...
Is time continuous or discrete?
Colton Cooper
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Angel Brown
Discrete unless your measurement device uses a continuous property of matter.
Matthew Perez
>continuous property of matter
Jack Thompson
I was using OPs terminology, non-discrete could fit you.
Time is measured by physical observations, time is only as continuous as your ability to measure it.
Jayden Taylor
>if it's not measured, it doesn't occur/exist
well memed NEETtard
Mason Morris
OP asked about continuity of time, an abstract concept which relies on measurement to exist.
You can theorize what happens if you can't measure it, I made no claim that what you can't measure doesn't happen. What I did imply is that you cannot prove continuity with discrete instruments.
Isaiah Rogers
the question in the OP wasn't whether we could prove continuity, it was only whether or not time is continuous or discreet.
If time was discreet, you would be able to tell easily. If time was not continuous, everything could only move for certain discreet duration, meaning there would be acceleration and deceleration in every interval. You would be able to measure the bremsstrahlung spectrum for example of an electron beam to confirm the discontinuity of time. Also if time were discreet, what force would be accelerating and decelerating everything in every discreet time interval?
Gabriel Bailey
continuous but it can be modeled well as discrete
Isaiah Wilson
>If time was discreet, you would be able to tell easily.
How? You're trying to measure the interval of change from inside a system that relies on it.
>What force would be accelerating and decelerating everything in every discreet time interval?
That is an excellent question to ponder. I do not know.
Joseph Morales
>How?
I just explained that. set up an electron beam, with a spectroscopy system with detectors orthogonal to, and in front of the beam just above and below it. if time is discreet, you will see brem spectra, from the acceleration/deceleration of the electrons at the discreet time intervals. there will be energy given off by the deceleration of the electrons, and it will be detected easily.
Eli Allen
>from the acceleration/deceleration of the electrons at the discreet time intervals.
How are you measuring these discreet time intervals without using instruments that also change in the very same discreet intervals?
It's a very subtle point I'm trying to make: in order to prove that change is happening in discreet intervals, you cannot use tools that exist in the very same system you're measuring, since they would also run at the same discrete intervals as your observed phenomenon. Leading you only to conclude that there is no indication of a discreet change taking place, which is not the same as proving a positive.
Now the interesting implication of a discreet interval is that there could exist phenomena that operate at different intervals.
Asher Nguyen
I understand the point you're trying to make, but there is no reason why the photons generated would not interact with your detection equipment. they wouldn't stop existing, they would just be capable of interacting during the discreet intervals, which has no implication on whether they are detected or not. and they would not be generated or detected with any significance if time were not discreet (which it isn't)
Asher Lewis
...
Aaron Ward
Is space discrete or continuous? My limited understanding is that the answer is continuous until you reach the Plank length regime at which point things get fuzzy. Perhaps there's an analogous duration. Dude weed.
Ayden Scott
>but there is no reason why the photons generated would not interact with your detection equipment
I didn't claim they wouldn't interact, I claimed that the interaction or lack of thereof wouldn't be a valid basis for a proof of continuity as you're attempting it from within the system itself.
The only proof that can be made from within a system is the difference in frequency between 2 intervals of varied length using one of them as basis for measuring the other. Continuity can only be assumed and used for approximate modelling.
Levi Garcia
dont think of planck length/time as the discretization of either respective interval. The planck units are more of a threshold for where quantum effects become significant.
The planck mass for example, is ~22 micrograms, but mass is certainly not quantized in discreet packets of 22 micrograms
Mason Collins
>I claimed that the interaction or lack of thereof wouldn't be a valid basis for a proof of continuity
If you see brem spectra with a max energy equal to that of the electron beam energy, what else would be causing that?
it's not like we can't measure gravity within the system that it acts, or the particles/waves that cause the effects of gravity. why would we not be able to observe the behavior of discreet or continuous time like we can with every other phenomena?
Nicholas Smith
>Ctrl-F
>discreet
>19 matches (now 20)
you fuckers should be ashamed
Christian Taylor
I spelt it right.
Michael Reed
Discreet is incorrect
Discrete is correct
Discreet means to be secretive
>i made a discreet exit as the ex-gf showed up
Landon Garcia
It's 5am, I started off with discrete and then traversed towards discreet.
>why would we not be able to observe the behavior of discrete or continuous time like we can with every other phenomena?
I would liken it to trying to see your own eye without a reflection. It's impossible because the eye can never perceive itself as it cannot look at itself, you can at most look into a mirror and see your reflection or take a picture of it. Semantics of this analogy could be pedantically argued since in the end eye perceives light and it doesn't matter if it's reflected or not, that's not the point of it though.
In order to observe discrete interval of change, you have to be figuratively looking from outside of the system where the change is happening - similarly to an eye being unable to directly look upon itself - since if the change upon which your instruments rely is identical in interval to your observed phenomenon, you'll never have reference for continuity of said phenomenon.
Adrian Smith
You're not looking at observing time directly though, you're only concerned with finding an effect of living in a system with discretized time.
again, you are not looking to observe any specific discreet interval of time. you are looking for a specific effect that would only occur in a world where time acted discretely. the reference for continuity is that the effect that would be observed in the case of discretization would not be observed in the case of continuity, because it's not possible, and vice versa.
it's not possible for time to be discretized, and not observe bremsstrahlung from the multiple accelerations and decelerations of electrons. that is an easily observable effect. this effect is not present or observable in a system where time is continuous, because that phenomenon is not possible in that instance, because the mechanism that would bring about its being (discretized time) is not a property of the system.
Dominic Reyes
Does time even exiat? I dont think so. Surely its just an abstract concept of relative motion.
And "discreet" makes you sound like a nigger.
Jason Diaz
>this effect is not present or observable in a system where time is continuous
In mathematical models of physical events.
Matthew Thomas
everything in our Univers is discrete.
Matthew Garcia
Everything is discrete as long as you cut it into arbitrarily small units.