/sci/ - Science & Math

A realization of entropy.

>>11255151
Relative

It's a metric

>>11255151
The most valuable thing you have... and people trade it for $8 and hour.

What clocks measure

>>11255159
>t. neet

>>11255159
Based

>The classical view is that time is a single universal parameter [math] t\ [/math] on which all observers agree. That is, if all observers are equipped with accurate clocks, all properly synchronized, then they will all agree as to the time at which any given event occurred. We know, of course, that this view is not exactly correct: According to the theory of relativity, two observers in relative motion do not agree on all times. Nevertheless, in the domain of classical mechanics, with all speeds much less that the speed of light, the differences among the measured times are entirely negligible....Apart from the obvious ambiguity in the choice of the origin of time (the time we choose to label [math] t=0\ [/math]), all observers agree on the times of all events.

>>11255153
also this

inb4 "hurr time is an illusion"

>>11255153
Elaborate please

>>11255168
Not the same guy, by time only flows in the direction such that the total entropy of an isolated system increases.

>>11255168
The elaboration is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.

>>11255171
Cool we know the effect of time , but we still don't know what it is exactly

>>11255179
LOOKS LIEK THERE'S WORK TO BE DONE THEN DOESN'T IT LOL

>>11255179
It's a scalar parameter that always increases and helps us model reality. Humans can perceive the passage of time and can measure it with extreme precision. I gave you another definition of time here >>11255166
which comes from Classical Mechanics by Taylor. Asking "Okay but what is it" ad infinitum isn't an interesting or insightful question and verges on >>>/lit/

>>11255151
an interdimensional gateway

>>11255194
>Parameter
What's the closest analogy you could give ? Is distance also a parameter ?

>>11255202
>What's the closest analogy you could give
a number
>>11255202
>Is distance also a parameter
sure, why not?

>>11255151
The horizon of Being.

>>11255172
t. textbook author

>>11255151
>a stubbornly persistent illusion
t. einstein

>>11255151
logic as it exists in the real world

>>11255222
Logic is shaped by reality not the other way around.

>>11255228
Least intelligent comment today

>>11255236
yeah that was bad. so is this one >>11255222

>>11255151
Einstein can explain that sir:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jJ5PPcLUw8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx3wcdCtL58

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyYqyYAKGC0

>>11255151
Time is the involuntary traversal in the 4th dimension. Without it we wouldn't be able to be conscious so that is why our consciousness have evolved to follow it.

>>11255151
Unfortunately, I think if you try and ask what these base quantities are, you'll come up blank. Our brains sadly did not evolve to contemplate what things are, but what brains DO succeed in doing in observing properties, and engaging in comparison. We can compare two events happening at different times, we can compare two times to say that one was longer than the other, we can observe a phenomenon and look to our clocks to see that the clock took 3 seconds to carry out its process, so therefore the event lasted 3 seconds.

If you find this answer unsatisfying, try to define other less mysterious quantities, like length or area. You will struggle. All we can do with length, area and time is to make comparisons: this stick is 60cm pong because it has equivalent length to the 60cm mark on my ruler.

>>11255199
This legit looks like it's moving

>>11255667
Don't you mean the 5th dimension?

>>11255716
I agree.

Intertwined with space. Not Einstein shit. Metaphysically. All realities can be modeled with cellular automatons

>>11255151
as A square once warned us of higher beings, gods compared to us, inhabitants of the 4th dimension we should become open to the idea to a dimension above us, most likely being time

>>11255716
>try to define other less mysterious quantities, like length or area
Fuck now that i think about it i don't know what length is anymore Aaaah !

>>11255151
motions of matter and the universe

Bump

>>11255151
I don't know

>>11258085
The question has been thoroughly answered.

time is the derivative of distance with respect to speed.

>>11259454
This. Just cancel out the d's lol

>>11259455
we don't even need to cancel out, think about it:
[math]\frac{dS}{dV} = \frac{dS}{dV}\cdot\frac{dt}{dt} = \frac{dS}{dt}\cdot\frac{1}{a} = \frac{v}{a}[/math] So put another way, time is speed divided by acceleration.

