I don't think a real physics book has the answer to the question of time.

And that's exactly why you need to read one.

Why should I read something that does not have the answer?

Does it say that time does not exist?

If not, then it is wrong.

Texas, if time exists, then please describe to me, in your own words, what you believe it is.

Okay, why not.

Time is simply another dimension like up or left or backwards. We move through time in exactly the same way we move through space, except time is a one way street. We are pulled into the future as if in a strong current.

This is what Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity is about. This theory is over 100 years old now and still stands up well to what we observe in the universe.

If you cannot understand this it's because you either refuse to look at the evidence or are unable to grasp the concept.



And do you have any experimental evidence to back up that hypothesis?

You'll have to forgive me if I give more weight to the opinions of people with actual degrees on the subject.

There is no time, only "spacetime." Time and space are intimately connected. There can be no time without space.

Einstein:

"People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." - Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein and the Fabric of Time

Surprising as it may be to most non-scientists and even to some scientists, Albert Einstein concluded in his later years that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. In 1952, in his book Relativity, in discussing Minkowski's Space World interpretation of his theory of relativity, Einstein writes:

Since there exists in this four dimensional structure [space-time] no longer any sections which represent "now" objectively, the concepts of happening and becoming are indeed not completely suspended, but yet complicated. It appears therefore more natural to think of physical reality as a four dimensional existence, instead of, as hitherto, the evolution of a three dimensional existence.

Einstein's belief in an undivided solid reality was clear to him, so much so that he completely rejected the separation we experience as the moment of now. He believed there is no true division between past and future, there is rather a single existence. His most descriptive testimony to this faith came when his lifelong friend Besso died.

Einstein wrote a letter to Besso's family, saying that although Besso had preceded him in death it was of no consequence, "...for us physicists believe the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one."


Most everyone knows that Einstein proved that time is relative, not absolute as Newton claimed. With the proper technology, such as a very fast spaceship, one person is able to experience several days while another person simultaneously experiences only a few hours or minutes. The same two people can meet up again, one having experienced days or even years while the other has only experienced minutes. The person in the spaceship only needs to travel near to the speed of light. The faster they travel, the slower their time will pass relative to someone planted firmly on the Earth. If they were able to travel at the speed of light, their time would cease completely and they would only exist trapped in timelessness.

Einstein could hardly believe there were physicists who didn’t believe in timelessness, and yet the wisdom of Einstein's convictions had very little impact on cosmology or science in general. The majority of physicists have been slow to give up the ordinary assumptions we make about time.

The two most highly recognized physicists since Einstein made similar conclusions and even made dramatic advances toward a timeless perspective of the universe, yet they also were unable to change the temporal mentality ingrained in the mainstream of physics and society.

Einstein was followed in history by the colorful and brilliant Richard Feynman. Feynman developed the most effective and explanatory interpretation of quantum mechanics that had yet been developed, known today as Sum over Histories.

Just as Einstein's own Relativity Theory led Einstein to reject time, Feynman’s Sum over Histories theory led him to describe time simply as a direction in space. Feynman’s theory states that the probability of an event is determined by summing together all the possible histories of that event. For example, for a particle moving from point A to B we imagine the particle traveling every possible path, curved paths, oscillating paths, squiggly paths, even backward in time and forward in time paths. Each path has an amplitude, and when summed the vast majority of all these amplitudes add up to zero, and all that remains is the comparably few histories that abide by the laws and forces of nature. Sum over histories indicates the direction of our ordinary clock time is simply a path in space which is more probable than the more exotic directions time might have taken otherwise.

We do not "move through time."

I would explain to you how we don't even "move through space" but that is probably way over your head.

It's obvious to me that you simply do not understand what you're talking about because your quotes from Albert confirm my post. You are making my argument for me.

How so? It is clear you don't understand Albert at all.

There is no division between the past present or future. NONE.

Also NOTHING HAPPENS in the past or the future. An event can only happen in the present.... Now.

Now is all that exists. The past is a memory. The future is a probability. We don't move through time.

Yep, you need to hit the books.

I think you do.

Time does not move backwards or forwards.

We do not move backwards or forward through some entity or dimension called "time."

The time concept is intimately connected and relative to space and matter.

But because time is a mental concept it is more intimately related to consciousness.

Right, time itself doesn't move.



Wrong, moving through time is exactly what we do as we age. But, it's a one way street. We cannot stop or go back.



Agreed. But, I think it's clearer to say space and time are one and have and matter effect each other.



And that's where you make the leap into woo woo land. Time isn't a mental concept. It's a physical reality. It can be measured. It can be used to make predictions etc.

You can throw around all the pseudoscience and nonsense you want. Rhetoric isn't proof of anything except the that gullible are easily mislead.

So you agree with me that the measurement of time is what defines it and that the measurement of time is relative to the system you are basing it on. Our solar system comes with it's own rules, doesn't mean the rules are the same elsewhere.

And where do you put a tecyractacube on your multi axial depiction of dimensions? And how would anyone know if they exist? Is the world within a mirror another dimension? I think not. But some would argue.

I propose that if you put two points on a line you have harnessed time because time becomes perceptible when there are two realities coexisting. Every object is a spark in time.

I agree that time may be effected by gravity and this could cause the "flow" to speed up or slow down. However, the laws of physics are unchanging within the universe. All the same rules apply.

But,time isn't defined by it's measurement anymore than space in defined by a mile.

Of course time is a mental concept.

Time is NOT a physical reality.

The only way to measure time is by using mental and relative concepts of matter and space.

If you subtract matter and space, and go into your mind then time can only be measured relative to your thoughts. Your thoughts are not physical.

Put yourself into a sensory deprivation tank or a coma and see how well you can measure time. You can't. You can only guess about time by its relation to your conscious thoughts.

This could go on forever. I need a beer.

Funny, I measure time with a clock.

She does that a lot!!