Jump to content

Time


McRainy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 hours ago, RamNut said:

Yes. If we had a super telescope pointing at Earth that could see in fine detail and is positioned 130 light years away, then we could look down it and watch history unfold before our eyes.

But the speed of light is a universal constant, unless you are suggesting otherwise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

But the speed of light is a universal constant, unless you are suggesting otherwise?

You would see the events on Earth unfold as they did 130 years ago but at "real time" speed. To fast forward, you'd have to travel towards the earth while still watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

You would see the events on Earth unfold as they did 130 years ago but at "real time" speed. To fast forward, you'd have to travel towards the earth while still watching.

and by the time you got here it would be the present moment

Sometimes the way the universe works seems precisely designed to be an unsolvable puzzle doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

There is a time and space in the universe where you’ve already read this. So there’s no need to actually go out of your way to read it, just wait until your in that time / space. 

You've just summed up Michael Gove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Parsnip said:

Physicists everywhere one day will be throwing their snapped pencils on to their desks as they reluctantly come to the conclusion... it has to be creation.

The questions won't end there though.  How did the creator come to be will be the next.

It stands to reason that if time and space are interlocked and space is determined to be infinite, then there could not have been a beginning for either time or space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Things don't stand to reason though, our thinking about these things is often limited by the dialectical nature of our language. Observing the inherent paradox is often as close as we get. 

Well what sort of chance does that give me then?

Alright I am the Messiah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lambchop said:

Things don't stand to reason though, our thinking about these things is often limited by the dialectical nature of our language. Observing the inherent paradox is often as close as we get. 

I think there is an objective truth out there regardless of the nature of our language. Whether we will ever be able to understand it is another question entirely.

As fascinating as the block theory is to read, it's nothing new as such. Einstein expressed the same about a century ago when he wrote

"the dividing line between past, present, and future is just a stubbornly persistent illusion". 

Or even if time does pass as we commonly imagine it,  we all age at a slightly different rate, depending on our speed through space and the strength of the gravitational field at our location.  So the phrase 'There is no time like the present'  is literally true.

I haven't a clue what time really is.  The mind boggles. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...