/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10863873
There is time...

It's what you think about when you imagine what actions can be done before your toasts are finished.

>>10863873
There is no science, because experiment worked only when it worked, it's not guaranteed it will ever be the same again.

>>10863873
Tell me more.

>>10863873
>Time is an illusion
Never understood this. If there was no time, how would you have change? Time isn't a "description" of anything, all of our descriptions are based around time. Everything is state. Time is the medium for change of state. Without time there is no change, only a constant and unchaging state.

Yeah, I don't get it. I think a lot of this stems from relativity and the notion that there exists A spacetime, as in a physical object that exists rather than a concept for description and reasoning. If you think about the fundamentals you can see and experience, reality is pretty much a flipbook. Change is probably quantized. Who knows.

Honestly, this "time doesn't exist" shit actually pisses me off. It really does. Never before have I seen such a bold and massive statement made so often, yet literally, never, explained. In any detail. With any metaphor, allegory, "lateral thinking". It's just said, smugly. As though the supporting framework to understand it is on some plane where it's not feasible to make anyone understand.

Yeah. Prove me wrong and say something substantive, or fuck off kiddo.

>>10863873
>daily reminder that length is not real but just a human construct to measure and describe physical distances, and therefore all of special relativity, time dilation and most of gravity are fundamentally wrong.
>there is no length, there is only here, and here has been everywhere and will be everywhere.

>>10863873
Correct, there is no universal 'now', and time is just a word as well.

>>10863873
That's why it's called a theory of special relativity, dumbass. There is no universal 'now', but GPS still works like assumed.

>>10863963
pic related this

>>10863873
OP can you please explain the benefit in contemplating the universe with no time? Also how do you propose we don't burn the roast?

>>10863963
>>10863992
forgot pic related..

>>10863873
yeah, we know.

Lo and behold, no response.

What'd I tell ya.

OP is quite right in questioning if time should really exist in the fundamental laws of physics, or is just really an artifact of a brain (conscious observer) changing from one state to another in universe where all possible states happen. I'm also an advocate or time-independent theories of the universe.

>>10863873
>>10863963

OP is right. Time is a human construct, like sound or color. What "time" really is, is our way of calculating the change of energy through space. This is easy to prove. Define a second as deeply as possible without referring to planetary motion or particle decay. What this also means is that time changes at scale. Fundamental particles have been observed "spinning" at 1 million times light speed, well no shit, time is much faster at smaller scales and Academia is afraid to admit this because it kills the narrative that drives their funding. Entire Universes and civilizations are blipping in and out of existance at infinite scales deeper than the quantum foam, existing for billions of years from their own reference frames. All points in space will be as big as our observable Universe within what we call 13 billion years. Like OP said, this Universe is eternal; even imagining a beginning or end to it is a logical fallacy because the concept does not even exist at the most fundamental level.

>>10863970

Distances exist, in fact along with energy it is the only thing that exists.