The Meaning Of Time?

[Vivian101 0]

Yes, I was wandering the other day, what did time mean? how did we know about time? what is the real definition of time?Does anyone know? because my teacher was discussing time the other day and talked about how time began with the big bang and stuff you probably already know. But when a student asked the teacher 'what is time' even the teacher became confused. So gave us the honor of finding out what time really is

In my opinion,time means everything,and means nothing at the same time!It just like water,when it has gone,it never come back ! When you catch every opportunity and make full use of time,it means everything to you!However,if you ignore everything,you will lost many things！And at that time,it means nothing but waste of life !

[Bikerman 2]

Time as a fysical fact seems to be a part of existing in the physical world. Like an object has weight and dimensions and the way it appears. An object has physical aspects like colour, taste, hardness. Time is an aspect of existing in the physical world. When an object doesn't have this aspect it would not exist in the fysical world like the human being experiences it. The object would exist like a ghost and be timeless. An object needs to be attached to time to be able to exist. An object which time is finished disappears. That can be compared with wood that gets burned. The wood in its original form disappears. This means that the piece of wood lost track with the existing time.

No no no no no.
a) The dimensions of an object are relative to it's motion with regard to the observer. The dimensions change as the velocity changes.
b ) Exactly the same applies to time - it changes as the velocity of the observed object changes.
c) Space and time are not separate things - they are woven together into what we call spacetime. Everything moves through spacetime at the same speed - the speed of light. Some of that 'speed' can be in space, and some of it in time, but they always add up to c (the speed of light). Therefore if you travel very fast through space, you only travel slowly through time.
Edited September 19, 2010 by Bikerman (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

Do you also accept evolution? Because if so then it seems that God created a whole lot of stuff for just one species. Why create the universe and wait 8-9 billion years before creating earth and then wait billions more before man evolves? Seems like a strange way of doing things, but maybe He has a reason eh? :-)Actually the notion that God exists outside time is fine by me - I am an atheist but I have nothing against religious belief so long as it is not 'fundamentalist' and it doesn't result in harm to others.* What I cannot abide is those who let their faith blind them to reality - the creationists and fundamentalists of all types who cannot accept obviously true facts because it contradicts what they think their faith position should be. No time for that at all. I want to know how things are in reality, and if what I learn is scary or hurtful then so be it. Fairytales are for children :-)

*PS - that is not meant to apply to Muslims in particular by the way. Fundamentalist Christians scare me just as much as the Islamist terrorists do.

i like your reasoning because sometimes i sit and wonder why god created YOU. you know. someone who is always bashing religions and then goes on to say you have nothing against religions. obviously you DO have something against religions. and who's reality are we talking about here? just yours? seems like you are blinded by your OWN beliefs and reality to come up with a statement like that when it was you who was talking about realities are relative when talking about spacetime.

so when i here you always contradict yourself, i keep wondering how much you really know. you portray that you know a lot, and i am sure you do, but evidently you don't know everything. and for some reason, this has you stumped. almost like you SHOULD know everything and you don't know why you don't. then the question arises. if you don't know everything, how can you illiminate the possibilities of a god. i'll tell you something else. you are in the minority when it comes to not believing the possibility. how can a couple milion people tell several billion people that they are wrong and are not living in reality? do all atheists have big heads like you? i am glad though that you do believe in something. i think everyone should believe in something. so thank GOD for einstein or you would be left not believing in anything at all.

now you bring up and down muslims again and try to relate terrorism to them? i don't know where you come from, but maybe you should get out more. trrorism isn't linked to religion. it's linked to people who choose to terrorize. come down to my neck of the woods in california and visit south central and see what these punk kids and adults do to terrorize and kill people. and terrorism isn't even related to color either. but not only do you want to down religions while also stating you have no problems with religions, you are trying to associate terrorism to religions or the muslim community. personally, if i had my choice to trust a muslim or trust you, hands down, i would trust a muslim. you have a black heart. something changed you. i hope it changes back before you pass on.....for your sake and others.

i am not a bible reader, but i would rather read the bible than listen to your trash which is influenced by your black heart.

