Are Past, Present, and Future Just Illusions?

Bogan

Yoo hoo, Zeus.     Just when I thought I might straiten you about about racial equality, you do a runner and post up a new topic about some esoteric nonsense that nobody cares about.

John_C_87

@JulesKorngold

Albert Einstein's theory of relativity suggests that time is not absolute, but rather relative to the observer

The law of relativity when written out is disproportional to timer. ( E ≈ Mc ^ 2 ) and provides evidence that time is geometrically absolute. General relativity suggests time is associated to a source of light as a force for it is the celestial body of a star which is a participant in the geometric equation of time. The star is a circle in the sky above our heads, we can but should not explain time like this formula 001. because the sun is a well-known shape used in the geometric formulization of time formula 001. - (T ≈ Mc ^ 2). However Einstein field equation has already been written by Einstein as ( G =  T + Mc ^ 2 ) explaining a unspoken understanding about gravity vs time as time stood as natural numbers it could not be moved to the left of the field equation, this by Einstein or anyone else for that matter. That is until the mathematics of atomic time had been established, which is in fact said more accurately " time” called (Atomic duration of decay) became a measurement of duration, as it is calculated from a object to small to be observed by the general public and in such a way that as it is unseen by many makes it the fine print on the contract of science. It does not need to match the geometric guidelines of analog time it is very limited in the number of witnesses. 

This means that the past, present, and future may not be as distinct as we think they are. In fact, they may all exist simultaneously. Quantum mechanics also challenges our understanding of time.

Which form of time are you speaking of, the principle of time science has plagiarized then corrupted mathematically or the process of geometrical time also known as anolog time which science avoids like the plague as it points out a mathematic issue or two used by science which has serious flaw.

but rather relative to the observer

This means only a person can make a mistake in recrating the event of time as it occurs and that is the human relationship between time and mankind.

This means that the past, present, and future may not be as distinct as we think they are.

Well by we if you mean Movies, T.V., and Science fiction books I agree. Past, Present, and future are by law of relativity forms of energy not time. Explaining time analog time is a circle held proportional to a horizon marked as it moves in a vector directly 90 degrees over a person’s head. Atomic decay is the portion as duration it takes uranium naturally to turn to lead simply put. This example shows only the difference between two out of three ideas and not how they in fact work in what is to be a common goal. In navigation however, the atomic duration takes the place of only the hourglass not time.

ZeusAres42

@JulesKorngold

This is a very interesting topic. You present many for and against arguments too where also lots of good rebuttals can be put there as well. The concept of time, as traditionally understood, has been foundational in shaping human evolution, cognition, and action. The intersection of physics, philosophy, and human experience brings richness to the debate on time's nature. As it stands, while theoretical physics presents exciting challenges to traditional views, it doesn't provide conclusive answers. The debate, as ever, remains open, underscoring the profound mystery that time continues to be in human understanding.

Bogan

Then go for it, Zeus.    Topics which investigate how many angels can dance in a pinhead have no interest for me.   

MayCaesar

"Past", "present" and "future" are concepts. Only present is observable - however, certain observations made in the present can be related to the past and future, and the relation can be verified experimentally. For instance, I may have a pretty visual memory of putting my sunglasses in the glove compartment of my car and interpret it as my recollection of events happening in the past and involving changes in the environment that would have carried into the present - then I can open my glove compartment, find the sunglasses there and verify that my interpretation is accurate. Similarly, I can predict that, should I turn my coffee maker on now, 5 minutes into the future I will have a cup of coffee ready - then set the timer and verify that, when the timer goes off, the cup of coffee is, indeed, there.

This is incompatible with them being illusions. An "illusion" is something the straightforward interpretation of which is inaccurate - for example, this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusion#/media/File:Checker_shadow_illusion.svg is an illusion as squares A and B appear to be different colors while, in fact, they are exactly the same shade of gray. "Past", "present" and "future" are not like that, although certain effects pertaining to wrong interpretations of them can be - the most famous example being the deja vu effect when something appears as if it has happened in the past while, in reality, it is happening to the subject for the first time.

