To me, time does not exist. Time is a way we document change and aid in organization and planning...

A rate of change does not define time. We define the concept of time as a rate of change because rates are numbers and language to us, nothing more. So how are we a thing if time is not? Well what do we know about "particles" that don't move? The answer is nothing because everything is ALWAYS in motion, in a rate of growth and decay. Time is not needed to define these things, only pressure mediation.

There is no consensus, they still don't even know that a photon, or ANY particle exists. All they have are equations to describe a RATE OF CHANGE. Time is thought of as a thing because of this reason, "Things are changing so time must exist, we have equations that measure and record things ALMOST as they happen and are ALMOST always right! We have special EXPRESSIONS in our math language that ALMOST solve the problem!"

And people confuse time with travel all the time (speed).

The asylum is missing a resident now that I think of it...

Oh really? You can prove that? No, you cant because you already said you cant.

What a stupid fucking thought.

Of course we can objectively define concepts we create. Holy shit are you a rodent?

Also your mom is a whore who objectively sucks my dick every night and cries about having birthed you.

Take your meds bud kek still haven't gave one argument to support your hysteria

I DIDNT SAY RATE OF CHANGE. I SAID CHANGE.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THERE IS A DIFFERENCE?

Angry about your life eh kek

>get btfo
>get butthurt

It IS something to be ashamed of if you want to change, however you may lack the IQ to cope with real concepts

If you were given an IQ point for every point of MAD i am you would still need a handler to help you cross the street and dot your i's

>no argument
>takes a Valium
Maximus keksimus

19/1/4/1

MAXIMUS KEKSIMUS

You suck at E V E R Y kind of posting

Sorry I I misread that, you're still wrong though. "A change" implies that it changes at will. If this were the case then plants and animals would spontaneously evolve and there would be chaos everywhere.

>"A change" implies that it changes at will.
What the fuck. And people are calling me psychotic?

ANY CHANGE AT ALL implies time.

Time is how we measure change, yes.

But what is changing? Our 3D universe?
We'll yes, but why?

Our universe is a fixed* 4D line, we live in a slice of that line and moving at a constant** rate in the positive direction.

That 4D line is what we call time.

*might not be fixed, but picture it this way
**Assuming gravity doesn't affect that rate, but it does

Time is relative your moron, change is not a result of time change, time change is a way we document change though you numb skull

Nothing in the universe is affected by time, yet everything in the universe affects time. Catch my drift faggots?

No, any change at all implies that something moved. We known free energy does not exist so it moves via pressure mediation (where it is to where it is not).

If I fill a tank with compressed air and then use that tank to fill another the same size, it will take x amount of time measured in the units I use in the perception I see it as. If I take the same tank and repeat the process, but this time with a smaller tank it will take less time yes, but that is only from my perspective.
Do you think magnetism, particles or anything in nature give a fuck about how much time it takes to fill the tank? Fuck no, all it cares about is coming to an equilibrium and it will use whatever it takes to do so. It will use the surrounding atmosphere pressure, diameter of the fill tube and the capacity of the tanks as TOOLS TO DO SO. You can change those tools so that the process takes less time, but that doesn't mean anything to the forces that are at play!

All they care about is coming to equilibrium, nature cares only about equilibrium. Time is only a contrivance of humans because of our sentience, and recorded as tools to come closer to the truth. Every time we get closer we find out there's further to go. The closer we look the more things seem distant. How could anyone logically conclude that time means something to the infinite and infinitesimally small "particles" that NEVER, stop moving.

If something can never stop moving and changing then what would be the point of time?

You are the fucking man. I'm not scientifically literate enough to form such a well versed statement on the subject. Excellent stuff user.

If times doesn't exist, neither does space.

ALSO CORRECT!!!

Space has no properties. It is nothing and acts upon nothing. There is counter space that diverges into infinity and "space" projected as matter that expels to it's equilibrium. In space there are still "atoms", and also lots of "electrons" and "photons" so to say space is nothing is absurd.
This is why absolute zero cannot exist and we have not been able to(or ever able to) recreate it. Do do so would be to create another universe because it would be contained in a system where the same laws don't apply. You're taking a system that always need to move and equalize itself and making a system where nothing moves ever because there is no quantity, no energy, no counter balance.