>>11255151
That's a question for the philosophy of physics to answer and not /sci/ itself, although the two are closely related. Physics is not interested in the meaning behind a phenomena, but in the phenomena itself, how it works and moves. The meaning of something is the objective of philosophy, I recommend the book Philosophy of Physics: Space and time by Tim Maudlin.

>>11259454
How do you do that ? I tried and I can only get something nonsensical. I got [math]/frac{dx}{dv}=/frac{dt}{d1}[/math]

>>11259542
[math]\frac{dx}{dv}=\frac{dt}{d1}[/math]

>>11259542
>>11259544
Fuck me, how does this thing work ?

>>11259544
>[math]\frac{dx}{dv}=\frac{dt}{d1}[/math]
Heh, idiot, can't even use LaTeX right. Learn something, fag:

[/math]\frac{dx}{dv}=\frac{dt}{d1}[math]

>>11255166
What kind of sword is that beaver using?

>>11255151
direction of causality

>>11259567
>[math]\frac{dx}{dv}=\frac{dt}{d1}[/math]
literally copy and paste of your post.
phone posting?

>>11259663
a canadian sword, obviously

>>11259714
hmm same result as yours. but it looks good in the preview.
[math]\frac{dx}{dv}=\frac{dt}{d1}[/math]

(Physycs) brainlet here, but, isn't it just the mere existence of irreversible processes what we call the "hurr durr illusion of time"?

>>11255206
correct
>>11255166
>>11255171
>>11255193
>>11255194
>>11255667
>>11255716

Time as it is understood in physics (relativity) is not the same "time" you understand from moment to moment. There are things called CTCs which contradict the notion of time we experience phenomenologically, and so prove our physical understanding of time is incomplete. Indeed, If the matter in our universe was simply distributed differently, there would be CTCs, thus the experience of time by the mind would contradict the data of Relativity. Whats interesting is there is actually another solution to this dilemma: Time as we experience it, and Time as we abstract it in physical models could actually be entirely different ontological objects

>time keeps on slippin slippin slippin
>into the future

>>11259752
I dont know what you mean. Irreversible processes are the best evidence we have that time "really" exists.

>>11259835

>>11255151
It's a measurement of things changing. I know that sounds simplistic, but that's literally what it is.

>>11255166
>inb4 "hurr time is an illusion"
If you could predict everything at once, time would not exist, time is a irrational belief based on your limitations.

>>11255166 #
>inb4 "hurr time is an illusion"
If you could perceive everything at once, time would not exist, time is a irrational belief based on your limitations of observer

>>11261026
>if something that isn't and could not be true was true, then ...
what a stupid post

>>11261074
It’s true for god. Time doesn’t exists for god,
Cause and effect are a base myth.

>>11259835
Based boomer

>>11259835
>entropy keep on turnin
>carnot engine keep on burning
>rollin, rollin, rollin on the world line

the eternal present

what if the dimensions we chose to fight natural selection over, and which we learned to perceive and in which we live, were not the only ones?
like what if there was something other than space and time?

No one's gonna talk about pipe man's outlandish ears?

A dimension in which everything can travel only in one direction. Everything can move through space only by also moving through time, anything moving with maximum speed in space does not move through time at all, and anything that is totally still moves through time at the maximum rate of time flow. Everything has its own time, but everything is in one space. This rule set works, don't mess with it.

>>11255151
Non-existent

A condition of mortal existence.

The scaled & measured perception of the duration of events.

>>11255153
Too simple. Were this true we wouldn't measure events of negentropy with progressive time scale.

>>11255159
Currency is equal to time in a sense yes, as both can be a measure of effort and/or personal value. But your statement is written with such a sardonic tone. Perhaps honesty is the best policy but few behave as such. Time and currency are the frequently failing efforts to accurately and honestly assign value to oneself and others. What else are we to do?

>>11262645
So conditions of mortal existence don't exist?

>>11255151
Deez nuts

>>11264056
Based