Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Stopping Time

  1. #1 Stopping Time 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    159
    I'm not sure exactly where to put this thread, as it doesn't seem to me to be pseudoscience. Rather, it seems more like a conclusion drawn from various assumed truths about Time. Anyway, here it is.

    For the sake of this argument, I have assumed that the definition of Time is simply:

    Time is a measure of change.
    As Time is a measure of change, to stop Time would be to make nothing change. No movement or transfer of energy in any way.

    If Time is started again, i.e. things start to change, there will have been no space of Time between the time that Time was stopped and the time that Time was started again, because Time was stopped between the two events. Therefore to any observer Time did not stop.

    My conclusion from this is that Time can only ever stop if it never starts again.

    What do you think? Is this wrong, obvious...or enlightening?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    17
    Sounds like the heat death of the universe.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_de...Current_status


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    I'll have to dig it up, but there was an interesting experiment done where someone tried firing a laser through cryogenicaly frozen material. Supposedly, they actually got the laser beam to stop for a moment in the material, and then let it start moving again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    I'll have to dig it up, but there was an interesting experiment done where someone tried firing a laser through cryogenicaly frozen material. Supposedly, they actually got the laser beam to stop for a moment in the material, and then let it start moving again.

    I don't see how that would even be measurable or logical.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    159
    kojax, that sounds very interesting. I would appreciate it if you could 'dig it up' for us

    But this whole idea does beg the question: Does Time exist? Or is it simply an abstract creation by the observer?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazz
    kojax, that sounds very interesting. I would appreciate it if you could 'dig it up' for us

    But this whole idea does beg the question: Does Time exist? Or is it simply an abstract creation by the observer?
    Yes it exists. Just because nobody recorded it, formally observed it or measured it in the past, doesn't mean it didn't pass. Otherwise you could argue that all the time that passed before a creature came along that measured it happened in the blink of an eye, which mucks with many other hypothesis', theories and laws.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    159
    Keep in mind that this discussion is assuming that the statement
    Time is simply a measure of change.
    is true.

    Therefore Time passes if things change. So Time does not have to be 'observed' to be known to have passed, all that is required is a knowledge that things have changed. What seems undefined is the rate of Time, and how to measure it. Does an acceleration in the rate of change mean an acceleration in Time?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    well that's more of PERCEPTION of time, isn't it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by mormoopid
    well that's more of PERCEPTION of time, isn't it?
    Yes, it is, but how can we be sure that the passing of Time is experienced in anything other than sentient life? The universe doesn't remember things. And if it is not experienced, how can it be proved to exist?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    599
    sedimentology, stratigraphy, phylogeny, etc etc do though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    I truely can't answer half the people who post in psueodoscience at this site because half of it to me doesn't make sense, however, this thread begs to be answered properly.

    Time is absolutely relative to observers. From a Cosmological Viewpoint, there is no measure of change in the internal energy of the universe (the Wheeler-De Witt Equation) - however, only from within can we have observers who measure energy and it's conjugate time (which is Noethers Theorem) shows us that depending on whether you look at it from a cosmological viewpoint or one from the internal structure of the universe, time takes on different roles.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman Schemmy888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    ??Hidden??
    Posts
    42
    It is quite enlightening and I beleive this is true, but I also beleive that there are other ways that you could stop time or at least have the illusion that time is stopped. Here are a two of my theorized ways that you could cause the illusion that time is stopped, but it is only oving slowly:

    1) Moving extremely fast ( I mean REALLY fast!!! )) so that everything around you has the illusion that it is moving VERY slowly.

    2) Being very Very VERY small. This would make it seem that all of the little motions that you make seem normal and your brain react faster and the gigantic movements around you seem slow.
    Schem Labs----The future of the science industry.
    ----------------------------------------------------

    http://schemtech.wordpress.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Plutonia
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by Schemmy888
    It is quite enlightening and I beleive this is true, but I also beleive that there are other ways that you could stop time or at least have the illusion that time is stopped. Here are a two of my theorized ways that you could cause the illusion that time is stopped, but it is only oving slowly:

    1) Moving extremely fast ( I mean REALLY fast!!! )) so that everything around you has the illusion that it is moving VERY slowly.

    2) Being very Very VERY small. This would make it seem that all of the little motions that you make seem normal and your brain react faster and the gigantic movements around you seem slow.
    Well relativity predicts you cannot slow down time completely, but you can come dead close to it around a strong enough gravitational field. If you like, you can look at relativity from a photons point of view, and a photon does not even experience time change at all! It does not even go anywhere, or even do anything!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •