Can you prove their isn't a time-thought continuum?

Can you prove their isn't a time-thought continuum?

Can you prove time still exists in the absence of conscious thought? If Everybody died tomorrow, wouldn't time just jump straight to the next being with conscious thought's birth?

proof requires conscious thought.

That's what I'm saying. If we can't observe it isn't that evidence of absence?

If this thread were made in /x/, you would get ridiculed for suggesting something so dumb.

But can you prove it is dumb?

>If we can't observe it isn't that evidence of absence?

no.

I'm not saying that the thing doesn't exist...

I'm saying that your ability to observe and thereby prove it, doesn't exist.

Because, not being a consious mind, you would be incapable of observation, and thus, incapable of PROVING anything.

at all.

When I was placed under general anaesthetic over 2 hours passed in a literal second. My inability to observe that period of time physically reduced that period of time to nothing.

One of the oldest observed galaxies is 13.4 billion light years away (it takes 13.4 billion years for light from said galaxy to reach earth.) Earth is around 4.543 billion years old. That galaxy produced that light about 8.86 billion years before the Earth even finished forming.

Right, but we can only observe that light reaching us in the present. We can't physically observe the galaxy when it was created.

And?

That doesn't matter. It still produced light without a consciousness there to observe it. And for anything to change(ie: being produced(ie: light)) there needs time.

My point is, if there isn't a single person to observe these things happening, what is stopping the universe from just starting and ending instantly.

can someone define time in terms of entropy to put a stop to all these meme tier questions about time?

>Meme tier
Philosophical debate is just as important to science as mathematical debtate.

If you can't answer the philosophical questions on their terms that is just as bad as ignoring the mathematics. Zeno's arrow paradox was ridiculed and still is, yet we still find many applications for it.

Why do you think it matters whether there's consciousness(es) there to observe the universe let alone, a person(s)? Those old galaxies shone for eons before we existed and the new galaxies will shine for eons after we're gone.

But we didn't directly observe them being created and existing. From our perspective and speaking purely relativistically, last weekend felt longer than the existences of those galaxies because we never experienced them. If there isn't a single person to experience anything then time will move infinitely fast, so fast that the universe might as well not even exist.

>Why do you think it matters whether there's consciousness(es) there to observe the universe let alone, a person(s)?
Whether or not I'm aware of a tree falling in a woods has no affects on said tree falling.

But what if an electron is observed in the woods?

That has nothing to do with consciousness.

>The act of observation has nothing to do with consciousness

>doesn't even know what it means to 'observe' an electron

I agree. Time is just an ordering of events as perceived by an observer.

Well we can gleam information about times before known conscious thought so I would say yes. If time doesn't exist in the absence of thought than there would be no time before thought right?

>what is stopping the universe from just starting and ending instantly.

Laws of physics.

The mistake you make is in the assumption that there exists a universal time which everyone can agree with. Time is subjective.

Even if time is subjective(I guess you mean the flow of time, how fast it goes yea?) if you state that time can't exist without conscious thought there should be no time before conscious thought.

There is no 'time' before you start making measurements of it, yes. But that doesn't mean that there are no events which you can assume to have occured in your 'past' - that is, to which you can assign a negative time.

How can there be a past without time?

Indeed there is no 'past'. Which is why I used the quotes. But you can use the assumed 'past' to make reasonable predictions although they will not be as accurate as the predictions you can make using the time measured by yourself.

So you are saying there is no past before sentient thought? So the universe started with sentient thought?

Yes because time is a thing measured by sentient things (which might include things we typically don't think of as sentient). I am unsure about the 'start of the universe' though.

Isn't time just the movement of particles though?

Depends how you look at it.

Time is the system by which particles and energy move through out the universe from a purely mechanical point of view, but from a relativistic point of view time is the way we perceive this movement. Particle can verifiably move without being observed, but without being observed there is no constraint on the speed and distance they move. Going back to the general anaesthetic comment, the universe verifiably keeps moving however the speed at which it moves is accelerated to a speed at which the passage of time experienced while unconscious is reduced to zero.

BAH, tired. What is next progression?

You know, tons of things exist without us knowing about it... Time isn't just a human notion, it represents a thing that is Really happening...

Zeno's thought experiment/premise was ridiculed, not his math
If you can put OP's problem into a math problem then we'll gladly consider that. But his premise is still dumb

Not necessarily
Memories are what gives us the feeling of continuity in our consciousness.
The drugs could have just caused the part of your brain that records memory to stop working.
Then when the drugs wore off your memory started working again giving you the feeling of conscious continuity.

"Time" is the conventional name given to one of the non-euclidean coordinate axes of the conventionally named "space-time" non-euclidean 4 manifold coordinate system under the topology generated by Einstein's theory of General Relativity. Points on the manifold are locations in space-time and are conventionally labeled as "events".

Informally, you can think of time as being 1 of the 4 components of a line that determines a distance between events A and B.

Observation has no effect on space-time in the context of General Relativity.

Do y'all really want me to be God?

>Can you prove time still exists in the absence of conscious thought?


Time passes pn/x/. /b/, /pol/, etc.

Plants age.

Geological strata laid down before human (or even animal evolution.

>People do not ageafter brain death, but live forever.

"FIAT LUX!"

So yeah, conscious thought was necessary for the beginning of the Universe.