Empirically, it appears that for conscious organisms time always moves forward. Perhaps, that is not a universal law. I could imagine a simulated Universe like ours in which every conscious being is actually a being in the "true Universe" plugged into a machine, and the whole simulation is a movie with a very large number of frames and this particular conscious being that is watching the movie through my eyes has chosen to run the frames forward, but some other conscious being may actually be watching it backward... This, however, seems to be practically irrelevant as I only have my consciousness that I can observe, and everyone else's consciousness is unverifiable. The fact that someone else may be experiencing time backwards has zero effect on me and the way I am experiencing time.

John_C_87

@MayCaesar

A hallmark of almost every known culture is some system to track the passing of time. It is thought that, like most agricultural societies, the ancient Egyptians originally organized their calendar according to the cycles of the moon and the agricultural seasons (30.4.2). Most scholars agree that the Egyptian day began at dawn, before the rising of the sun, rather than sunrise. The daily cycle was divided into twenty-four hours: twelve hours of the day and twelve hours of the night, the latter apparently reckoned based on the movement of groups of stars (“decans”) across the night sky. Beginning in the New Kingdom (ca. 1500 B.C.), there is evidence that sundials, shadow clocks (12.181.307), and water clocks (17.194.2341) were used to measure the passing of the hours. There is no evidence that the Egyptians tracked minutes or seconds, although there are general terms for time segments shorter than an hour. The month was organized into three weeks of ten days each, with the start of the lunar month marked by the disappearance of the waning moon.

 Telling Time in Ancient Egypt | Essay | The Metropolitan Museum of Art | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History (metmuseum.org)

 Again in short the argument of past, present, and future is made by

  conservation law, also called law of conservation, in physics, a principle that states that a certain physical property (i.e., a measurable quantity) does not change in the course of time within an isolated physical system. In        classical physics, laws of this type govern energy, momentum, angular momentum, mass, and electric charge. In particle physics, other conservation laws apply to properties of subatomic particles that are invariant during      interactions. An important function of conservation laws is that they make it possible to predict the macroscopic behaviour of a system without having to consider the microscopic details of the course of a physical process      or chemical reaction.

Past, Present, and future are properties of measurable quality of energy, not time as geometric event. Sun dial, hourglass, analog clock, atomic decay, and digital counter are all energy as angular momentum. All the described events of measurable quality of energy can be used without time. Physics and calculus are at odds with errors in mathematics on the human scale that relate to geometry, trigonometry and algebra nothing else.

Conservation law | Definition, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

just_sayin

@JulesKorngold
You are right that the subject of time is very much debated.  And it is usually argued for either an A time view, where there is past, the present is all that exists, and there will be future which does not yet exist, or the B theory of time which suggests that time is stateless and all perceptions of time are just constructs of our consciousness.  No time moment ever actually comes into being in this view.  The B theory is sometimes attached to various universe creating scenarios.

From my observation, a huge problem with B theory is that since time runs in one direction from our perspective, B theory is not able to explain some vary basic situations.  Let's say I eat something that makes me sick, and after a while I feel better and say "I'm glad that's over."  The statement, "I'm glad that's over", makes sense to A theory of time where there is a past that precedes the future, but in B theory the statement "I'm glad that's over" makes no logical sense because there is no real past, present, and future to reference.  To reference an event that B theory says didn't come into actual being makes no sense, for in this theory past, present, and future all exist and are not ordered events and are ultimately not dependent upon one another, yet my statement indicates that a past event influence a present situation.

If I take the example further and say "boy, I am never ever going to eat that again because I don't want to make myself sick again", B theory can't make any sense of the statement because there is no past event to appeal to, nor a future state to reference, and to suggest that a past event must precede a present one and influences a future event only makes sense in an A theory of time.

John_C_87

@just_sayin

We are not speaking of time we are speaking of energy, we say as energy exists what is its form, past, present, for future will the form that occurred happen to occur again. When it occurs will it be identical to what is was or will it be different.

just_sayin

@John_C_87

We are not speaking of time we are speaking of energy, we say as energy exists what is its form, past, present, for future will the form that occurred happen to occur again. When it occurs will it be identical to what is was or will it be different.

