Time

[DISTURBEDrbl911]

This topic came up in my philosophy class Thursday and I believe that it is a very valid arguement.

The spectrum of time is usually viewed as past, present and future. However, I have come to the conclusion that there is no present. Each moment, each millionth of a second "is" the present. Those moments go by us at such a fast rate, that they are insignificant. By the time one moment goes by, it is no longer the present, but rather the past. Just thinking about this gives me a headache. I would just like to know what my fellow comrades think about this subject.

[Herman]

Time is... complicated in itself. It's something which many philosophers have struggled with and something which many more continue to think about.

[apathy maybe]

DISTURBEDrbl911: You ask if there is such a thing as the smallest unit of time (well that is basically what your point is I think). My answer, who cares? Outside of a philosophy class or a philosophy discussion, of what practical consequents does it have? This is not to knock philosophy at all, I am majoring in it for my degree. However, these sort of questions is what gives philosophy a bad name in the wider community.

Yes we are living in the past effectively. However, we evolved so that it doesn't matter. We are living in the present, because the present is now. And while that now changes all the time, it is always now. But our experiences and thoughts are always in the past.

Anyway, there is a present, but as you said, it is very small.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 8 2006, 11:35 AM
DISTURBEDrbl911: You ask if there is such a thing as the smallest unit of time (well that is basically what your point is I think). My answer, who cares? Outside of a philosophy class or a philosophy discussion, of what practical consequents does it have? This is not to knock philosophy at all, I am majoring in it for my degree. However, these sort of questions is what gives philosophy a bad name in the wider community.

Yes we are living in the past effectively. However, we evolved so that it doesn't matter. We are living in the present, because the present is now. And while that now changes all the time, it is always now. But our experiences and thoughts are always in the past.

Anyway, there is a present, but as you said, it is very small.
Thats actually a significant topic in modern theoretical physics. It would actually have significant effects on the way the universe works at the quantum level. Just thought i'd bring that up, I know this is a philosophy discussion.

[apathy maybe]

But of what pratical consequences (which is actually the word I meant to use in the original post) does it have?

Yes it might be fun, but it is like string theory, yes it is fun, but is it actaully going to do anything for the rest of us?

[Whitten]

Originally posted by apathy [email protected] 8 2006, 12:27 PM
But of what pratical consequences (which is actually the word I meant to use in the original post) does it have?

Yes it might be fun, but it is like string theory, yes it is fun, but is it actaully going to do anything for the rest of us?
Did Galeio discovering the acceleration due to gravity have any immediate impact? In time (no pun intended) it will have an effect.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

I think he's pointing out a logical flaw. You can get smaller and smaller, infintely smaller units of time, so where does one draw the line? Is the present a day, a second, a nanosecond, smaller than that? Anywhere you choose, you can always go smaller so you're always wrong, so there isn't a present.


-Alex

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Double post, apologies.

-Alex

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

If time exists, past, present, and future exist. Where time is a construction, past, present, and future still exist as constructions. You cannot conceptualize a rational concept of time without having a present. The present is simply the framework that you currently experience and use to categorize past and present. The fact that human intellect or science can be mistaken in determine past, present, and future does not mean any or one of them do not exist.

At this moment, I am typing on the computer. As I wrote the sentence before this, I was engaging in the act I said I was. If you define typing on the computer as actually hitting the keys, perhaps, I did that within the time I said. Present is not a concept similiar to past and future. It is the point of analysis from where we analyze what is the past or present. Whether time is a construction is irrelevant.

[arielle]

There are two versions of time.
The perception of time.
And "real" time.

The perception of time is the rotation of the solar system. Day. Night. Winter. Summer etc etc. Watch, clock, blah blah blah.

"Real" time is the chemical reaction in which things age.



This came up during lunch with a few comrades. One was trying to say that if you go far enough into the future time stops. And I had to say, "no, because your still 'aging' and that is time."

Eh, that's my view on time.

[Cryotank Screams]

I personally find it fascinating how much the human animal is perplexed by such a straight forward occurrence such as time. I mean think about how many sci-fi books, and such talk about the future, and time travel, and how many religions developed mystical mumbo jumbo ramblings about time.

I liken time to the reaper's hourglass, always full, and yet constantly draining, unrelenting, cold, and reliable.

Time really is intangible, and I think anything that is that straight forward humans have to try to over analyze it and try to give it mystical meaning, when it has none.

[RebelDog]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 07:22 PM
I think he's pointing out a logical flaw. You can get smaller and smaller, infintely smaller units of time, so where does one draw the line? Is the present a day, a second, a nanosecond, smaller than that? Anywhere you choose, you can always go smaller so you're always wrong, so there isn't a present.


-Alex
Plank Time is thought to be the smallest disernable unit of time.

http://www.answers.com/topic/planck-time

When cosmologists talk about the instant of the big bang they are theoretically talking about the big bang plus a plank time as nothing could take place within this time. This is the earliest cosmological epoch there is and its called the Plank Epoch.

http://www.answers.com/topic/planck-epoch