Mister Silver
Faith's Nightmare
From what I understand, time as we personally experience and perceive it is an illusion.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I'm not a math guy, so I don't understand Einstein's math. Naturally, I don't understand quantum math either, but I'm attracted to its conclusions. One of those conclusions is that Einstein was wrong.Yes. Certainly.
But I will be gratified if I can provide some elementary understanding of Einstein's ideas of space and time that at least a few people understand.
What! Einstein wrong!? Heresy!I'm not a math guy, so I don't understand Einstein's math. Naturally, I don't understand quantum math either, but I'm attracted to its conclusions. One of those conclusions is that Einstein was wrong.
Maybe. Take a look at this and let us know what you think.What! Einstein wrong!? Heresy!
How was he wrong?
It's not that his theories were wrong, so much as incomplete.
From what I understand, time as we personally experience and perceive it is an illusion.
NIST said:The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
This question came up in regards to another thread (and often comes in the desperate defence of YEC timelines). There are lots of confusion about what relativity says about this matter as well more modern speculations of modern theoretical cosmologists.
Let's first think about locations in space in ordinary Newtonian physics. Consider, say New York. Relative to Roger, who lives in Chicago, the location of New York in terms of North-South-East-West will be different for him than if he lives in Washington. Does this mean locations of places on earth is subjective or illusions? No it does not. Because between any two locations, the direction and distance is invariant. Thus the direction and distance between New York and Chicago is invariant and the direction and distance between New York and Boston is also invariant. It's John's position and orientation that has changed, not the locations themselves.
Thus, mathematically, the distance ΔR between any two points A and B is the same regardless of which coordinate system one chooses and how that coordinate system is oriented. It is given by
ΔR= Sqrt( Δx^2 + Δy^2 + Δz^2)
and is the same regardless of the coordinates one chooses. This is what makes spatial locations objective in Newtonian physics.
In Special Relativity, the focus is on events. Events are happenings that "happen" at specific locations in space and specific moment of time (t, x, y, z). The matrix in which events are located are therefore no longer three dimensional space but four dimensional space-time. And here too one is to objectively measure the unique spacetime distance ΔS between any two events in space-time which is invariant for all observers and all choice of the coordinates system. This space time distance between two events E1 and E2 is given by
ΔS^2 = (cΔt)^2 - Δx^2 - Δy^2 - Δz^2
Here c is the constant speed of light in vacuum and Δt, Δx etc. are the differences in time and x, y, z locations between the two events as measured from any specific inertial coordinate frame. The most important thing here is that no matter what inertial coordinate frame is chosen the value ΔS^2 is the same in all of them and hence it is an objective and invariant measure of space-time distance between any two events in physics.
So, we have hit upon something that is indeed objective and independent of measurement conditions. In the next post I shall look at what this means for the reality of time.
Due to Quantum entanglement, I believe that it has been postulated that at the very foundation of physics, which still eludes us, neither time nor space is real.This question came up in regards to another thread (and often comes in the desperate defence of YEC timelines). There are lots of confusion about what relativity says about this matter as well more modern speculations of modern theoretical cosmologists.
Let's first think about locations in space in ordinary Newtonian physics. Consider, say New York. Relative to Roger, who lives in Chicago, the location of New York in terms of North-South-East-West will be different for him than if he lives in Washington. Does this mean locations of places on earth is subjective or illusions? No it does not. Because between any two locations, the direction and distance is invariant. Thus the direction and distance between New York and Chicago is invariant and the direction and distance between New York and Boston is also invariant. It's John's position and orientation that has changed, not the locations themselves.
Thus, mathematically, the distance ΔR between any two points A and B is the same regardless of which coordinate system one chooses and how that coordinate system is oriented. It is given by
ΔR= Sqrt( Δx^2 + Δy^2 + Δz^2)
and is the same regardless of the coordinates one chooses. This is what makes spatial locations objective in Newtonian physics.
In Special Relativity, the focus is on events. Events are happenings that "happen" at specific locations in space and specific moment of time (t, x, y, z). The matrix in which events are located are therefore no longer three dimensional space but four dimensional space-time. And here too one is to objectively measure the unique spacetime distance ΔS between any two events in space-time which is invariant for all observers and all choice of the coordinates system. This space time distance between two events E1 and E2 is given by
ΔS^2 = (cΔt)^2 - Δx^2 - Δy^2 - Δz^2
Here c is the constant speed of light in vacuum and Δt, Δx etc. are the differences in time and x, y, z locations between the two events as measured from any specific inertial coordinate frame. The most important thing here is that no matter what inertial coordinate frame is chosen the value ΔS^2 is the same in all of them and hence it is an objective and invariant measure of space-time distance between any two events in physics.