The topic is about time.  Energy is a state of matter (space-time).  Take a quantum fluctuation where energy for a fraction of a second becomes a particle, even there you see the past (state before becoming a particle), the present (the moment when energy has become a particle) and the future where the particle will revert back to energy.  These three happen in that sequence.  You can't have a sequence of past future then present.  It would have no meaning as each state is dependent upon the one before or after to dictate the flow.  

John_C_87

@just_sayin

There is no space-time Einstein was describing Energy Space-Energy. Time is mathematically stuck on the right side of the field equation of General Relativity. Past. Present and future are measurable qualities of energy. A recurrence of a state of energy as in the past can and does take place often. It is only the clarity of the precision of and random given recurrence of energy which is changed.

Take a quantum fluctuation where energy for a fraction of a second becomes a particle, even there you see the past (state before becoming a particle), the present (the moment when energy has become a particle) and the future where the particle will revert back to energy

There is no fraction of a second, a second of time has been converted from a fraction to a ratio. Quantum fluctuations is energy becoming a particle synchronizing time would state a particle if round has a particle hour, particle minute, and a particle second. Time can be called a different way of measuring the circumference of a sphere at its equator. This dramatically simplifies the idea, but it is factual. You are just describing the law of conservation. There is a Time-Zone and there is a geometrical event which sets the time-zone it is done by using of an artificial or natural horizon.

You can't have a sequence of past future then present.  It would have no meaning as each state is dependent upon the one before or after to dictate the flow

The reason for this is when navigating in time we call a " past " a port of origin, we call the " future " a port of destination, and when we are moving along the trajectory this is our " current" position. The whole process of navigating is that repetitive the argument of debate here is that time had never been guarded against plagiarism by educational institutions nor anyone else.

just_sayin

@John_C_87

Past. Present and future are measurable qualities of energy. 

If they are measurable then they are/were actualized which suggests an A theory of time is correct. In B theory there are no actualizations of time.  The passing of time is just something the consciousness does, but it is not real.

There is no fraction of a second, a second of time has been converted from a fraction to a ratio. 

Of course there are fractions of a second.  Many a Olympic contest has been won due to a fraction of a second difference.  The fact that we can measure it suggests it was actualized and if it was actualized that suggests that an A theory of time is correct.  How would you measure who won a race in a B theory of time, when all times are indistinct and not actualized?  Whatever point you are trying to make doesn't seem relevant to me to the discussion.

The reason for this is when navigating in time we call a " past " a port of origin, we call the " future " a port of destination, and when we are moving along the trajectory this is our " current" position. 

I'm guessing that 'current' would not be a term someone who favors a B theory of time would use, since no state of time in that view ever comes into actual being.  Also, the fact that you see time as sequential suggests that you believe in an A theory of time.  

John_C_87

If they are measurable then they are/were actualized which suggests an A theory of time is correct. In B theory there are no actualizations of time.  The passing of time is just something the consciousness does, but it is not real..  

A is more on course with time than B. Time is a geometric event that occurs on earth the time frame for it to occur in an environment of planet changes. It is energy which passes our human form of energy, the force surpasses the level of energy a person translates into momentum.Time is both faster and slower then us.We are in a way simply arguing for an alibi for plagiarism that has taken place against time and nothing more. 

Of course there are fractions of a second.  Many a Olympic contest has been won due to a fraction of a second difference.  The fact that we can measure it suggests it was actualized and if it was actualized that suggests that an A theory of time is correct.  How would you measure who won a race in a B theory of time, when all times are indistinct and not actualized?  Whatever point you are trying to make doesn't seem relevant to me to the discussion..  

