• [deleted]

Yes Dr. Barbour is perfectly right: there is no time in the universe. The only time exists is inner time.

The universe is in a continuous change. A change n gets transformed into a change n+1, the change n+1 into a change n+2 and so on. Clocks measure a frequency, velocity and numerical order of change. Changes do not occur in time, changes occur in space only. Time is not a part of space. Space is timeless. In the space there is no past and no future. Past and future belong to the inner time that is a result of neuronal activity of the brain.Attachment #1: 1_With_Clocks_we_Measure.........pdf

    • [deleted]

    There is a little bit in me which says, "I don't get it." The Hamiltonian constraint in ADM relativity tells us that NH = 0, which in the canonical quantized setting says HΨ = 0, which is a Schrodinger equation with ∂Ψ[g]/∂t = 0 as well. So there are no dynamics here. The Wheeler DeWitt equation is a type of constraint equation on the wave functional, rather than an evolution equation. It tells us that on the configuration variables of Ψ[g], which are spatial surfaces g, there exist constraints. The WD equation then constrains the wave functional over a set of configuration variables.

    In one sense this should not be surprising, for the time variable here is a coordinate time that is established by a gauge-like coordinate condition. Quantum field theory establishes equal time commutators of harmonic oscillators for fields. These are fixed on spatial surfaces, which start with a set established as Cauchy data on an initial spatial slice. The invariant time of general relativity is the proper time. So there are two important definitions of time in quantum physics and relativity. It is also worth noting that there is no time operator that is well defined. So there is no [T, H] = iħ, and time is not often regarded as quantized as such.

    It is not clear to me that physics is meant to determine whether something like time or space exist. These are the fields of general relativity, and just as we indirectly infer the existence of electric and magnetic fields by the currents they induce on an antenna or some conducting media, we infer the "fields" of space and time by the motion of particles. We don't really have any means to determine whether these fields actually exist, or to determine their ontological status --- to use philosophical language. Of course for linear plane parallel gravity waves in the weak field limit there are photon-like particles we call the graviton. The graviton departs from the photon in having two directions of polarization, or helicity = 2. So in principle a graviton detector is possible, though tough to build due to the weak nature of gravity.

    Ultimately physics is an empirical science, so we can only go with what we can measure and record. We record time with clocks and measure the expansion of the universe from astronomical data of redshifted galaxies. So if time does not exist on some deeper level, there would have to be some experiment or observation which could be conducted to ascertain whether that is the case. We are ultimately faced with some open questions about the nature of time. Examples of these questions involve the unidirectionality of macro-time, the low entropy of the early universe, the quantum nature of time and so forth.

    Lawrence B. Crowell

    • [deleted]

    I am happy what our physic world beghins to encircle the whole of our cosmological structure .

    It exists a secific dynamic of building .The physical Universal Sphere .

    All datas shall show us that ,without any doubt .

    The relativity and the perceoption always must be inserted in all models ,without that it's wind ,I think .

    I am very pragamatic in my model ,the thermodynamics ,coherences and invariances are essentials ,without that it's impossible te encircle the physical realiy and its dynamic.

    The time is a simple constant ,it exists ,it's like that .

    The expansion needs limits and a better understanding ...and that to be pragmatic .

    Sometimes I see some ideas and extrapolations ,and I say me ,OH my God ,it's not real sciences that ....it's time to admit some realities and physicalities in my opinion .

    Only the proved datas permit to evolve in sciences .Thus a tri is important in a model .

    sincerely

    Steve

    • [deleted]

    Hi Amrit and Lawrence ,

    In the past ,I always asked me why the Big Bang was interpreted like that ,with a design beginning with a center but not in spherical design ,it's bizare in fact all that .

    In fact the Big bang explosion must be interpreted in 3D sphere with a maximum volume(balance expansion/contraction) and a maximum mass (ultim finished sphere).

    It's more logic it seems to me to have a spherical system in evolution.We see our past but how see our present all is there thus the simulation must have fondations to well extrapolate and see the future with pragamatism ,the past too and of course the present thus.

    The expansion is probaly a reality but needs some news developments in spherical logic .

    Sincerely

    Steve

    • [deleted]

    Dear Lawrence B. Crowell

    I would like to comment your statements: Ultimately physics is an empirical science, so we can only go with what we can measure and record. We record time with clocks and measure the expansion of the universe from astronomical data of redshifted galaxies. So if time does not exist on some deeper level, there would have to be some experiment or observation which could be conducted to ascertain whether that is the case. We are ultimately faced with some open questions about the nature of time. Examples of these questions involve the unidirectionality of macro-time, the low entropy of the early universe, the quantum nature of time and so forth.

    Yes physics as empirical science has to admit that with clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of physical phenomena that run in the universe.

    We do not need to prove that time does not exists in the universe because there is no experimental evidence on time at all.