[Bikerman 2]

Have you actually got a point or are you just going to dribble abuse?

i like your reasoning because sometimes i sit and wonder why god created YOU. you know. someone who is always bashing religions and then goes on to say you have nothing against religions. obviously you DO have something against religions. and who's reality are we talking about here? just yours? seems like you are blinded by your OWN beliefs and reality to come up with a statement like that when it was you who was talking about realities are relative when talking about spacetime.

I didn't say I have nothing against religion. You really do have a problem reading. Religious belief is what I said. Spacetime is a bit beyond your abilities so i wouldn't expect you to understand it.

so when i here you always contradict yourself, i keep wondering how much you really know. you portray that you know a lot, and i am sure you do, but evidently you don't know everything. and for some reason, this has you stumped. almost like you SHOULD know everything and you don't know why you don't. then the question arises. if you don't know everything, how can you illiminate the possibilities of a god. i'll tell you something else. you are in the minority when it comes to not believing the possibility. how can a couple milion people tell several billion people that they are wrong and are not living in reality? do all atheists have big heads like you? i am glad though that you do believe in something. i think everyone should believe in something. so thank GOD for einstein or you would be left not believing in anything at all.

Nobody knows everything. The rest of this paragraph is a mixture of ad-populum fallacy and nonsense. A couple of million? Another figure plucked from the air?1.25 billion Catholics believe that 1 billion Muslims are wrong. Does that make either of them right? Of course not. It is the 'my dad is bigger than your dad' type of argument that children indulge in.

now you bring up and down muslims again and try to relate terrorism to them? i don't know where you come from, but maybe you should get out more. trrorism isn't linked to religion. it's linked to people who choose to terrorize.

Terrorism is certainly linked to a particular 'type' of Islamic fundamentalism. If you don't believe it then ask the terrorists.You should also read up on the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy because you seem very fond of using it.

come down to my neck of the woods in california and visit south central and see what these punk kids and adults do to terrorize and kill people. and terrorism isn't even related to color either. but not only do you want to down religions while also stating you have no problems with religions, you are trying to associate terrorism to religions or the muslim community. personally, if i had my choice to trust a muslim or trust you, hands down, i would trust a muslim. you have a black heart. something changed you. i hope it changes back before you pass on.....for your sake and others.

You are a very silly person. I wonder how many Muslims you know? I know plenty - where I live, in the NorthWest of England, we have a large Muslim population so I was brought up with Muslims and count amongst my good friends 1 devout and 1 less devout Muslim. Both, by the way, would agree that Osama Bin Laden is a Muslim terrorist, though they would both say that he is a bad Muslim (just as he would say that THEY are bad Muslims).

i am not a bible reader, but i would rather read the bible than listen to your trash which is influenced by your black heart.

Well who is stopping you? In the time you took to type this drivel you could have read the first 4 chapters of Genesis.
On the other hand, if you feel like making a contribution, rather than spewing bile, you could tell us what you think is wrong with the notion of spacetime and give your alternative.
Edited September 20, 2010 by rvalkass (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

if i was going to talk about spacetime, i certainly wouldn't tie religion in to it like you did. that's just one of the differences between you and me. the only reason i made religion an issue, is because you did again and how you were contradicting yourself once again in your belief and "spacetime". i also like it when i can get you to say a lot about nothing in public. to make people aware of who you are. it's the sick entertainment i get pleasure out of when i run in to people like you.btw- you have double posted a total of over 10 times now. is there a reason for it you you just like to give the mods a hard time where they either have to delete a post or merge a post? i noticed you are different in the other forums you belong to. i wonder why. i wonder what makes this forum so different that you have to disrespect people and their beliefs. you remind me of born agains who rush to a a certain place to preach their dribble. so anyway, continue on. i would like to hear more about the life of bikerman and how we should all strive to be like you one day.

[Bikerman 2]

So once again a posting entirely off topic?You are clearly an idiot - I thought I'd take you off ignore because you might actually have something to say. I was wrong. Back you go.

[inea 0]

the time topic is interesting. Everything else not related to the discussion about the matter of time is not that interesting in my opinion. And thanks for the reply on my opinion about time being an attribution of substance.

[Bikerman 2]

the time topic is interesting. Everything else not related to the discussion about the matter of time is not that interesting in my opinion. And thanks for the reply on my opinion about time being an attribution of substance.

