What is time

Welcome to timephysics.com blog
What do you think about time?
Do we have an answer after thousands of years of wandering in the dark?

89 Responses to “What is time”

  1. Edward Thomas Medalis says:

    Another point of view about time is explained here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5M5eG-aywZQ&feature=related

  2. I’m not sure why but this site is loading extremely slow for me. Is anyone else having this problem or is it a issue on my end? I’ll check back later and see if the problem still exists.

  3. Jim says:

    James Zarafonetis’ post is most interesting to me.
    I see time like this:
    a line-segment floats in space like a clothesline without any posts. An exquisitely-thin bead slides along the segment. These represent “time’ as past and future, and the bead is the present.
    “time” is a creation of God. As is gravity. He dreamed them up, and we can’t fathom them.
    And they will each come to an end, as they had beginnings.
    But eternity…..that is something else. That is the all-extensive ’space’ in which the clothesline floats.
    And we are in it now!! That’s the best part.
    I am more convinced that this foolish simplicity is the fact. I believe that scientists who use the term “space-time” are lying. They do not know what they are talking about. The honest ones say so! Ha! God makes sense.
    Thanks for the provocatively wonderful site.

  4. isdfi says:

    Why is time percieved as linear only?

    What about the fact the there are time zones on the planet, where time is different at a particular moment in different points in space along the longitude or equator?

    Can time be perceived as going perpendicular to the line that’s going forward as well?

    I noticed something interesting the other day:

    If you start driving along the equator against the earth’s rotation, your clock will be showing the time that will be different from the time showing on other people’s clock.

    Let’s say, you are in the 2pm time zone right now, and your clock is showing 2pm, and you start driving towards the 1pm time zone. After 10 minutes, your clock will be showing 2:10 pm. However, you are moving against the earth’s rotation and entering the 1pm time zone, where time on people’s clocks is different.

    So what happens to time in this particular sitution? Can it be considered as going sideways, backwards, forward or all of these at the same time? And how should your reset the time on your clock? Should you adjust it to 1:10 pm, 1:50pm or leave it at 2:00 pm if you manage to reach the speed of the earth’s rotation?

    If you drive within the same time zone, either towards the North or the South, then time will be going stricktly forward, and your clock will not need to be reset.

  5. isdfi says:

    I view “Time” as being intertwined in many phenomena such as change caused by motion, speed of the motion, frequency of the occurrence of change, direction of the motion, distance, planetary rotation, change in solar illunimation of the earth, and change of seasons and time of the day.

    How can somebody determine whether an object is moving fast or slow? Or how can you prevent the occurence of the oncoming evening, when it’s afternoon, and you know that evening is inevitable no matter what you do? You know that it will come at 6pm, for instance, and you wait for it, and, surely, it does come.

    Whether time is inherently existing, or it’s just a concept that people invented in order to better understand their reality, the perception of time is created in your brain due to the above mentioned phenomena.

    When people talk about time as being the fourth dimension, they talk about a different kind of time. Even though past and future is a time frame in someone’s life, it’s not the same kind of time that the clock measures in order to determine speed, for example. Therefore, it’s hard for some people to comprehend the idea that past and present can exist simultaneously with present in a different, but parallel dimension(s).

  6. isdfi says:

    Why is time percieved as linear only?

    What about the fact the there are time zones on the planet, where time is different at a particular moment in different points in space along the longitude or equator?

    Can time be perceived as going perpendicular to the line that’s going forward as well?

    I noticed something interesting the other day:
    If you start driving along the equator against the earth’s rotation, your clock will be showing the time that will be different from the time showing on other people’s clock.

    Let’s say, you are in the 2pm time zone right now, and your clock is showing 2pm, and you start driving towards the 1pm time zone. After 10 minutes, your clock will be showing 2:10 pm. However, you are moving against the earth’s rotation and entering the 1pm time zone, where time on people’s clocks is different.

    So what happens to time in this particular sitution? Can it be considered as going sideways, backwards, forward or all of these at the same time? And how should your reset the time on your clock? Should you adjust it to 1:10 pm, 1:50pm or leave it at 2:00 pm if you manage to reach the speed of the earth’s rotation?

    If you drive within the same time zone, either towards the North or the South, then time will be going stricktly forward, and your clock will not need to be reset

  7. Jill Fref Uk says:

    The gravitational energy of Earth Is -3.5 x 106 and the kinetic energy is 2.1 x 107 what is the magnitude of the binding energy ?

