The state of the universe.

Ah, dark energy. It is intriguing. Not only is the universe expanding but the rate at which it is expanding is accelerating. One day the fabric of space-time may stretch at FTL rates, consequently stars would begin to disappear from sight. Then, a long time after that, the expansion would overtake the bonds of matter until entropy had its way and the universe would be a giant sea of chaotic subatomic particles.

I ponder if the force would be sufficient enough to tear apart black holes.

 

Space and time are bound together so if space is expanding then time should be slowing down. Once the expansion accelerates to a point where it is at speed of light time should be completely stopped at whole universe. If there is a chance that the expansion might accelerate past the speed of light the time in theory should start to go backwards. That could be a catalyst for Big Crunch!

 

The universe is only conceived as a universe due to the model-building ability of an intelligent mind. So much for realism.

 

Interesting thought. Conversely, time is relative to the observer. If the acceleration remained constant across all space-time, would the time be perceived by an observer in that system as being slower? Take that backwards, moments after big bang when space-time was exceedingly smaller than it is now. Would time have been faster? Do we percieve the universe as being very old because of a time-dilation? In our current measure of time, could it have come about in a much shorter timeframe?

Then, looking back from that point in the distant future when space-time reaches this critical juncture, how will it really appear? From here to there may be eons, but by the standard of time then it may just be decades.

 

In theory no, it would not have been faster. It would have been slower. Time runs faster in space because of lesser impact of gravity. It's called Gravitational Time Dilation. The theory is that mass bends space inwards, hence the gravity, but since space is connected to time, so time is bent (slowed) as well. Time runs slower where the matter is the most dense. A few moments after the Big Bang matter was very dense, so space-time was bent. Time was very slow. On top of that, expansion just few moments after Big Bang was extremely fast. So, like I mentioned in my post, faster universe expands slower the time runs. It's not about the amount of space (volume) there is, it's about the speed. The speed of expansion.

Is far as I understand you, it seems that you are assuming that there is objective time? Yes? I don't think there is. How fast or slow time runs depends from position of observer. It's relative. For somebody who is going into black hole, they see time running as very fast, they will reach the black whole in an instant. While in actuality they just perceive it that way, in reality their time has almost (or completely) stopped. Because of their speed of movement; the gravitational pull, as well as presence of huge mass. But for observer outside of the impact of those factors time will run differently. It will run faster. So when they will watch traveler going into black hole it will not seem like they went there in an instant. For observer it might seem that it took the traveler decades. Now, which is the right perception? None, it's relative.

So I would argue there is no shorter time frame. Not for us anyways. Cos we are in this matrix of cosmos. This experience is all we have. Maybe for observer outside of this universe, like God for example, time may be running differently. If we compare our time to his time then maybe we were just crated decades ago, according to his time perception. Yet for us it is not a real experience. We still experience our existence in time frame we perceive.

By the way, what if God was created (just for the sake of argument lets say he was created) eons ago but is, lets say, just 30 years old? You are also 30 years old, but what if you were created just yesterday? Both of those things are possible. Right? Trippy stuff the relativity and time, isn't it?

I wonder, if there is a being in a dimension where there is no space and physical matter, hence no time. How would they perceive the existence?

 

The measurement of time, whether with a clock, or with the rotation of a planet, is not time itself. Time involves the perception of time.... so is relative to perception. That's why we say time is dragging... or flying. No percipient beings, no time.

 

True indeed!

But how about space (as a volume, not as a universe) and matter? Could time exist without those things? I guess not. I supposed universe would not exist without those things. But would then mind-time be gone too? Do we need time to experience time? Or can we experience time without actual time? Ya know what I'm saying?

What if universe would be gone but consciousness (an observer) would exist still? Lets assume that consciousness does not need a matter to bind itself to, to exist. Lets assume that we are spiritual beings, for the sake of question. Would just the existence of observer alone would automatically create mind-time? Just like existence of light creates darkness? Or maybe not? Maybe the whole existence would just be perceived differently?

 

It does feel strange. The one thing that I cannot think is what can be counted as an observer of time? We can count ourselves because we experience it. Although we count anything as an observer in solving problems but that doesn't mean that passing time can be there due to them (if it needs an observer).