Yes, I apologise for the 'diversion' - not my choice.
If you are interested in time and relativity then I can suggest some more reading material:
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/
http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/
http://www.motionmountain.net/index.html
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/relativity.htm

If you find one site too hard then move on to another - I've tried to give a range of sources and there should be something there for most non-science types.....enjoy :-)

[Harlot 2]

So once again a posting entirely off topic?You are clearly an idiot - I thought I'd take you off ignore because you might actually have something to say. I was wrong. Back you go.

Based on anwii's tendency to launch personal attacks against individuals he disagree with in both this thread, and others, while at the same time making no logical argument to back up his own stance on particular issues; I will have to agree and say that his behavior does reflect that of an idiot. Don't be surprised if he follows you from thread to thread, and falsely accuses you of making contradiction, while launching more attacks at you. I myself have been busy with college, so I no longer have much time to post here, but don't allow him to intimidate you or run you away. We need more intelligent people such as yourself who have the ability to place your values and primary socialization aside, and allow your thought to be guided more so by logic than the irrationality of emotion. This community is called Xisto, and I assume that the name is evident that many of us are here searching for knowledge and truth. In many cases, our views or the views of others may be completely wrong, and that should be expected because humans are imperfect. However, simply because we disagree does not justify launching personal attacks to the extent that the other person is forced to defend themselves or launch attacks back. This is what happened in your case. He attacked you, and you were forced to call him an idiot, and I was forced to agree. This throws the community into disarray, and distracts us from the topic being discussed. His behavior in these forums depicts clearly why he was removed from the moderation team. For some, such as myself, this is a place where I can freely express my ideas, beliefs, and thought without having to worry about the social impact or ostracism that comes along with it. Humans are creations of conformism, at least on the surface. This is a place where no one should have to conformed or be personally judged due their beliefs or ideas. In other words, refute the facts, not the individual. However, I guess theory always differs from practice. People don't like when the ground that they stand on is being logically brought into question, and they resort to personal attacks when they can not logically justify the views in which they were raised.

Even the attitude of conformism is within this forum. Anwii stated, "how can a couple milion people tell several billion people that they are wrong and are not living in reality?". The idea pushes forth the notion that the majority is right, and that everyone else should conform. In contrary, history tells us that the majority is almost always wrong. The norms have always been dis-proven by the logical thinking and scientific practice of a few. A few hundred years ago, the majority believed that the Pope and several other religious leaders could speak directly with God or the Gods. The majority also believed that religious scripture was evidence that Earth was the center of the universe, and that the sun rotated around Earth. And even when other planets were discovered and was used as an argument to disprove that the sun rotated around the Earth, religious simply transformed their teaches to say that not only does the sun rotate around Earth, but so do all the planets. So simply because several billions of people believe in their distinctive religions, a couple million people can tell them that they are not living in reality because they can not logically and scientifically prove that their religion is true. However, people tend to foolishly follow the majority. In fact, there was a study done at the Harvard University, where a couple of students were brought into a room without knowledge of the study, and three students were told what the study was all about, and the others were left knowing. The conductor of the study brought all the students in one room and drew three lines on the board labeled as A,B, and C. The first two lines, A & B were the same length, and C was slightly longer. He started with the 3 students who knew about the study, and asked them which line was longest, they picked A (as the conductor of the study had privately instructed them to). The 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th student - all of which who did not know about the study - picked A also, despite the fact that their senses obviously were telling them that the longest line was C. However...who were they to say that the first three students who consecutively said A, were wrong?

Now as for religion, I will have to agree with anwii when he talks about the possibility. I am not a religious person myself, but both Christianity and Atheism is a belief system. Christians believe that God exist, why Atheist believe that God does not exist. I say that no one knows if God exist or does not exist. It has yet to be proven that God exist, and it has yet to be proven that God does not exist, and therefore I am an agnostic. I proudly admit that I do not know if God exists or not. Many people are afraid to say that they do not know. People are socialized to think it is wrong to not know, especially in regards to religion. The first thing a child heard into their teen years is asked when they first visit a church, particularly a Baptist Church, is "Do you believe in God?". Every now and then you have a child who says "I don't know", and then the pastors acts shocked and treats that child as if he or she is confused for not knowing. Then of course the pastor goes on the imply to the child that he or she is not at fault, but that good people who are confused go to hell (lol). Some Atheist are strongly against Agnosticism, and obviously so are many believers in religion. Atheist make the argument that only Atheism and Theism exist because saying that you don't know if a God exist is the same as not believing in a God. I disagree. If an individual was born on a dessert island, and never heard of any religion, he would not be an atheist (who believe a God doesn't exist), he would simply not know whether a God exist or not. He would be an agnostic in other words. If a missionary were to find him and tell him about God, and he then concludes that he is 100% certain that a God does not exist, he would then be an Atheist. Let me be clear that when I say God, I do not necessarily mean Gods that are depicted in religion. I mean any God, which includes a God that we could be completely unaware of and is outside the characteristics and nature of the Gods that religion depicts.