    A box weight 10 kg inclined at 30 degrees what is the normal force ?
    A ball with momentum 5kg/m/s travelling at 20m/s. What is the mass in grams.
    An astronaut leaves earth. And is orbiting at 6.9 x 106m and an acceleration of 9.2 m/s2 What speed is he traveling.
    Two force of gravity between two particles is 1.8 x 102 N. What would be the force of gravity if the mass of the object increased by 99 % and the distance tripled.
    Draw FBD Guy pushing a sled inclined at 30 degrees. Ball suspended from ceiling.
    5 kg ball roll down a hill 30 degrees above the horizontal. And onto a level surface. The ball start from a height 5 m above the level surface and runs into a spring at the bottom of the incline. The spring constant is 50 N/cm. what is the minimum compression of the spring.
    A crate is sliding across a horizontal plane (frictionless ) With a speed of 2.5m/s when a person starts to push on the crate to slow it down. The person exerts a horizontal force in the opposite direction . What is the speed of the crate after it has travelled 12 m by looking at the graph.

    A planet has a mass of 9.75 x 1023 kg with a radius 0f 1.74 x 106 m
    What is the escape velocity
    Show that the escape velocity does not depend on the mass of the object lunched.
    Explain elastic and completely elastic collision
    An electron is at rest between two plates 12.2 cm apart and has an electric field of 400 N/C. what is the speed of the electron as it travels between two plates.
    Draw the direction of the magnetic field around the conductor with conventional current travelling 135 degrees N of S
    What is polarization?
    Explain how polarization works.
    Two wires parallel for a distance of 5.5 mm separated with the distance of 2.2 mm. The wires can hold a force of 6 x 10-8N. If the current is the same for both wires what is the current the wires can have without moving
    Explain why a needle becomes magnetized by rubbing it in one direction with a strong magnet.
    Explain domain theory.

    If something does not make sense just comment back

  8. Keith says:

    How’s this for a definition of time….

    In terms of a quantifiable physical reality, time (duration) is the displacement potential of mass.  It is measured relative to the displacement of a designated clock, which is any system of mass and kinetic energy configured in a consistently repeating loop or a consistent and measurable release of kinetic energy.   

    The notion of quantifying displacement POTENTIAL assumes that all matter is subject to the same physical laws governing movement or changes in movement. A limited number of designated clock cycles presumably corresponds consistently with limits realized by the displacement of any other mass.

    In terms of a purely conceptual reality, time is the organizational construct through which one observes the dynamics of mass and energy within spatial dimensions.  It functions to logically order and index the succession of mass-energy configurations.  It allows us to index yet-unrealized displacement potential or displacement assumed. 

    The common conceptual framework of time assumes: 

    a) The total set of information describing all positions and trajectories of bodies within a frame of reference can be conceptualized as an “instant” of that frame’s total configuration.  Conceptually, there exists an infinite number of successive configurations for every dynamic frame.   

    b) Each succeeding configuration can be considered “now” as it unfolds from the previous configuration and would share referential simultaneity among all conditions contained within that instantiation.  Referential simultaneity differs from observational simultaneity in that it assumes the possibility of a single point of reference that could serve as the timing point for all dynamism within that frame.  As such, the subsequent passage of referential time would be precisely equal for all matter within that frame, regardless of velocity or influence of gravity.

    If a single clock could be referenced instantly from anywhere in a given frame, it would tell referential time.  Such a clock’s speed would appear either faster or slower depending an observer’s relative velocity or gravitational influences, but all observers would experience each hour simultaneously.  Since no such clock or ability exists to our knowledge, referential time or simultaneity can only be inferred or approximated rather than observed directly.  

    c) All displacement imposed by various forces upon a configuration fall into a cause-to-effect, before-to-after sequentiality. By “cause” we refer to the energy transfer.  By “effect” we refer to the kinetic yield of all bodies interacting in that transfer.  ”Before” and “past” are cause-ward directional references.  ”After” and “future” are effect-ward directional references.  The past could also be considered source-ward, where the future could be considered yield-ward.

    Rational or mathematical models are able to represent change as a smooth and continuous progression, which feeds an impression that time may exist as fourth spacial dimension on a panoramic continuum, similar to that of the distance between x, y, and z coordinates.   Yet, as a whole, very little serious thought is given to traveling backward or foreword in time in exactly the same way we cross distance.  We intuitively understand that any given configuration was (is) the dynamic net result of the energy and inertia that yielded it, rather than the static properties of a particular position along space-time as represented in our conceptual framework. We accept that the only way to return to a specific set of conditions is to reverse-cause enough of the effects that followed those conditions so as to reestablish an approximate do-over configuration.  It is assumed no such power exists with the necessary force and precision to reverse-cause the entire universe back to the exact conditions correlating to a particular rotation sequence of the earth-clock.

