What Physics Still Can't Explain About Time

Comments · 31

• JU

  @JustBeHonest_98 · 1 day ago

  Time is the sequence of things happening

• DO

  @Doggieman1111 · 3 weeks ago

  Great video. Brought out all the crazies again but I guess that's what happens with physics videos.

  1

• ST

  @stephanieray6587 · 4 weeks ago

  Thanks!

  1

• OL

  @OliveMoniker · 3 weeks ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgYG7Sw0fPs&amp;t=261">4:21</a> David Foster Wallace?

• AR

  @aracoixo3288 · 4 weeks ago

  🎉

  1

• ST

  @stephanieray6587 · 4 weeks ago

  I think it&apos;s hard to define time because it is an artificial construct used to measure the duration of various processes.

  2

• ON

  @onekutguy · 4 weeks ago (edited)

  Time is a period of existence between two repeating events. The Earth revolves around the Sun in 365 days. Then repeats. The Earth rotates on its axis every 24 hours. Then repeats. The moon orbits around the earth every 27.3 days. Then repeats. Our entire concept of time is based on those 3 repeating events.

  2

• KY

  @KyleVr238 · 4 weeks ago

  time is a measurement, &nbsp;just like speed and distance &nbsp;are measurement.<br> &nbsp;time is the the measurement &nbsp;of speed and distance.

  1

• DE

  @DeepWebDiary · 3 weeks ago

  Seems to me we’re pinning down our perception of “time”. Maybe even gravity but “time” does not exist as part of space at all.

  1

• CO

  @Corethread08 · 4 weeks ago

  Love is time

• CH

  @chickenduckquack · 4 weeks ago (edited)

  WRONG - you have never MEASURED time. Time is very, very simple.... It&apos;s just something that man has invented. It&apos;s an abstract concept only and very very useful as such. But it is not a real entity, you can&apos;t touch it or affect it or invite it to dinner. And that is why the universe doesn&apos;t care about time or use time, can you think of an example where it does? Stay with me even though your whole life experiences and scientific study is telling you to scoff. You will be very surprised and I am willing to take arguments of course.<br><br>Another statement. Even though time is not a real entity, clocks are. There are natural clocks - we live inside three of them - but they don&apos;t measure anything! What happens is that we humans use clocks to DEFINE the time we invented. At some point when humans became smart enough to communicate we would have been able to synchronise things we needed to do by looking at the sun (it&apos;s a clock). So when the sun rises it&apos;s &apos;time&apos; to get up and start the day. When the sun is high overhead perhaps &apos;time&apos; to have a siesta. When the sun is setting perhaps &apos;time&apos; to head back to the cave.<br><br>Now there is no entity &apos;flowing around early man like a river&apos;, all he is doing is watching the effect of the earth rotating. Now he (and we) will say that when the Earth has rotated once again then it will be &apos;tomorrow&apos;. But why? All that happened was that the Earth went round once. When the moon waxes and wanes we call that a month but all that happened was a rotation, no entity flowed by. When winter comes again, we say that a year has passed - but it hasn&apos;t - all that has happened is that the Earth has orbitted the sun once. So NO &apos;time&apos; has passed - it is all mass and energy.<br><br>All clocks have the same characteristics. They have a readout, they move (to change the readout), they must be powered (it&apos;s what powers the read out) and of course there is NO portal into which you stuff the &apos;time&apos; that you wish to &apos;measure&apos;. By now you should be challenging all those experiments that use clocks! What exactly are you doing? The answer is you are comparing the movement of one powered mechanism to the powered movement of some mass. Not &apos;measuring&apos; but &apos;comparing&apos;.<br><br>You hear a lot about clocks and humans experiencing a different &apos;time&apos; than others BUT, that is always where the theory ends. There is a really important question that should follow but never does - HOW does something that isn&apos;t an intelligent force know how to make a clock slow down or speed up? I bet that you don&apos;t know how to make an atomic clock run faster, but oddly - it seems that &apos;time&apos;, in its guise as a real entity, does! No it really doesn&apos;t! And the same applies to those clocks inside the GPS satellites (before you go there) Don&apos;t just accept the statement that time has affected them - ask HOW? As there is no possible mechanism for &apos;time&apos; to make them slow - then It doesn&apos;t, does it?<br><br>The natural consequence of time not being a real entity is another thing that you won&apos;t be able to stomach - we live ONLY in the present. There is no actual past and no actual future. There is no real entity that we call time - so as nothing &apos;passes&apos; - we must be still. Our &apos;now&apos; is the same &apos;now&apos; as it was when the earth was formed. Also there is no &apos;time travel&apos;, humans invented time so you can&apos;t travel through it! This also explains why there are NO time machine designs that stand any chance of working. You can&apos;t travel through an idea you had!<br><br>You might say that the &apos;dinosaurs (for example) have been lost in the &apos;mists of time&apos;, but they haven&apos;t - they were just MOVED! Yes just mass and energy again. Imagine a dead dinosaur on a rock somewhere, other dinosaurs eat its flesh (so they move the flesh away), then vultures clean the bones (and move more flesh away), then microbes pick the bones clean (then they get washed away), then the rain dissolves the bones (washing them away). All the atoms in their bodies are still around - they have simply been MOVED! Also note that the rock they died on hasn&apos;t &apos;passed&apos; into anything - it is still here! And all is still in the same &apos;now&apos;. Has time as a &apos;real entity&apos; had any part in this? No.<br><br>But even living in the &apos;now&apos;, we can still define a past and a future - it&apos;s easy. The past is &apos;where things were&apos; and the future is &apos;where things will be if you don&apos;t interfere&apos;. And that works!<br><br>Time is also universal, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgYG7Sw0fPs&amp;t=766">12:46</a> where you are is also <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgYG7Sw0fPs&amp;t=766">12:46</a> on any star in any galaxy. In the same way that all planets have a radius in metres, no matter where they are! So sorry - have a great a gravitational field as you like or move at any speed you choose, it&apos;s still <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgYG7Sw0fPs&amp;t=766">12:46</a>.<br><br>So what about our daily life? No change required - we use our invention happily, use clocks happily. Look how many words we have invented to use time, we have even invented past, present and future tenses. All great, time is a great IDEA. It&apos;s only science that needs to worry.... space time? Er crap. Arrow of time, crap. Entropy is OK, Different time frames - nope. Dilation, nope. And of course with what I have outlined here - there are no Paradoxes.<br>So if you conclude that somehow time is made of something real, that you can move through it or is being distorted in some way - you are wrong.

  5

• WB

  @wbiro · 3 weeks ago

  Your are wrong right out of the gate. We do not measure the passing of time. Time measures the passing of change. Your are in good company, however, since physicists themselves are muddled on the issue, and we have Einstein&apos;s lame professor to thank for it by coming up with the misnomer &apos;spacetime&apos;, which should be &apos;spacechange&apos;. Time is not a physical property, change is. Time is a measuring system. People take the misnomer and run with it, such as science fiction writers and philosophers, resulting in silly notions (like backwards time travel). If you want to visit the past, you need to reconstruct it (its prior arrangement of atoms). <br>As for arrangements of atoms, the past is composed of prior arrangements of atoms, the present present, and the future future arrangements. Therefore the past, present, and future do not coexist (which is another silly notion that resulted from taking the misnomer and running with it).

  2