If we look at the concept of space-time, it also says that the universe is a 4D static object. So there is no motion, not even of time. Many physicists say that the perception of time moving forward has just been created by the brain, although we are also a static 4D object. I find this idea the most puzzling of all. How can a bunch of molecules experience time moving, although it is not? If all matter experiences the same, then how can time be a static dimension. Also it complicates the mystery of the creation of the universe among other things.

P.S. I don't think I know as much as you all in these matters, also because I haven't studied it academically, but I could not stop myself from posting in this awesome discussion!

 

As far as I know, movements in space are limited to the speed of light. However, the expansion of space itself isn't, and length contraction and time dilation only relate to the former.

 

Say the perception of time, and everything in it, is what we call flux. I think it was Heraclitus who first said it was a river, and that one can not step in the same river twice. But this perception presupposes something else; that there must be something on the bank, something stable in contrast to the flux, by which the flux of time is perceived. Enter Plato, and then the history of western philosophy [which is said to be just a series of footnotes to him] culminating in science. Yet science finds itself in these kinds of conundrums today because it has lost its metaphysical beach-head; if everything is caught in flux, how can anything be known? For knowledge must be tied to some stable state that lies unchanging underneath, or behind, or beyond phenomena. Enter post-modern cynicism, where everything is in the natural flux. The only possible intelligible solution I see to such conundrums is in a philosophy of science which rejects realism and instead accepts a sensible instrumentalism; science gives us models of reality, not reality itself.. it can not do metaphysics. This not only makes intelligibility possible, but also allows for the possibility of spirituality. Spirit is just the name given to that quality of mind that can perceive matter because it is not itself matter. The thought of Immanuel Kant is enlightening here.

 

Ha, I was waiting for that. It is one thing to say time is a 'form' of the mind, a primary quality through which all phenomena must be perceived, and another to say that so too is space! That one is even harder to swallow. And yet this is what Kant and the idealists proposed [space is not itself an object, but what makes the perception of objects possible... just like time... extension and duration]. Even though it seems to fly in the face of common sense, the strength of idealism is that it states an obvious truth; all knowledge is our knowledge, all perception is our perception, there is no God's eye view. Of course, scientific realism also left common sense behind, so that is hardly a criticism of idealism. I think the underlying problem of all of this is the rationalist and empiricist identification of a certain kind of reason [discursive] with reality. There was always a third school, that of scepticism, that always found that project amusing. Or, as, Sartre put it, the sin of seriousness.

 

There have been some interesting studies that suggest C has indeed slowed down. If so, it could have decreased exponentially in the moments after the big bang & explain why, at current measures of C, the Universe looks so old.

Whatever time "is" in reality, talking about it certainly beats PMO!

Keep it going.

T22.

 

three cool songs to go along with your debate! peace!

 

If the speed of light slowed/is slowing down, won't we be (we share the same space)? The Higgs thing. All the particles can travel at the speed of light, if they don't have the weak hypercharge (probably they have a massless component also). The reduction in light speed would have some effect on them also. Okay, sounds awkward.

I don't think we will find the truth about time in near future (a century or two), if not never. We also have other things to study like QM and relativity and integrating them; who will go for something that seems impossible and useless?

 

Hey mb@sci.

You may well be right on the implications of C having slowed down. If it was exponentially faster close to the big bang or whatever, it's certainly significantly slower now & maybe the decrease over the last 10-100k years or so, has been negligible.

I don't understand much of quantum theory but thank G-d for some great pop science books!

Power to you all.

T22.

 

John: "I'm on my 90 day reboot challenge. I'm only on day 30, time drags so slow. I have so much time left."
22: "Time is just an illusion my brother."
John: 'Oh, really?"
22: "Yes my brother. So don't worry. You are already there in future and hence there should not be struggle now."
John: "Oh, so if time is illusion and I'm already there it means I can fap?"
22: "No, what I meant was..."
John: *faps*

 

LOL, I never thought I'd see a humorous justification for PMO based on quantum theory!

 

NoFap works in mysterious ways.

 

Remember how time was annihilated when you fapped? That was part of the equation... the discomfort of feeling time. And think how time drags so when you first start Nofap. That counter just seems to click over ever sooooooooo slowly. I think a good indicator of recovery is when you don't sense this drag on time [and your counter], and you start to savour it in that goldilocks zone, where it neither flies by nor crawls. You are comfortably in sync with it... or rather you are just comfortable with your own Being.