Space is like my tank analogy. It's just a massive empty tank that has a different pressure difference. What keeps that at bay is the COHERENCY of the earth SPINNING aka "moving". If the earth stopped moving, everything goes! The atmosphere would leave into space, the sun would burn one side, and the gravity would probably change too. All because the coherency and INERTIA is lost. Think about how much energy would be immediately transferred into space merely from the LOSS OF INERTIA and the difference of something full to something empty.

lots of posts for someone who isn't mad

>The Earth spinning is what retains the atmosphere
>It also changes gravity
I don't even know where to start

to measure the difference in positions from point a to point b

i have always been confused as to why people question the very notion of time, is it not just the way we classify positions?

Earth spins, everything spins with it, centrifugal force yes? This spinning creates a centripetal convergent/divergent vortex of electrons/photons in the north and south pole of a magnet (think of a water going down a drain). Stop moving a spinning object with items on it, objects on spinning thing retain the momentum and fly off. Stop spinning and this vortex on either side of the planet stops moving and stops creating a strong magnetic field to shield us from EM radiation. Em radiation blows every atmosphere molecule on the planet into oblivion and you become one with Mercury.

Fill a bucket with water, spin it above your head slow and you get wet, spin it faster and the centrifugal force of the water counter balances gravity pulling the water out of bucket.
>oh that's not gravity that's centripetal/centrifugal force!
>different things

Also I'll take ionosphere for $400, Alex.

Time does exist independently of sistem changing, saying time doesnt exist is saying space doesnt exist, since both have the same source.

And space, of course, exists.

the past is as much dependent on the future as the future is dependent on the present, so neither of them can be dependent on the other, every element of causation and effect [must have][is][will] [taken][taking][take] place simultaneously.

delayed choice quantum eraser experiment

tldr

experimenters change the structure of the experiment towards the end of it, after a particle has already decided which way to go, the particle ALWAYS based it's decision on which way to go on what the experimenters did AFTER the particle passed through the slit.

What is space, define space for me, "Mostly empty space or nothing" are incorrect answers.

i was mad. sometimes letting the madness channel through me and into my posts is fun

Op and following didnt really make me mad, i was angry before that.

God Bless you buddy, humility is the first step

I also have this notion that there is no past or future only present, becuase the past is only our memories and the future is our projection, but in reality they are both meaningless in terms of tangebility

Different user here. There is no space either, what we consider space is just the presence of matter but it actually has no direct effect on anything, when we refer to space were actually referring to matter, which is every tangible thing, space in essence is an agreed upon concept that it is made up just like time

time doesn't exist, clocks exist

I think i see what you're saying, and you said it well, but correct me if i am wrong.

You are saying time and it's units are what humans use to describe all the intermediary states between the starting state, and the ending state.
Correct?

That is how i see time. I still dont know what you mean by
>No, any change at all implies that something moved. We known free energy does not exist so it moves via pressure mediation (where it is to where it is not).

do you mean this is not time?

nice trips, so would you say space does or does not exist since there cant be absolute nothing

Bitches dont know about my ying yang.....or termodynamics, of course space does exists, dont be so edgy

so your saying space is real but time isnt or they both exist

THERE IS NO LOGIC THERE IS ONLY AESTHETICS, BUT IT IS THE SUREST SIGN OF DEGENERATION TO ADMIT THAT OUR JUDGEMENTS ARE AESTHETIC AND NOT LOGICAL. TO DO SO IS TO LOSE ONE'S SOUL! THE PERFECT WARRIOR WOULD CLAIM HIS ENEMY'S JUDGEMENTS ARE MERELY AESTHETIC, AND HIS OWN JUDGEMENTS LOGICAL.

Yes time is a concept made up by humans.
We know now that instantaneous action at a distance exists. This destroys the notion that time is a thing that does a thing and can be changed at will. If that were the case then the laws of conservation become untrue, we would not be bound to an equilibrium and would experience temporal chaos. People would vanish from existence, motors and mechanisms would behave however they wanted and the universe would phase in and out of existence.
Time is nothing but the numbers on your wall that tick at you.