No, many Olympic contests have been won when one person had crossed a line as destination on a course before another in a contest of speed or human endurance. This describes the event marked by passing of time, the race has met conditions to be measured with time, remember time uses three things something as a past, present, and future. A port of origin in this case is our starting line or start point. Time has a course to be traveled using energy, a track of distance, and finally time has a destination to be reach by traveling the complete course, the courses finish line. Time is the geometric event that will, or may take place on a course the same length before, during or after, as list of geometric events taking place multiple times on the earth’s surface as a course. AKA curved line. Where we are stationed on the surface of the earth changes a vector of the geometric event which repeats over and over again. Using a decimal behind a second does not mean it is the right, more accurate, or the correct thing to do mathematically. It is just done. The placement of a additional decimal is done because no one really witnesses the first decimal and it remains unknown and out of sight of any clock till twelve noon at earths equator. For most of us that is some distance away.

I'm guessing that 'current' would not be a term someone who favors a B theory of time would use, since no state of time in that view ever comes into actual being.  Also, the fact that you see time as sequential suggests that you believe in an A theory of time.  

On all planets orbiting a sun time occurs. Time also takes place on object orbiting a black hole, and yes, the black whole itself also experience time. They are simply not syncronized. It is the expansion of time outside the surface of a planet or black hole which points out other flaws in mathematics. The errors in mathematics are singled out by newton's law of gravity and Einstein’s law of relativity. E ≈ Mc ^ 2 Only Einstein didn't write his own formula as mathematical law for some reason he wrote it as theory E = Mc ^2. The reason why he did this is Pi and time are stuck on the right side of the = sign in the field equation. This is not a small mistake that will fade away over time, it is an error repeated in many well documented theoretical math formulae. 

My argument of debate again is that past, present, and future are conditions of energy not time. Energy is used in time to only replace the magnetic field of earth giving earth both lines of longitude and latitude for navigation.

just_sayin

@John_C_87

On all planets orbiting sun time occurs. Object orbiting a black hole, and yes, the black whole itself also experience time. It is the expansion of time outside the surface of a planet or black hole which points out other flaws in mathematics. The errors in mathematics are singled out by newton's law of gravity and Einstein’s law of relativity. E ≈ Mc ^ 2 Only Einstein didn't write his own formula as mathematical law for some reason he wrote it as theory E = Mc ^2. The reason why he did this is Pi and time are stuck on the right side of the = sign in the field equation. This is not a small mistake that will fade away over time, it is an error repeated in many well documented theoretical math formulae. 

My argument of debate again is that past, present, and future are conditions of energy not time. Energy is used in time to only replace the magnetic field of earth giving earth both lines of longitude and latitude for navigation.

Since we can speak of our universe as space-time, and matter can be converted into energy and vis-versa, I don't get your distinction.  I would argue that time is a different measurement than height, width, depth and is best considered different than space.  

Last week I read how time at the beginning of the universe was running about 5 times slower than now.  From the perspective of the person living it it appears the same, but when we look back at the earliest galaxies, some findings have lead to this conclusion.  That's interesting, but it still shows that time is moving in a sequential direction.  

Which value of E = Mc ^2 is time?  

John_C_87

Last week I read how time at the beginning of the universe was running about 5 times slower than now

True, the fact is that time-zone is 100 or 15,000 times larger or smaller depending on which planet or black hole the geometric event is derived from.

Which value of E = Mc ^2 is time?  

Proving ( E ) energy which replaced Einstein’s Gravity Constant or Einstein tensor and the cosmological constant are added and removed on both sides of the equal sign because neither Einstein nor anyone else in mathematics could place in writing explain how to move values of natural numbers with no zeros across a formula during algebra calculating. Time describes Pi instead of a product of division it is a geometric event detailed by trigonometry and is not an irrational value it is a line drawn as a hypotenuse of a right triangle. Time is on both sides of the equal sign but is described as two different things neither is the geometric event that takes place in nature by fact.

I have said before the science experiment to be performed proving Einstein right or wrong is not hundreds of thousands of dollars or limited to higher educational students. The cost can be as little as $10.00 dollars if you own a pair of nice scissors, and only need paper, and cardboard. Here is a mathematic epiphany why does the ratio of a cirtcles circumference need to be in a value of 3?