So, we have hit upon something that is indeed objective and independent of measurement conditions. In the next post I shall look at what this means for the reality of time.
The experience of time is illusory, time itself is just a defined construct to measure change. The scientific (SI) unit of time is the second which is defined as
So time in a physical, measurable and repeatable sense is based on real world observation.
I think it's a mistake to say that emergent entities are not real. For example atoms are real even though it's an emergent complex made up of protons, neutrons and electrons. Thus, even if time is made out of something more fundamental, that does not make it non-real.Due to Quantum entanglement, I believe that it has been postulated that at the very foundation of physics, which still eludes us, neither time nor space is real.
Perhaps, therefore, the question should be modified to also investigate where or and when the phenomena is real and where and when it isn't real. If, further on, you include the concept of wormholes that make the distance between extremely remote object a lot less (folding space concept), we see another area where time-space acts in a seemingly subjective fashion.
This is beyond my abilities to investigate. But, I will see if you comment on this, preferably without insults.
OK. I agree my phrasing was poor.I think it's a mistake to say that emergent entities are not real. For example atoms are real even though it's an emergent complex made up of protons, neutrons and electrons. Thus, even if time is made out of something more fundamental, that does not make it non-real.
Whether time is fundamental, or is a facet of some more fundamental entity of nature is still up for debate. Otherwise I agree with what you said here.OK. I agree my phrasing was poor.
Perhaps then one may use the old 2D plane where a 3D object is seen going through. It is real, but depending upon what the 2D individual sees, the 3D object's appearance cannot be related to its true form. It may be something similar we are encountering here. Something that fundamentally has a different true face, but to us is revealed as time-space. Mathematics might be able to tell us the why of it, if we're clever enough.
Einstein merely revealed that chronos is nonsense as being fundemental. Newton just like the theologians of his day such as calvin and luther were clearly confused and believed and saw the world in a cheonos fashion. Kairos is a whole different way of seeing or percieving. Mathmatics just like language cannot account for kairos literally it can only make allowances for it. Heisenbergs uncertainty principle is like a coin toss observation. The coin toss it is not random chance it is just uncertain untill observered is all. Each coin toss is unique and all coin tosses are interconnected never separate. Symbiosis is a fundemental aspect of kairos. So science is only now arriving at that which is old and understood thousands of years ago. There is nothing new here at all.This question came up in regards to another thread (and often comes in the desperate defence of YEC timelines). There are lots of confusion about what relativity says about this matter as well more modern speculations of modern theoretical cosmologists.
Let's first think about locations in space in ordinary Newtonian physics. Consider, say New York. Relative to Roger, who lives in Chicago, the location of New York in terms of North-South-East-West will be different for him than if he lives in Washington. Does this mean locations of places on earth is subjective or illusions? No it does not. Because between any two locations, the direction and distance is invariant. Thus the direction and distance between New York and Chicago is invariant and the direction and distance between New York and Boston is also invariant. It's John's position and orientation that has changed, not the locations themselves.
Thus, mathematically, the distance ΔR between any two points A and B is the same regardless of which coordinate system one chooses and how that coordinate system is oriented. It is given by
ΔR= Sqrt( Δx^2 + Δy^2 + Δz^2)
and is the same regardless of the coordinates one chooses. This is what makes spatial locations objective in Newtonian physics.
In Special Relativity, the focus is on events. Events are happenings that "happen" at specific locations in space and specific moment of time (t, x, y, z). The matrix in which events are located are therefore no longer three dimensional space but four dimensional space-time. And here too one is to objectively measure the unique spacetime distance ΔS between any two events in space-time which is invariant for all observers and all choice of the coordinates system. This space time distance between two events E1 and E2 is given by
ΔS^2 = (cΔt)^2 - Δx^2 - Δy^2 - Δz^2
Here c is the constant speed of light in vacuum and Δt, Δx etc. are the differences in time and x, y, z locations between the two events as measured from any specific inertial coordinate frame. The most important thing here is that no matter what inertial coordinate frame is chosen the value ΔS^2 is the same in all of them and hence it is an objective and invariant measure of space-time distance between any two events in physics.
So, we have hit upon something that is indeed objective and independent of measurement conditions. In the next post I shall look at what this means for the reality of time.