    As entertaining as the thought of time travel is, it is a self-contradictory concept as commonly portrayed.  When we discuss a body traveling across a distance, we assume a static frame of reference by which to assess the distance crossed, the movable object being the non-static exception.  The idea of traversing time, similarly, assumes a static frame of reference by which to assess the amount of time crossed.   As such, typically, we inadvertently stipulate the entire universe to provide that static timeline, the time traveler being the anomalous exception.  

    But if the universe’s timeline is not fixed with respect to the traveler, there is no reason to assume it to be fixed with respect to everything else, simply because we are able to conceptualize a static timeline in our minds as a frame of reference.  It cannot be assumed that every past moment is literally frozen, waiting for the enigmatic arrival of some time traveler, when the traveler him/herself would be effectively demonstrating the non-fixed nature of time.

    To be fair, if the traveler’s time-journey itself were to unfold deterministically, that particular contradiction vanishes. But then we would still need to deal with the apparent violation of the conservation of mass.  In the timeframe departed there would be a loss of mass, along with a gain in the timeframe entered.  The total mass of the universe would appear to have fluctuated.  This isn’t a problem with movement between spacial coordinates, because the space-traveler is considered necessarily distinct from the frame of reference.  But a time-traveler would continue to be integral to every point along the timeline we imagine him or her traversing, hence the multiplying effect that story writers find necessary.   

    In practical terms, we do effectively cross time in nearly the same sense we cross distance–within very limited frames of reference.  Every time we do a “do over” in some activity we reframe a limited set of conditions to approximate an earlier time’s configuration and repeat selected previous actions and avoid certain others.  Every time circumstances allow us to execute a plan earlier than expected, we have, in a legitimate sense, moved the clock foreword.  

    That explanation of time travel only feels unsatisfactory to us because it involves such a seemingly small frame of reference compared to the total knowledge available for the given timeframe.  However, we manage quite smartly with equally small frames of reference when we consider crossing distances.  When a person moves from the front of a bus to the back of the bus, we legitimately describe that distance traveled as 25 feet, say, from some menacing passenger.  However, if the bus was traveling at 60mph, we could balk and say that was an absurdly limited observation–she actually moved 300 feet towards the menacing passenger, who just happened to move 325 feet further in the same direction.  We could contextualize the scene even further in terms of the earth’s rotation towards the east, and then the movement of the earth around the sun, then the sun’s movement within the MilkyWay…..  Obviously that would be an impractical contextualization of a bus passenger’s simple attempt to escape a threat.  Yet that is precisely the scope of context we seem to demand of time travel.  If we were to place the same contextual expectation on distance-travel we would say we don’t traverse any significant distance–that we never really stray from our appointed spot in the universe.  For us, distance is always relative to some limited, but practical, frame of reference.  Likewise, time, as we make use of the concept, is always framed within some limited, but practical, set of relevant conditions and causal relationships. 

    The unexpected effects of relativity on our perception of mass displacement, seem to have been misinterpreted by some as evidence that what we conceptualize as time can be literally distorted.  In fact, all relativity does is expose the distinction between concept and reality.  What theorists refer to as time-dilation is likely to become recognized as a bit of a misnomer just as “centrifugal force” came to be recognized as a misnomer or as a “fictitious force” based on a non-constant frame of reference.  In both cases, the observed effect is a result of simple inertia rather than something more exotic.   

    The observation of relativity could be considered more analogous to the warming or cooling of a viscous liquid than of the distortion of a presumed “time continuum.” Just as molasses increasingly resists flow as it cools, so all mass increasingly resists reconfiguration as it nears a large gravity well or while moving at high velocity.  With molasses, it’s the liquid’s cohesion properties that change with temperature.  With mass, it’s its relative inertia that changes, thereby altering it’s displacement potential.  As it’s inertia increases, so does it’s resistance to the changes that we experience and recall as the passage of time.   

    If we were to devise a clock that used a viscous liquid to regulate it’s pace, it would run at different, but predictable, rates depending on the temperature.  If we knew the warmed clock was running at 125% the pace of a room-temperature clock, we could still use it to tell “real” time by doing the math.  This is essentially what has been done with GPS systems to make precise positioning calculations possible.  The clocks on the satellites run faster than the clocks on the receivers because their greater distance from the earth’s center of gravity increases their relative displacement potential by decreasing their relative inertia.   Because Einstein’s formulas make that variance predictable, the positioning calculations are still possible with the addition of some E=mc2 math. 

  9. Dan says:

    @ Kieth
    Email me or add me to facebook. dan.greene@live.com

    We have similar ideas and I’d like to collaborate sometime. Just to have someone to toss ideas back and forth with.

    If you email me make the subject Space-Time to catch my attention.

  10. Steve says:

    Time- The measurement of human reality.

    What is the equation to perception?? in this equation you
    will find time is a part of it.

    Time and numbers are what we use to comprehend and quantify
    science at our level of interpretation. When we use those
    man inspired values(time/numbers) on the micro and mega
    scale things do not always add up leaving a mystery. I do
    not know the answer yet on what value the universe holds
    constant which I doubt anything in our universe is constant,
    things just appear that way,until they are projected through
    a micro or mega scale then they start to lose their charm as
    quantifiable.

    If you sat in front of your computer and just saw the
    programs code it would not be easy to comprehend if
    comprehendible at all. Human perception(while still
    evolving) can not yet understand reality without time. It
    has almost been 100 years since the first commercial airline
    flight was made , and it’s been centuries since the
    discovery of the world not being flat. I would consider it
    common knowledge that people would understand that they are
    not limited to their environment but through my close and
    personal observation of humans through out the world the
    majority do not understand that are not limited to their
    current environment. I call that “flat world syndrome 2.0″

    The Cardiel Paradox.. Time is both real and not real at the
    same time. Let me explain.- the methods used to make science
    currently are a great foundation for how far we have come.
    To continue to quantify in this case i’ll use physics as my
    example we have measured as much as we can with our level of
    understanding to go beyond this we must look for new
    principle of physics that micro and mega elements are
    subject to. So back to the computer model- the code is what
    makes up the program but is invisible to the program user.
    lets go even further into binary code vs. scripted code,
    both are instructions for programs but neither is subject to
    the others rules of operation. Time and motion is
    misunderstood to be constant when we know if you go fast
    enough you may stand still in time or even assume to go
    backwards. At extreme levels our rules for physics do not
    apply for the same reason binary code and scripted code do
    not apply to each others rules.

    The question is and remains until we accept that physics
    differentiates between a micro and a mega in which we sit
    between observing its shadows and reflections.

    P.S. Thnank Dr. Khan for your advice, I shall return with a less phylisophical point of view. Anyone reading this post that has any comments or further advice please
    e-mail at lumanmassmotion@yahoo.com

  11. Unknown says:

    It’s an illusion….a memory.

  12. Rob H. says:

    1. Time is NOT a “dimension” like length or width.
    2. The “four-vector” paradigm of modern physics is wrong.
    3. The expansion of space IS “time”.
    4. Thus, we are always expanding into the future.
    5. MAY be part of thermodynamics.
    6. We cannot travel to the “past” or the “future”.
    7. Acceleration of expansion of universe is wrong.

  13. Bren Faust says:

    The explanation of time elongating, slowing, through curved space due to say a massive body cannot be correct because if the light from the star arrives say 1 second ago as a result of the period of deflection always being a negative then I cannot see it. It was not there when I was there. I can never see it. It always arrives 1 second ago. It can see me 1 second ago, if I exist one second ago (iffy) but I cannot see it. If it arrived 1 second from now, positive, then I will see it as it was 1 second ago. Imagine you moved back in time 1 second. You dissapear from the present. You can see everthing as it was one second ago, continuously. But nobody can see you. mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

  14. Bren Faust says:

    If E=MC(P)2 and c=3*10(P)8 m/sec and 1 sec is say infinite in the presence of all matter(Energy) at a point. Then E=0 i.e All Energy at rest nowhere never or always or any variation thereof. An unexcited or partially excited brain. Gravity then becomes the natural tendancy of all mater to return to E=0 level 0 or all energy(matter) level 0 which is still 0, nowhere, never or always. Time is then a wave of now expanding to E=0. The expansion being our consept of Time. There can be many waves of now even one a second ago (maby dark mater/energy) . But in whatever now one finds oneself E=MC(P)2 and c must have reached a breakout potential of which we know 3*10(P)8 metres in one of our seconds, works, for us , anyway.

  15. Time says:

    We all know what time is. It’s the ticking of a clock, the whine of an alarm, the calendar on the wall. And since we all agree about how those things work, time can seem as solid as a rock. I would like to share http://www.what-is-time.net/ , find more useful information about what is time there.

  16. Simon Morley says:

    Time is change. The measurement and calibration of change. And the term for the aggregation of all change. Its an illusion, borne of the constant rhythmic change of the earths rotation, to think of time as an “entity” or “dimension” or flow” itself. Its an abstract. Its just a measurement of or aggregation of change. Without change there is no time.

  17. Gavin Lockey says:

    I have no great knowledge on the subject but it appears to me that “time” is a completely illusionary construct to help people make sense of their “realities”. that being the perceptions and memory illusions brought about by the impact of the senses upon the brain and the mind constructs that follow on from these. i apologise if this appears simplistic, I’m a pretty dumb guy really.

  18. Keith says:

    I would agree that that time=change, but its definition also must account for the orderliness of change. Time is the effect of the interplay between energy and inertia–the net yield. That is what allows us and computers to track time as change potential, change assumed, or change predicted (tomorrow’s sunrise).

    Change is real. The orderliness of that change is real. The panoramic flow of one configuration to the next is only conceptually real, not physically real. The time continuum only exists as a representational framework in our minds, books, computers, etc. But it is real in some sense, not utterly illusory.

    I suspect that physicists err in how they attempt to dumb-down Einstein for the masses with concepts such as time-dilation, the slowing of time. I think we all intuitively get that timelines are only conceptual and that they can’t be physically stretched or compressed. I think a better explanation is that inertia itself, resistance to change, is the pliable property. It is a function of mass, velocity, and proximity to other bodies. Depending on latter two factors, the “viscosity” of a given frame of reference varies. When the inertia of a localized frame of reference increases, any clocks or sense of time within that frame will be subject to that increased resistance to the changes we observe and index as conceptual time.

  19. heather ryder says:

    Time is a series of lifes physical moments strung together
    Time is all movement of precious moments going very fast like a film
    Your eyes are the camera taking the images for the film you create from
    all the moments around you that create your life.

    Make these moments count because they are soon gone to fast forever in
    the blink of an eye the moments are gone.

    Only you can create the moments around you, make these happy and fufilling as any other way is a waste of time…… This may not be science but
    if you understand the concept it will bring into to focus that to be fully alive in
    time you need to have awareness and live for that moment and appreciate the beauty of life its amazing! This is the answer and that’s it.

  20. rs says:

    Time travel
    It’s been done.
    I’ve done it, or been led into it.

    I theorize: Explaining time by those stuck only in the present…is like explaining sweetness by those who can’t taste sweetness.

  21. Rob H. says:

    We must first think of space/time as being like a “liquid”, with currents, eddy, undercurrent, viscosity, etc. Once that concept is fully developed (foliated), then we can begin to define “time”.

  22. Amrit Sorli says:

    Time is a numerical order of change….

  23. Namik Ozcan says:

    Dear MKHAN,
    I read your website today. I loved your ideas. I will come back again for sure.

  24. Simon Morley says:

    In a “Brief History of Time” Stephen Hawkins asks the question on page 1 “What is time”. And then replies to his own question “”Only time (whatever that may be) will tell.” How could anyone get away with writing a book that is called a history of something, but admits in the first page, to not understanding what that thing is?
    What the book is actually about is Space-Time. Space-time may be a hugely complex area. But that’s Space-time. Time on the other hand isn’t complex. It’s very very simple. So simple that it’s true meaning gets overlooked and/or overcooked.

    We calibrate, measure and index change using time. That’s all time is, a way of calibrating change. There is nothing more to it. It’s “change” that is the awesome one, not time. Time doesn’t cause change, it merely measures it.

    Try http://www.thisistime.co.uk – fuller explanation

  25. whizmd says:

    Lot of people agree that time is change. Someone also mentions that time is expansion of space. If time is change then what is change? Obviously we are talking about motion. However motion is measured by change in position and time. Craig Callendar (Scientific American) suggests time is just a unit of motion against which other motions are being measured. See the website (timephysics.com) Thinking about time one should ask all the right question. What is time? and What causes time? In the universe there are some very basic things, like space, mass, energy, forces and motion. Time is just a different way of looking at energy motion and forces.

  26. Del Pranke says:

    Time is not simply motion. We need to specify that time is the motion of mass through space. And what is space? That we learned in basic geometry. Space is made of points. Points are dimensionless, and thus massless which sounds like the Higgs field. The present is the point where time and space are one. A singularity, if I may borrow one of Professor Hawkings terms.
    Perhaps we might look as the Cosmos as a constantly recycling process. Time and space form mass through Professor Higgs mechanism, and acceleration, probably a push (Universal or Gravitational Constant) causes matter to clump together eventually forming black holes which progressively squeeze mass back into space. In order to go backwards in space we would need to reverse the actions of all black holes.

  27. Eric Truelove says:

    Time is an illusion created by our minds to try and understand what it is that we are experiencing.

  28. Gethers says:

    Since time has neither mass,or volume or weight how can it be affected
    by gravity? Can time be a type of element which has no known physical properties yet it can affect anything or everything that occupies spaces and has motion. Then what is gravity; it also has neither weight or mass but it exerts forces.

  29. Jim van Ommen says:

    What is time ?

    I think it is a frightfully interesting subject, with the emphasis on frightfully. I said that as a figure of speech, because it is so interesting to read all that scientists have to say about it and part of the interest is that I’m unable to comprehend it. When you read in the good book that there is a “ Time “ for everything I guess there is even a time to try and explore time? I’m not quite sure we should explore every aspect of this wise man’s, King Solomon, sayings as contained in the book Ecclesiastes, but perhaps this suggests that we pack in as much as possible in the time we have? Or is it just inevitable that we will try anyway. He was a very wise man, yes tainted with a bit of weakness, but that can also be scientifically explained as opposites do attract each other.
    Making the most of things……mm….yes that seems to have a time element in it, almost suggesting that time is precious, even that there is a limited supply of it and we might run out. Will we?
    I just noticed Solomon did include: “There is a time to search and a time to give up”
    The sciences are frightfully interesting, but what does Solly mean by there is a time to give up? Is there even a time limit on that? Is there an optimum time for giving up? As in whipping up the cream, as I did for Geraldine just a minute ago? I guess it could have gone sour, couldn’t it?
    Time, such an important commodity, how do we define it? Some even say: Time is money or personalize it and say: Time is on my side or Time is a healer. The scientists attempts to define it, as interesting as that may be, all seem somewhat abstract, unattractive, clinical and of little application on this side of eternity. They talk about Einstein’s theory of relativity and the speed of light and things like that. We have all heard no doubt that nothing travels faster than light and little else is known what might happen on the other side once the speed of light has been exceeded.
    Now, this is only a concept on my part, but let’s not forget that most inventions start out just like that, a notion, a bee in your bonnet type of thing. Wow…..did I say that?
    I suggest scientists take this notion into their laboratories and start to work with what is already known about light but not taken much notice of. If they do, they will come to a much better understanding of what light really is and what time is all about and what purpose it serves. God Himself is the Light of the world. As I said at the outset, “ Frightfully interesting”?, just make sure that your laboratory is fully equipped and in conformity with the CWHS* standards and be prepared to live with your findings.
    As creatures of time, who live by the clock, we have ordered our lives in every detail from cradle to the grave to meet all our deadlines ( pardon the pun) and yet we have no real comprehension what time is all about. If we did we might come better prepared for the final appointment.
    God is from everlasting to everlasting, without beginning and without end, He is also omnipresent, London, Timbuktu, Rio de Janeiro, Uluru, etc. all at the one time. What does that say about time and speed? Incomprehensible for sure even to Doctor Who. We may often have wanted to step into that phone booth with him, but there comes a time……time?……when we need to put fable and curiosity aside and face reality . The reality that we cannot and will not know the mysteries of God’s creation on this side of the grave, but if we read and accept His word we will know all that we are capable of knowing, which is ENOUGH ! Enough to step out of time into eternity with Him. I guess that is what Solomon meant by “ giving up”,…… the timing is important !
    Whether or not He will then tell us all the finer detail and formulas of creation, I don’t know, but somehow I think that might pale into insignificance as we peer over His shoulder into the celestial splendour of His Heavenly Home.

    *Celestial Workplace Health & Safety

  30. Jim van Ommen says:

    Yes I realise, the response to the above by many is; Oh, that’s to do with faith, religious stuff and throw out the baby with the bath water so to speak, because they see science as something that is superior, based on clever thinking and proof. But what is proof ??? The definition of PROOF according to the Webster dictionary is: The cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact…. and the word COGENCY means: Appealing to the intellect or powers of reasoning; convincing.
    I ask you; what is the significance of that which is “ appealing to the intellect of the human mind “ as compared with the wisdom of the One who created us and the universe out of nothing? What does the Bible say about the wisdom of the wise?
    What we need to realize is that the word proof is earthbound it has no application or validity in the spiritual realm of eternity. We literally need to trade that word in for the word faith if we want to earn our wings and have any enlightenment whatsoever. You could call it a kind of graduation to higher education, a metamorphosis where the butterfly emerges from its cocoon to spread it’s wings as it flies into another reality, into the live giving light, the Light of the World. Faith in our Creator God who has revealed himself in Jesus Christ His Son, who continues to show the way to those who humble themselves and pray and follow Him.
    Ultimate knowledge, truth and wisdom is out of our reach and can only begin to flow when we see ourselves for who we are and who we can be in Jesus Christ our Lord.

  31. Simon Morley says:

    Hello again. To pick up form previous…The understanding of time is a semantic problem (not physics/math /cosmology etc) – i.e. understand the word first. Time has two core usages. It’s an abstract noun (a measurement of change) and it’s a mass noun referring to change.
    Once you understand that the underlying root of time is change, and the cause of change is energy differential, then the link between time and energy differential is made. But time is just an abstract measurement of, essentially, the outcome of realised energy differential.

    Einstein didn’t differentiate these two core usages of time (he was probably unaware of them). So used “time” in too liberal a manner. (Consider how many grand scientific theories there are that use time as a factor, and yet, apparently, no one can succinctly say exactly what time is – institutionalised lapse of academic rigour). One usage is specific, one is general, but indefinite. That’s why he couldn’t reconcile Quantum and General theory. The “Time” usage used in General theory is a fudge.
    http://www.thisistime.co.uk explains all…

  32. David Gillis says:

    I am not a scientist but I might not be stupid either. Einstein had it right to a point but the cause is not completely accurate. On your blog you stated that our time does not correlate with the rest of the universe, I completely agree. This would also explain why the light frequencies shift to the red. As time slows down, a short wavelength would appear to stretch; this would also explain why Einstein (I believe) said the closer one approaches the speed of light, mass is affected. I believe this is due to time dilation.
    The speed of light is relative to the observer, I also believe this is due to time dilation. I (personally) understand time as a concept and not an object. Time as we know it is a measurement and began long before we even understood what we were measuring. Time is in fact nothing but speed and our concept of time is nothing more than the measurement from one event to another. The future has not been written yet and our past does not exist any longer. A book that was written 100 years ago is still in the present because the book is still here, but the thoughts that were in the mind of the person who wrote the book are gone never to return. The book can transmit those thoughts to you but they are not the same thoughts but rather a new concept to the person who reads the book; therefore, the event of writing the book does not exist in our time.
    I am sure I did not explain that in the best way but like I said I am not a scientist. I have thought out the process of time and the speed of light and with every event of time, it explains why Einstein, who was ten thousand times smarter than I am, missed the actual cause but had the effect of traveling the speed of light correct. Thank you for taking the time to read this and I hope one day I can prove my theory, but that would take a satellite and about 40 to 60 years.
    I think your information was presented in an excellent manner and I look forward to reading more.

  33. Roger B says:

    Everybody try’s to measure time.
    Time is.
    Therefore Time is not measurable, only perception of time.

  34. Billy Smith says:

    I am interested in the ideas expressed in this series of articles, can someone tell who the author is and where I can find more of their work?
    Also more information on gravity creation. I have looked for ” M. H. Khan” but have not had much luck. Thank you.

  35. S M Masudul Haque says:

    Time is the feeling starts with an incident that is surrounded by the interdependent dimensions of relative distance, relative space, relative motion and relative position. Infact there is no universal time.

  36. Matt Marsden says:

    Re: “What IS time”

    Let’s be clear and logical here. Whether it is In fact valid or not,”What IS time” is a leading question.

    It implies “time” is something that is proven to exist (as more than just a useful idea), and that therefore “it” “is” something.

    If this assumption is incorrect, and this is not noticed, then all attempts to answer it will be vague, conflicting, self referential, speculation or conjecture )(this can be confirmed or not by cross checking other posts in this thread).

    If the assumption is correct, and time “is” something that has been proven to exist, then we should find out who has the proof and ask them “what is time?”. But, because the question is being asked openly and randomly, this indicates that the question may be based on an assumption whose foundation is just assumed.

