauer, "Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung" ["The World as Will and Representation"], 1818), or merely nothing but my thoughts, or both?

        Well, I'm glad that you explained that, because I would not have guessed that to be a serious "problem" for you.

        No, it is not actually a problem for me, beacuse you are right with your guess.

        The problem is a philosophical one, but because of that fact we all are involved in that problem, whether we want to or not.

        James S Saint wrote:But I would have guessed that you believe in an objective reality; a reality distinct from whatever you might think of it. Is that right?

        Yes, that is right, James. At least for the most part. For the most part I believe in an objective reality - like a scientist. But I am also sceptic. I partly believe like a scientist and partly like a philosopher; in other words: I believe like a sceptic thinker, a sceptician, who believes scientifically and philosophically in a sceptic way. To me scientists hae always to be sceptic because if they do not be sceptic, they will sooner or later be corrupt. To me philosophers do not have to be, but should be sceptic.
        Last edited by Arminius on Fri May 30, 2014 9:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
        Image
        User avatar
        Arminius
        ILP Legend
         
        Posts: 5732
        Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
        Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

        Next

        Return to Science, Technology, and Math



        Who is online

        Users browsing this forum: No registered users