[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 294 B, 300x150, Green.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10263757 No.10263757 [Reply] [Original]

Is time like even real? or is it just a measurement of the movement of particles relative to an observer?

>> No.10263771
File: 310 KB, 427x576, 1527386690517.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10263771

>>10263757
Anon
Yes time is real

>> No.10263780

>>10263757
there is clock time, and then there is duration

>> No.10263787

>>10263757
All I can think is that time is intimately related with distance, though I'm not sure how beyond layman descriptions

>> No.10263857

This is one of the open problems in Physics, right now. Read the papers by Carlo Rovelli. He's the one who is working most on this problem. He published some easily digestible papers but unfortunately I forgot the names.

>> No.10263870

>>10263757
Just an illusion made up by our brain.

>> No.10266189

>>10263870
How small and what are their purpose?

>> No.10266194

Time isn't real.

>> No.10266212

>>10266194
Your mum isn't real

>> No.10266238

Logging on into /sci/ is like falling down a rabbit hole every single time.

>> No.10266348

>>10263757
It is a measurement of entropy.

>> No.10266366

>>10263757
If we can measure it then it is real in some sense.

>> No.10267482

>>10266366
you could be measuring the wrong thing.

>>10266348
entropy increases at a non-constant rate, but time is thought to increase at a constant rate. the two are not the same.

Even concepts such as "instant" do not exist, because simultaneity is not real, a result general relativity.

>> No.10267490

>>10263780
That is counting and measuring. You just described maths.

Time is the flow rate of related (and relatable) variables to the observer/inspector.

>> No.10267492

>>10263870
I invite you to dock in my cerebellum and replicate double-quick.

>Time needs no initial referencer as all is reconstructible from temporal inference.

>> No.10267494

>>10267482
How the fuck is time supposed to increase? Either the experiential funnel widens or thins, it doesn't extend or shrink.

>> No.10267502

>>10263757
Yes. 1 second is defimed by particles oscilliation

>> No.10267534

>>10267502
Numbers are relative to observer-group, categories are the observer-groups best-approximation.

>> No.10267621

>>10263757
i showed time was real in like 2013 but my proof is too elaborate and complex to share here.

>> No.10267641

Time is equal distribution of events over discrete observations/measurements.

>> No.10268232

am I real

>> No.10268234

Time is quantized at the Planck time and progresses from Planck time to Planck time. It is real, only retards think otherwise.

>> No.10268512

>>10268234
then show me an experiment that has a signal from the past or the future. No experiment has ever done this.

>> No.10268521

>>10268232
No you're not.

>> No.10268524

>>10268232
>>10268521
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nh3z3PSAkE

>> No.10268528

>>10263757
I think so. But space and time are not particularly fundamental (they're not metaphysical). Product of matter itself.

>> No.10268537

>>10268524
kek

>> No.10268561
File: 46 KB, 420x400, cft-correspondence.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10268561

>>10268528
de sitter or minkowski space is indeed not real
only anti-de sitter space is real
but you can't perceive it

>> No.10268569

Time is real in the same fashion numbers are real

>> No.10268833

>>10263757

it is real since we derive it from observing state changes, in away is linked to entropy like another anon said.

>> No.10268852

>>>/lit/12326040

>> No.10268949

>>10268561
nice escher