Both exist, look, spacetime, gravity and mass are all related, the fact that mass is increased to deny a body to reach the speed of light, the fact that gravity bends spacetime means all are related, and are the same substance, but in different states.

Umad?

I didnt want to post this, i dont know how much sense is in it because i am tired and not entirely sure what the difference between your concept and mine is, but if you want to try to help me understand what you mean, read on.

Also i really dont know about physics more than what i have read online or learned from science teachers in high school.

Anyway:
I think time is a concept of something intrinsic to the universe, thats why i say time is change because it is the metaphysic of physics taking place

instantanious action at a distance is an interesting point, but not only do we not know why that happens(i dont think?) but the change that does happen is irrelevant, seemingly causeless . (which is why we cant transmit information this way)

Even worse than above:

plus, couldnt you say time can be changed with temperature? not with everything but it does change the rate of change.
- then again after typing that i realize that is not time because many things aren't affected by temperature. - but then this leads me to wonder if time is only specific to a system, at which point i am now thinking the photon traveling one planck length is time.(Aka what i might accept as the "tick" rate of the universe)

Look, time, space and mass are all related in the lorentz equations, actually relativistic mass does contribute with the gravitational potential of the mass traveling near c, all are related, so if some edgy faggot says time "doesnt exist" he should say space, mass, and gravity doesnt as well.

They don't, you didn't prove anything

Time and space are mutually exclusive and are not continent on each other. Time definitely does not exist since it something we cannot measure but is something we use for measurement, it's like saying a ruler is length, no we use a ruler to measure length. The ruler in of itself is nothing without the concept of legth, space is trickier becuase its invaded by matter and we can discuss to the subatomic level, which gets much trickier

Think about this, if nothing ever deteriorated, nothing ever perished, there was no danger or threat, would time factor into our lives? Fuck no.

*contingent

*are not contingent

So do we have momemtum in 4D just sitting on the couch as we progress through time? It's still motion, a 4D being could put a ruler to it, and all properties are conserved. For it not to be, the mass would have to disappear violating conservation of mass. Conversely, wouldn't this future mass contribute a dynamic to the gravitational attractive force? ie gravity is future masses momemtum just from times passage along the XYZt axis in space we don't perceive?

Time is an Archon whose only purpose is torment.

Time exists.
Time can be manipulated.

>what is relativity
I've had it with all the fucking pseuds on this board. Space-time is basic physics at this point you spergs

The fuck does relativity have to do with time dip shit, that concerns speed

so

rate and magnitude of change eh

well. sounds compound, is time more than one thing?

or is it precisely 1 single thing that is the thing that is time. but here you claim it is a single thing that can be represented as multiple things. that doesnt sound like unity, that sounds like you have some epistemological issues you need sorting but so like how do you measure that? bounds? and then how exactly do you go about determining the appropriate slices of time to calculate? from your own sensual experience of the rate of time? or perhaps with some device that can give accurate measurements that are ultimately relating back to some intuition you have about slices of time.

well what if i take all of it and just say that it is all at once right there : time. just like that boom all of it all right there all at once at 1 with itself.

well what happens to your magnitude and rates and change when all change is all happening all the time all at once? when there is only 1 slice of time and that slice of time is all the time that is time.

if you go near lightspeed for a considerable distance and return your clock has progressed less than the ones at your starting point

well user did you know the empirical metric for our units of time (seconds for example) is calculated as the amount of time it takes for a beam of light to travel some set distance in a vacuum.

did you know that user?

meaning thats how fucking fast your moving, what does this infer about time at all? thats all relative to slow moving things, whats your point, and we know its literraly impossible to enter a period that has already passed thats paradoxical

what does this matter to the notion of time

I am this user:

I think that answers your question, but basically time is not a thing as of yet because we don't have the means to define it as a thing. We have measurements, but those don't explain what is happening. We have no concept of the age of the universe or if we're even going forward though "time". Can we go sideways in time? That would be neat.

Time is space, if there is no time, then there is no space. Time is an arrow, and space is expanding.

thats not true since neither affect each other

time is a matter of consciousness and space is a matter of "matter". this is me

Bump the fuck up, were solving this Veeky Forums style!