Time - is it just an illusion?

"I'm probably misrepresenting it, but apparently, everything that has happened or will happen has already happened all at once and it is just an illusion that we are travelling through it." That's the Tralfamadorian way...

ah, but art thee as fine as the Venus on the half shell?

Not 'Traveling' through it Enzo. Steping in to a pree defined destiny as 'all' possible futures have all ready happened. The Quantum model. As for Time. Well that assumes a beginning. Otherwise it is merely a Human construct to describe the periodicity of our three dimensional experiences. Also so bosses can bark 'YOU ARE LATE! and I can mumble something about perspective Relativity. (:

'Venus on the half shell'? Thale art! If thale are an electron with a half spin? (-:

'What I'd really like to know though is what exactly is time?' Well. In its traditional sense brooosh, I would describe Time as the sensation of moving forward from one point in three dimensional space to another point in that same spaces. It has to be measured against something if it is to be quantifiable. 'relative', Which I'm sure you all ready know. But if you are referring to Space Time, then the basic premise is to consider the idea of occupying a position in three dimensional space.. Would you not have to occupy that position in space at a specific Time? I.e. The 4rth Dimension, Space Time. This assumes the Constancy of 'C' of course. But thats another story. \:

'why does time only ever move forward ? Well.Time doesn't move forward brooosh. Its you, 'or you're perception of the passing of time' that Leads you to the feeling that time passes. and always at the same speed? The sensation that time passes is always relative. 'Why can't we hop back and forth in time the way we might hop back and forth across a stream' Experimental evidences suggest that we can. Depending on your velocity compared to the speed of light. e.g 'C' 'Also why do we only experience time as a tiny pinprick called 'now'? Why can't we experience all of time, all at once'? Well. That requires a more in-depth answer brooosh. If I have some 'spare Time' - 'Tomorrow', Will be nice to have a theoretical stab at it. (-:

"as 'all' possible futures have all ready happened. " surely that is only assuming the MWI (many worlds interpretation) is correct, something that is impossible to prove if the parallel universes cannot communicate with each other. I am a bit sceptical of MWI but then a big part of me feels that there may be something in the notion of quantum immortality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_immortality) I have a terribly pressing feeling that I have died in other realities. Mainly because of the unusually high level of potentially fatal situations I have been in. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

'Would I be right in thinking you are coming at this from the perspective of a physicist, rather than a philosopher or poet. Or is it possibly a bit of all three' I suppose my perspective is predominately from a Physicist point of view, though in to-days Physics/Cosmology/Philosophy, their has been a gradual cuming together of ideas. Personally brooosh, I see poetry in all of natures complexity. it truly is a wonder that bestows my heart and mind with possibility and wonder. (-: 'surely that is only assuming the MWI (many worlds interpretation) is correct, something that is impossible to prove if the parallel universes cannot communicate with each other' Absolutely, Jude. But as you say, all ideas in Sciences and Philosophical thinking are mealy models that present converging possibility's. Depending on which MWI model you consider the idea that 'Consciousness is Immortal', in one or all parallel Universes, the idea that a Universe exist that can support a 'miraculous' continuation of infinite Me's, seems equally improbable to me. However. Having spent some years considering ideas such as the the notion of Zero Ontology, Duality and the principals of wave function, both from a MWI and the varies Copenhagen interpretations, I am left with the feeling that it is not merely a problem of mathematical inaccuracy, but also a problem that should be more accurately described as the limitations imposed on our understanding by our limited three Dimensional perceptions. If that makes any sense Jude. (-:

Actually, I would add something more to this from a more Scientific, or (pseudo Scientific) point of view. I have never felt comfortable with the idea that the speed of light is indeed constant. For various reasons I have spent many years developing a model based on the particle/wave nature model. In my (Pseudo Model), It becomes possible - 'In my view', for light to be both of particle and wave nature at the same time. e.g. Faster than the speed of light becomes possible if we consider that 'C' meets a physical barrier as a particle, but not as a wave. As a particle we are limited to a three dimensional Universe. As a wave, 'Information' travels at a greater velocity than 'C'. Alternatively, we may simply shoot that dam Cat and be done with it. ( -:

'It becomes possible - 'In my view', for light to be both of particle and wave nature at the same time.' I thought that this was pretty much established anyway?? I am no physicist but I always thought that wave/ particle duality meant that light or electrons can be waves or particles at the same time and whether particle or wave properties were evident depended on the observer. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

ah... no I was wrong. I have just checked and... "one can demonstrate both particle and wave properties of light, but not at the same time, simply by changing the type and location of our measuring apparatus. The light ``knows'' when to behave as a wave, and when to behave as a particle, but it never demonstrates both properties simultaneously. " jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

It's times like this I sit here hoping for Maddan to pop up with an analogy that helps me to see what the blazes you people are on about. Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

And I just spent 20 min spell checking some crap about self deterministic behaver Jude! (-: Enzo, You think we know what the heck we are going on about? \:

Sorry. meant to add Double split experiment. (:

Try telling the barman at chucking out time that it's just an illusion and see what response you get.

SLIT! NOT SPLIT greeeeeeeeeeeee..

Yeah - I remember the double slit experiment from A Level physics and I have retained some of the information! This kind of stuff is impossible to subjectively grasp because of our 3 dimensional (well 4 if you count time) limitations you spoke about earlier. I remember vehemently protesting at the idea of time passing at different rates relative to speed and my physics teacher being pleased because he realised that it meant I was trying to understand it in the same way I understand other natural phenomenem and that just isn't possible. jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Thats the problem with our subjective experiences Jude, they often act as a barrier to un filtered creative inspiration. Tis what made Einstein a genius in my view. (:

indeed, and it is why the questions ' what was there before the big bang?' and 'what was outside the cosmic egg?' make no sense. There was no before the big bang because there was no time, similarly there was no space but as creatures of time and space we can only think in these terms. The real question would be 'what transcended that reality?' I think the laws of physics transcends that material reality. Whilst we know that particles can come into existence from nowhere discounting the need for a first cause and therefore demolishing the cosmological argument for the existence of a divine creator, I think few would deny that there must be some kind of ultimate or absolute reality that transcends the universe and therefore time and space. And that ultimate reality is what I call God. It may not be conscious or intelligent or have any of the attributes the Judaeo-Christian God has been saddled with (but then again it may). jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

But what about the poetical answer? pe ps oid Blogs! "the art of tea" "that's an odd courgette"

I thought David Bowie had settled this once and for all on Aladin Sane: "Time, he flexes like a whore / Falls wanking to the floor"

I thought David Bowie had settled this once and for all on Aladin Sane: "Time, he flexes like a whore / Falls wanking to the floor"

But what about the poetical answer? Well. The resulting poem was small. Twas inspired by Jude. (: