Is it truly a basic concept?
Or is the concept derived from more primitive notions?

I'm reading the book by independent physicist Julian Barbour (http://www.platonia.com/index.html) entitled "The End of Time".
After finishing the first part of the book, which is aimed more at the general reader, I am still undecided, but leaning more towards a Timeless universe.

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKsNraFxPwk)is a video explaining the basic idea of the book in a non-technical way.


Do you lean towards no time at a fundamental level or do you believe time does exist at the most basic level?

Define "time".

Define "time".

That is a problematic request.

Most would agree it is something linear. Relentlessly moving forward through instants stung out on a line. But is this ever changing Now Reality? or does it just appear that way from nescience?

I would say that since it is a dimension then it is a reality that would be available to an objective, outside observer, but one that we can only make conjectures about as members of this time-based universe. I wish I knew the equations for it. :( Hopefully somebody here knows enough physics to tell us.

Ignore

I wouldn't assume it's a dimension just yet. It may very well be, however, there is always the theory that time is nothing but an illusion created by change. If nothing changed, there would be no time. If suddenly changes became twice as prevalent, it would seem as if time had sped up. If changes become half as prevalent, it would seem that time had slowed down. Change could very well be the basis of time.

Change could very well be the basis of time.

It is just as hard to deny motion as it is to deny time.

I'll find some of the arguments for the illusion of motion appearing from a timeless Platonia in the book and post the ideas later.

It is just as hard to deny motion as it is to deny time.

I'll find some of the arguments for the illusion of motion appearing from a timeless Platonia in the book and post the ideas later.

Agreed. In the immortal words of Dana Skully (sp?) of the X-files "Mulder, Time is a universal invariant"

p.s. a greek (I think) philosopher by the name of Zeno believed motion to be an illusion and used what is today called "Zeno's Paradox" to prove it. Although proved incorrect it is still very interesting to read.

p.s. a greek (I think) philosopher by the name of Zeno believed motion to be an illusion and used what is today called "Zeno's Paradox" to prove it. Although proved incorrect it is still very interesting to read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmenides

This guy was the Aristotle of his day and a teacher of Zeno. Plenty of modern parallels.

I can't understand why people say time is a dimension. Just because it takes time to get from one space to another doesn't mean time and space are part of the same thing. I don't think having access to the 4th dimension necessarily means you can teleport from any one point in space to any other either.

If we we're 1 dimensional we could only travel in straight lines and we would have to travel from one end of the line to the other. If we became 2 dimensional then we'd have access to a whole plane and could go around any obstacle on the line but we would still have to travel from point A to point B.

Who knows what kinda possibilities it would open up though. Like the difference between living in the second dimension and the 3rd. A wall is impossible to bypass if your in the 2nd dimension but if your in the 3rd dimension you can just go over it.

I can't understand why people say time is a dimension. Just because it takes time to get from one space to another doesn't mean time and space are part of the same thing. I don't think having access to the 4th dimension necessarily means you can teleport from any one point in space to any other either.

If we we're 1 dimensional we could only travel in straight lines and we would have to travel from one end of the line to the other. If we became 2 dimensional then we'd have access to a whole plane and could go around any obstacle on the line but we would still have to travel from point A to point B.

Who knows what kinda possibilities it would open up though. Like the difference between living in the second dimension and the 3rd. A wall is impossible to bypass if your in the 2nd dimension but if your in the 3rd dimension you can just go over it.

One of my favorite arguments for time being a dimension goes something like this:

I'm inviting you to a party at my apartment. For you to be able to come, you need my coordinates. They are Fifth Street (X-coordinate) and Park Avenue (Y-coordinate) on the fifth floor (Z-coordinate). Now you know exactly where my apartment is, but you don't know the time of the party. My party is only going to be in existence from 7pm to 11pm tomorrow night. If you come too early or too late, my party won't be there. This makes time a crucial aspect for the location of anything, which makes it a dimension.

I would elaborate a bit more, but I've gotta run.

Thats a good analogy. I saw the documentary you got that from. It was that documentary about string theory I think. It was pretty good. I always wonder if we discovered time was the 4th dimension and we figured out how to traverse it then would every one of us actually be a thrillion people all living in different milliseconds of time.

If I travelled back about 10 years then me as a kid would have to be wandering around there somewhere otherwise it wouldn't be the same past I was once in. If me as a kid was there and me as I am now was there two would be both be the same people or different people? If I time travelled to 10 minutes ago and met up with me 10 minutes ago then I'd have successfully cloned myself and I'd actually be two people and it wouldn't matter that I left the future I was in because the future I would only be 10 minutes away.

Some people say time travel will only be possible when the first time machine is invented. If thats the case the whole world will be transformed because people millions of people from the future would instantly go through it at that instant and all kinds of madness would ensue.:eek:

If I travelled back about 10 years then me as a kid would have to be wandering around there somewhere otherwise it wouldn't be the same past I was once in. If me as a kid was there and me as I am now was there two would be both be the same people or different people?

Same people.
Different Time Capsules

Same people.
Different Time Capsules

Ockham.

If I travelled back about 10 years then me as a kid would have to be wandering around there somewhere otherwise it wouldn't be the same past I was once in. If me as a kid was there and me as I am now was there two would be both be the same people or different people? If I time travelled to 10 minutes ago and met up with me 10 minutes ago then I'd have successfully cloned myself and I'd actually be two people and it wouldn't matter that I left the future I was in because the future I would only be 10 minutes away.

The question is, would you clone yourself by traveling back to when you were 10? 5? A fetus? Non-existant?

What the fuck is time? The perception of the rate of change of the environment on a macroscopic level?

What the fuck is going on here?

U NED MOAR ENERJIES