    Those who think that time exists should prove that with an experiment.

    Universe is timeless, when we say it has 1300 billion years this makes sense only as a numerical order of events running in space that itself is timeless.

    Sincerely yours Amrit

    • [deleted]

    Isn't 7 minutes 420 seconds? I mean I'm not Einstein, but...

      • [deleted]

      clock does not run in space-time

      clock run in space only

      420 seconds is 420 "bing, bing" that we expeience in "inner time"

      time is in the brain

      • [deleted]

      Amrit ,

      I don't understand what you mean,the time is a constant of evolution ,invariable .It has no sense .Sorry but it's my opinion .

      In the brain ,on Earth or in the quantum or in the limits of cosmologuical dimensions ....times is the same a CONSTANT OF EVOLUTION .

      The Space time is bad understood it seems to me .....

      We are in a physicality and its laws and our relativistic perception is different than the reality .

      Times is everywhere in the physical Universe ,3D and a constant for times .

      Without Time space don't evolove ,without space time hasn't sense .All is there .

      Sincerely

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      Amrit ,

      All our life shows us the existence of time ,all experiments prove its existence because it's an invarible constant ,coherent with all .

      Only the space changes .

      Sincerely

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      We don't need an experiment about time ,it's evident in fact .The only fact to think is a proof of this constant of evolution .

      If the Time didn't exist ....all could be invisible without any physicality .

      It's like the consciousness ,it exists somethings which don't need experiments .They exist and it's well like that ,thus all experiments about time shall be a lost of time ,all is there ,paradoxal and real .

      Cheers

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      To return about the expansion and our cosmological structure .

      It's times to adapt the datas in spherical logic .

      Let's take our great wall on the CfA or the Dark matter simulations .It's relevant about the spherization .

      The great structures are relevants .

      Let's take too the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) ,what shall be the datas without new parameters ?

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      Excellent story on a very interesting person! I am glad I found this on Reddit.

      I especially like his view on the expansion of the universe. Our current explanation for this phenomenon lacks a strict mathematical model. I look forward to this book.

      Thank you for the article,

      Sterling S.

      • [deleted]

      Amrit, As I said physics does not tell us whether time exists or not. We might well argue that time as well as space are model structures we use. With classical gravity there was no test of whether lines of force radiated from a mass, but models with that structure reproduced what was observed. We use these because they manage to tell us something useful, which includes time.

      How a clock works is a bit strange. The proper time of a particle is the invariant of relativity. Proper time is

      ds^2 = g_{ab}dx^a dx^b = -c^2dt^2 dx^2 dy^2 dz^2,

      where the last part is for flat spacetime. The particle will tick of time as the integral of ds, but to do so there has to be some inner workings --- a spring and ratchet-prawl device or oscillating atoms etc. So the time marked off by ds is then

      ds = Hdt,

      which for a stationary clock just gives H = c. But this intertwines proper time with standard or coordinate time.

      Cheers LC

      • [deleted]

      Dear Sterling ,

      All must be adapted ,not only the expansion but many extrapolations of perception.

      The expansion have a specific sequence of evolution ,thus the accelereation and deceleration are variables in Time .

      It exists not one expansion but a specific expansion ,it's the same with the contraction towards balance between mass .

      I think really it's time to encircle the whole ,without that it's not important .

      The ideas or models even in intersting minds ,must have pragamatism and rationality ,

      Sincerely

      Steve

      • [deleted]

      The truth is that neither time nor space exists. They both lead to an infinite regress. As counterintuitive as it may sound, a time dimension would make change/motion impossible. This is the reason that Karl Popper compared Einstein to Parmenides who, along with his famous pupil, Zeno of Elea, maintained that change was impossible. Popper wrote that spacetime is a block universe in which nothing happens. Source: Conjectures and Refutations. See also, Nasty Little Truth About Space.

      • [deleted]

      Interesting article, I look forward to reading his book as well. Makes me think that if humans evolved somewhere other than in an enviornment with out regular intervals of a sun/moon like underground, would we have developed a concept of time? Would our mathmatics be different? Everything does seem to be static and the same as it ever was. Only matter itself does change. I do not agree in the inflationary model and think that ideas such as this will end up leading to a better understanding of the universe.

      • [deleted]

      "After picking up the phone precisely on time for this interview, he asked for seven minutes exactly to finish the remaining third of his cup of coffee, and was ready and waiting for my call, coffee cup drained, 560 seconds later."

      7M*60S/1M=420S

      • [deleted]

      There are 420 seconds in 7 minutes

      • [deleted]

      there are 65 instances in a moment

      • [deleted]

      Steve, I don't think the alleged non existence of time means once it is proven we can throw away all of our clocks....

      As for how consciousness works and our perception of time, subjective experience cannot be said to be invalid, and this is not what this is on about.