As for the primary topic, which was the meaning of time. I am not the most knowledgeable guy when it comes to science, nevertheless, could it be possible that time does not exist? Perhaps time was a creation of humans in order to define life and death. When someone has cancer or a serious disease, they usually ask how much time do they have left. I don't know any other creature on Earth that does that. It appears that other beings live and die without consideration of time. In fact, the human idea of time usually conflict when discussing both science and religion. For example, science may ask, "When did the universe start?". Due to our understand of time, we are forced to assume that the universe had a beginning. Most scientific conclude that the universe started a very very very long time ago with the big bang, but then the question of, "What created the big bang?" must be answered, and when did what started the big bang come into existence, and what brought that into existence also. We can not imagine a world without a beginning, and then on the other hand we can not imagine that at some point nothing existed - nothing from nothing leaves nothing, it doesn't equal a bang. So due to our view of time, it is impossible to consider that perhaps the universe has always existed and time is only an illusion...something that does not really exist. Even on the religious side, the question is asked, "If God does not exist, who created the universe/humans?". It is impossible for us to consider the idea that universe perhaps was not created, and it was always here. Then another question on the religious side is that, "If God created the universe, who created God?". The religious side is forced to go into conflict with their belief of time in order to maintain their religious belief by saying that God always existed. You will notice that many children will say, "How could God have not beginning?". This is because the child's faith is not yet strong enough to go into conflict with their view of time in order to accommodate their belief in God.

I am not saying that time does not exist, but I am saying that the non-existence of time is something that I have been thinking of. I don't have the scientific background to conclude if time truly exist or not. Nevertheless, time could actually be nothing more then something created by humans in order to measure the length of their life. In the sense of the universe and nature, could time be non-existent?

[Bikerman 2]

Yes, I dislike having to personalise any debate - it goes against the grain for me. Unfortunately some users make it impossible to do otherwise, therefore the best solution, I feel, is the ignore button.

Where I would take issue with you is on the idea of atheism as a belief. I think it depends what you mean by atheism, and this is much discussed.
Let us first agree on the definition of the word - one who does not believe in God(s).
Now that does not equate to asserting that God(s) do not exist. The person on the desert island you describe is not an agnostic, he is an atheist. He does not believ in God(s). The distinction is subtle. An agnostic is one who does not believe it is possible to prove or disprove the existence of God. Thus you can have religious agnostics - and many Church of England folk are probably in that category.
Within atheism you have weak and strong. Weak atheism is simply the non-belief. Strong atheism is the assertion of no God.

I do not assert that God does not exist - I merely say that on the evidence available there is no reason to believe that he/she does exist. If the evidence changes then my position will change. I do not have any belief, therefore. My atheism is not a belief - it is not a position taken without evidence or regardless of evidence (which I think is a reasonable definition of belief)...

Just to hammer this home....most theists are mono-theists (in name at least). So they believe in one God. They therefore disbelieve in x Gods*. Are we to then say that they have one belief or thousands?

In the very aposite words of Stephen Roberts:

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

http://www.askatheists.com/atheist-quotes
* Where x is a number somewhere between a few thousand and a few million).
Edited September 23, 2010 by Bikerman (see edit history)

[cunny 0]

Time is life. If you going to an interview at 8.30 but you cant reach that time. you lose great opportunity. so any where don't waste your time forever. Time is money...