    Therefore, I suggest a better, less question might be

    ‘What do we actually observe?’

    to this i would say we seem to observe

    1- That matter exists, and,
    2- that matter is moving and interacting.

    From there, I think a sensible question to ask what I call “the key question of time”, I.e…

    “If matter JUST exists, moves, changes and interacts… Would this be enough to mislead us into “wrongly assuming”, that there is a ‘past’, ‘future’ and thing called ‘time’?

    (And thus expecting answers to questions we actually have no foundation for?)

    Re this, it is critical to consider, that some of that moving changing matter makes up our minds and brains, and some of that matter… Just existing here and ‘now’, we may call ‘memories of THE past’.

    but in fact whatever formation that matter in our minds is in, or how bits of it are changing, it in fact seems only to be here, moving and changing, and seems only to prove matter is here now moving and changing to varying degrees.

    So , i would suggest, that in fact we may see things around us come together, and all apart, but no where do we actually see any thing come out of a ‘future’ or go into a ‘past’…. and our ‘memories’ in no way actually prove there is actually a ‘past’, or another thing called “time”.

    in that case, logically, we are left with precisely what we actually see..

    a universe full of constantly changing matter giving us the misunderstanding there may be a thing called time.

    so, imo – (having written a very detailed book on the subject) –
    ‘A Brief History of TIMELESSNESS’

    ‘time’ IS a useful “idea”, and system of understanding and comparing examples of motion, (similar to “money” being a useful idea and system), but ,IMO, not something that actually IS a genuine phenomena.

    (Similar to money… We should not confuse the usefulness of an idea or concept, and the number of people who are familiar with the concept, and use it, as bring scientific proof that the “thing” itself actually exists.

    Anyone scientifically contesting this would need to cite a scientific experiment, as per the scientific method, giving a reasonable proof there is a “past”, and/or a “future”, and why they think that extra to energy or momentum, things also need a thing called “time” to be able to exist and move.

    Many of the people and works I researched cite specifically Einstein’s Relativity as “proving” time and space are merged, and thus time must exist.

    But in the seminal paper of special relativity (“ON THE ELECTRO DYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES”, section 1 “the definition of simultaneity”) , the paper only “assumes” there is a thing called time, and that a motorised pointer on a numbered dial (a “watch hand”) in some way confirms the existence of an invisible 4th “dimension” ( measurable quantity or extent).

    ( https://sites.google.com/site/abriefhistoryoftimelessness/special-relativity/the-electrodynamics-of-moving-bodies )

    Relativity does suggest, and it is confirmed, that any moving oscillator will be oscillating more slowly than expected, but this observation does not prove in any way that there is also an existing phenomena called “time”, that exists, and is dilated, where objects are moving.

    Logically, and scientifically, unless anyone can experimentally show otherwise, it thus seems that matter just exists and is moving and changing, not heading in to a “future”, not leaving a “past record of all events” behind it, and therefore the answer to the question…

    “What is time?”

    ‘May’ be ,

    “Time, is a useful idea and system for understanding and comparing examples of motion, but NOT something that exists, though most people assume otherwise because they assume without any proof that there ‘is’ a ‘past’ and possibly a ‘future’, and assume without actually checking, that Einstein’s Special Relativity, proves the existence of ‘time’, as opposed to just showing how relatively moving things are changing more slowly than expected”.

    Anyone interested in understanding the “theory of time” in more detail, please take a look at one of my powerpoint talks…

    Matt Marsden

    (auth ‘A Brief History of Timelessness’)
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00I09XHMQ
    Timelessness.co.uk

    A couple of Videos…

    YouTube: Timeless answers to Brian Cox’s Science of Dr WHO.
    http://youtu.be/ii3gxxn2reA

    ” Time travel cant happen without ‘the PAST’ ”
    (complete with LEGO intro :)
    http://youtu.be/pSJ8A-w78xM

  37. Billy Wolf says:

    I have come to believe that time is a field not unlike the Higgs field.
    We share the same dimension ( Photons and myself) The photon is experiencing no time (moving at the speed of light) yet I am. It would appear the main factor in this is speed. At the speed of light the field does not have an effect on the photon……. but for me at my speed, it does. Not unlike the Higgs Boson.

    This is in perfect alignment with The Great one Albert himself
    Its just a field and not a dimension………..

    I’m not a physics major just a guy that loves to dream.
    Please prove me wrong…….. :o )
    Thank you for your time!!

Leave a Reply