Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Does Time Exist?

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 73 posts

Re: Does Time Exist?

#21

Post by oldstrangers »

why-el wrote: post #16
oldstrangers wrote: post #4

To me it's pretty intuitive that time isn't real (outside of being a concept). We just use time as an elaborate way to explain our movement through distances (and how fast or slow we cover those distances), that's about it. The twin paradox[1] does a good job of explaining this. There's no discernable difference between today and lets say, arbitrarily, 1984. The only difference is our movement through that spatial di…

In your rebuttal, you used a concept that necessarily assumes time ("how fast or slow", i.e. speed) to argue against the existence of time?

Velocity is real, distance is real, time is how we've decided to describe their relation.

Physically and philosophically, the "idea of time" isn't real. It just helps us describe our reality.

Re: Does Time Exist?

#22

Post by aidenn0 »

oldstrangers wrote: post #19
aidenn0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that the speed of light directly relates time and distance in (to the best of our extremely precise measurements to date) an absolute manner, then if time doesn't exist, neither does distance. Also, as TFA mentions any dismissal of time as a concept must also deal with thermodynamics.

The speed of light is still just the movement of something over a measured distance.

I can flip that around and say that a distance is just the movement of something over a measured time. By your original argument, distance doesn't exist.

Re: Does Time Exist?

#23

Post by [deleted] »

aidenn0 wrote: post #22
oldstrangers wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speed of light is still just the movement of something over a measured distance.

I can flip that around and say that a distance is just the movement of something over a measured time. By your original argument, distance doesn't exist.

[deleted]

Re: Does Time Exist?

#24

Post by webkike »

oldstrangers wrote: post #21
why-el wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your rebuttal, you used a concept that necessarily assumes time ("how fast or slow", i.e. speed) to argue against the existence of time?

Velocity is real, distance is real, time is how we've decided to describe their relation. Physically and philosophically, the "idea of time" isn't real. It just helps us describe our reality.

velocity is defined as distance over unit time so I’m not sure how you square that circle

Re: Does Time Exist?

#27

Post by nameisname »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #8
brimble wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I approach 40, a year feels about as long as a month did when I was elementary-school aged. I worry that if the current rate-of-increase continues, my last decade will feel weeks long.

I think the answer to this is to do more interesting things on a regular basis. If every weekend you do something different, then the month feels longer than when you stay home every weekend.

Great advise! I wanted to add a bit more to it. As you age the number of novel experiences and "space" for those experiences in your brain decreases. So the first 20 years of your life you accumulated a lot of new experiences while your brain was growing an expanding. For this reason it feels like you lived in regular time. Your final 20 years will mostly be nothing new and what is new will largely include a base that is shared based on past experiences. This is why as you get older time moves faster.

Re: Does Time Exist?

#28

Post by oldstrangers »

aidenn0 wrote: post #22
oldstrangers wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speed of light is still just the movement of something over a measured distance.

I can flip that around and say that a distance is just the movement of something over a measured time. By your original argument, distance doesn't exist.

I get what you're saying. But the physicality of a distance seems more meaningful than our movement through that distance.

I've tried articulating this idea before but its very cumbersome: You want to go make a drink in the kitchen, the difference between the future you making that drink and right now is only your movement to get to that point. You making the drink and you not making the drink are exactly the same "points in time". But for perception, you making the drink is an idea you see as a future event as opposed to a concurrent event that involved some movement through a distance.

Re: Does Time Exist?

#29

Post by dperfect »

For more on this topic, I recommend Carlo Rovelli's The Order of Time. The book is very accessible to non-experts in the field (like me), and it opened my eyes to some super interesting and unintuitive ideas about time.
Post reply on HN