[kikapoo 0]

Personally I think Time is a very subjective matter. Mankind has always thought that we can keep time in check but I think what mankind has done is create clocks that tell time in their own perspective. Have you ever thought about why a second is a second and an hour is 60 minutes. All these are just guidelines that man ourselves have put into place to keep time in check so that we can base our lives on it. We are very much restricted by "TIME" and so a better way in my opinion to define "TIME" is by quality of time.Example 01:You're doing something mundane and boring, the 30 minutes to the end of work never comes.Example 02:You're having fun with the stuff you're doing and before you know it, 30 minutes is up.I believe everyone has been through that definitely in your lives. Therefore in my opinion, time is defined by the quality of experience that the user is going through and has been put through.Well, sounded like an essay doesnt it hahahaha

[Xarex 1]

I'm always thinking about time.. how little of it there is and how long it can sometimes seem to us. But if you think about it, in terms of the Universe and how long things took to even form and be made.. we are but a spec. Our lives basically happen in less than a blink of the universe's eye. Compared to the amount of time in the universe, the entire existence of humanity -- from the dawn of man till now -- isn't even a thought to the universe. We are nothing. We have always been nothing. And that's all we will be. It sounds insane, but if we could somehow go over the records of the universe -- of everything that was ever created, it almost doesn't even matter. Life seems but an accident. And that's all it ever is and was. Time only means something to us because we are so limited. But to something that never ends or to something that seems like it goes on forever, time is nothing.

[iGuest 3]

Our struggle to comprehend time and all of it's components can be attributed in part to the present development of the human brain. I suspect the human brain is still capable of much more than it is now, and will continue to evolve. In addition our language also restricts our ability to understand what we observe. We can only define what we can put into words, or perhaps more accurately, we cannot define very much more than what we can manage to put into words. I am aware some people are capable of relaying information through music. But not being so inclined myself, I cannot comment on it's limitations or lack thereof. Math seems to be the most comprehensive way we can define the most complicated of things. But still, our understanding is limited to our ability to employ math. We have yet to discover all of which math has to offer. So, we have yet to be able to comprehend all of which we can observe or imagine.The restriction of language I can only poorly attempt to explain with the following example. And this may be a weak example, but it's the best I can do..... " This time I will be able to explain time to you without having a hard time of it. "I have used the word 'time' three different times, ( heh, 4? ) and each time ( argh ), and each instance of it's usage has a different meaning, but identical spelling and pronunciation. I can attempt to reiterate the above sentence without using the word 'time' redundantly, but approach the present limits of my particular brain.... " This attempt I will be able to explain 'Time' without having a difficult instance of it ". Now that is poor grammer. Not my strong point. Let me clean that up a bit. " At this particular moment I will be able to explain to you the definition of 'time' without difficulty.... Alright, I was better able to communicate my meaning by employing a greater command of my language. But I hope I have illustrated my point. We are restricted to understand and define to ourselves and others what we observe and imagine by the complexity of communicative processes.All of that being said, I originally thought that time really didn't exist. And it may still not, my comprehesion of it is tentative at best. We use days, months, and years relative to us only on Earth in this solar system as a unit of measurment of the passage of 'time'. And it is not a concrete thing, like a 'concrete' noun. It is more of an abstract thing, exactly like an 'abstract' noun. It has no substance to itself, it really doesn't exist. Confusing and contradictory. I know. Like I said, the limits of the human brain, ( mine specifically ) and that of my adeptness with my chosen form of communication. Which is written English.But I struggle at all times ( again with that word, there is no avoiding it! ) as I expect we all do in all things to put it, or imagine it, and everything we contemplate, much more simply. Building from my very rudimentary understanding that velocity and distance effects ( affects? ) our measurment of the passage of time. I think time is nothing more than a unit of measurment itself, that defines the relationship between velocity and distance. Now I suspect I'm missing something here. Matter. I think I have left matter out of the equation.Time is the unit of measurment used to define the relationship between the velocity of matter over distance.?.... It has no beginning nor and end, no more than a 'pound' does as a unit of measurment to define gravity. Where does a pound begin?, where does a pound end?. Doesn't make sense, because it isn't effectively applicable. So you can't apply a begining or an end to time,any more than you can say a pound starts at 1 oz, or 1 gram, or 1 nanogram, or an even smaller measurment until we enter a new discusion about how long you can split something in half, and then half again, and in half once more, and half of that. Though a pound clearly has an end. Perhaps I'm completely wrong, or perhaps that is just a bad example. But that's the extent of my ability to explain my undertanding of Time, at this time. ':-)