Time

[Anonymous No.9944581]

Sci noob here, please excuse any fact I get wrong and correct me where it may be needed. I've been thinking about time.
Einstein (if I remember correctly) made the connection that time and space are one and the same. Moving through space is moving through time. Does that make the passage of time a consequence of movement?
We can "time travel" to the future by moving stupidly fast (like in my cousins Volvo 740) and/or being near a massive object (like your mom).
If time and space are one and the same, then can they be separated? Can we change the consequence without changing the cause, if time is indeed a consequence of movement?

Time has always been a topic of interest for me, curious to hear your thoughts

[Anonymous No.9944588]

>>9944581
>Einstein (if I remember correctly) made the connection that time and space are one and the same.
In that neither one exist, yet can somehow be curved...

>Can we change the consequence without changing the cause, if time is indeed a consequence of movement?
When you peddle your bike faster, what happens? Are you peddling time or the bike?

[Anonymous No.9944608]

>>9944588
>time and space dont exist

[Anonymous No.9944615]

>>9944588
>When you peddle your bike faster, what happens? Are you peddling time or the bike?

You experience a force that results in your acceleration, has that force affected time or you?

Then: In what manner has it affected you?

So its resulted in a change of location and your inertia.

Now, where did that force come?

Okay, so from the food you ate that powered by muscles in your leg to the pedals which then propelled the bike through space.

Great. Tell me, what is the final resting state of the matter that provided the energy for the force that moved you?

Oh, right, it now exists as energy. Sort of swallowed away and transferred into energy. Not counting the residual non-contributing matter, which you will have excreted by now, surely.

Now, isn't that interesting? And somehow time fits into all of that. Now the good question is how?

[Anonymous No.9944619]

>>9944581
>Moving through space is moving through time.
This has nothing to do with Einstein, it's tautological since movement means a change in position as time changes. This is just classical physics.

>Does that make the passage of time a consequence of movement?
No, the complete opposite. Movement is defined with respect to the passage of time. Movement (and all change) depends on time.

[Anonymous No.9944805]

>>9944608
Nope
>>9944615
>You experience a force that results in your acceleration, has that force affected time or you?
Not a force, a flow of pressure. Affects everything that is "tangible", but is part of the thing that flows too since the flow obviously spawned the thing to begin with. It most certainly doesn't come from "nothing".

>Great. Tell me, what is the final resting state of the matter that provided the energy for the force that moved you?
No such thing but yes, it would indeed be the "final resting state". That it would.

>Oh, right, it now exists as energy
There is no difference between matter and "energy". "Energy" to be put more specifically is a difference itself. There is an input and output that simply converts matter into...more goddamn matter and the flow of pressure mediation is coherently taken advantage of (like pistons/crankshaft, gear reduction etc.).
>whattabout muh solar panels
Which are made of rock and metal and capture the difference that is a "wave" and stores it as potential in a battery. The only thing that matters is the quality and blueprint of how the material is made/assembled. It is all just "matter" though, even the elements that manipulate light are made of matter (like a lense or prism). If matter can manipulate light and vice-versa then is it really any different than it, other than its quality? Even atoms are allegedly made of the same shit, just in a different configuration.

[Anonymous No.9944865]

>>9944581

You can erase time and reverse it at an energy cost.
If you want to give it to everyone you better start harvesting now and fast. Otherwise this universe will end and we will just wait until an asteroid hits us.

Learn math.

:D

[Anonymous No.9944947]

>>9944619
Then could you still say time moved forward if everything stood still? And by everything I literally mean everything.

[Anonymous No.9944952]

>>9944947
not him , but without any phenomenon i guess there's no time passage

[Anonymous No.9945020]

>>9944805

Jesus Christ, pal, get off the drugs you are taking.

[Anonymous No.9945026]

>>9944947
>Then could you still say time moved forward if everything stood still? And by everything I literally mean everything.
This question is exactly the same as "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

[Anonymous No.9945031]

>>9944947
Essentially so, reality flows in a multitude of layers and directions so attempting to allign a simple benign movement with it for no reason, makes little sense

also the word 'everything' is paradoxical in nature'

[Anonymous No.9945060]

>>9945031
Okay, so lets say every elemental particle in the universe stopped moving. No information was exchanged, no energy was transfered or exchanged, no interactions were made on any level. Could you say time still moved forward in the universe? If someone peered in from outside our universe, would it be like a video on pause?
There can't be movement without time, but can there be time without ANY movement?

[Anonymous No.9945093]

>>9945020
>Jesus Christ, pal,
Who the fuck types like this here? A fucking normie redditor that needs to go back, that's who. On your way there if you happen to find an argument please pick up and come back.

[Anonymous No.9945142]

>>9945060
>No information was exchanged, no energy was transfered or exchanged, no interactions were made on any level
If no information is transferred nor any interaction happens, how would your hypothetical observer notice that no information is transferred nor any interaction happens?

[Anonymous No.9946589]

>>9945093

Seriously bub, you have no rational point worth discussing, you are a complete idiot. Now honestly, stop doing drugs, and ffs stop using speech marks around words to mask your ignorance, its embarrassing to witness.

[Anonymous No.9946757]

>>9946589
>Seriously bub, you have no rational point worth discussing,
Oh no you got me, if only you has some sustenance to back up that shitty opinion then people might actually believe you. Here's an idea, why don't you explain to me what the quantitative difference between a 1 watt laser and a 1 watt light bulb is? A magnet and a chunk of iron? There is none you fool!
Apparently your refueling at reddit didn't yield you any more arguments since all you seem to be doing is trying to fit in here by making "lol brainlet!" posts (again). Refute me.