5 ms·

The question that's always in my mind is if the perception of the flow of time is really just entropy. As long as state A is different than state B we have a pe

The question that's always in my mind is if the perception of the flow of time is really just entropy. As long as state A is different than state B we have a perception of time.

lucio 12y ago
I concur. But not just for entropy, for all movements. Time is a human construction to order sequences of events. All our "time" measures are based on cyclics movements. Make yourself a question, if ALL movement stop (include atoms), will time pass? will the arrow of time advance?
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Sure. In a cold vacuum with no atoms at all, those conditions are satisfied (no movement of any kind). But the vacuum continues to generate particle pairs and annihilate them; EM radiation continues to propagate. All on a strict clock.
  - lucio 12y ago
    if radiation propagate, there are movement. Imagine if even particle generation and radiation propagation stops.
    - wyager 12y ago
      Your premise doesn't make any sense. Those things cannot possibly occur. It is generally not useful to consider the consequence of falsehoods.
      - dllthomas 12y ago
        It is often useful to consider the consequence falsehoods. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment I think this one runs some risk of begging the question, though, so unless we make it significantly more precise we're unlikely to get anything useful out of it.
        wyager 12y ago
        Thought experiments generally consider the consequence of something that could be true.
        dllthomas 12y ago
        I don't think that's true, depending partly on how we define "could", but we're getting off into the weeds. In this case, we're trying to understand aspects of the laws of physics; getting at the consequences if they differed subtly could be tremendously useful - akin to a proof by contradiction.
        wyager 12y ago
        > getting at the consequences if they differed subtly could be tremendously useful Sure, but that doesn't describe "What if radiation and quantum noise stopped moving?". That's just a dumb question. We can't really derive anything interesting from its consideration. It's along the lines of "What if you dropped a rock and it didn't fall?" What if?
        dllthomas 12y ago
        If you dropped a rock and it didn't fall, you could infer that probably either you are outside an appreciable gravitational field or there's some force counteracting the gravitational field you're in. In any event, I agree that the question is not likely to be useful, but as I said I think that is because it subtly begs the question in a way that isn't likely to be clear without it being stated quite a bit more formally. "That's just a dumb question." While "there are no dumb questions" is an overstatement, I think your tone throughout this has been unnecessarily hostile (not toward me, mind you). You could have done more to educate, you chose to abuse, and in a way that stepped into inaccuracy to boot.
        wyager 12y ago
        >If you dropped a rock and it didn't fall, you could infer that probably either you are outside an appreciable gravitational field or there's some force counteracting the gravitational field you're in. Perhaps my example was not appropriate, because I described something that could happen (which is what might allow us to have a useful thought experiment). I couldn't think of anything to match the irrelevance or off-basedness of the radiation-stopping question. >You could have done more to educate, you chose to abuse "Abuse" is quite hyperbolic in this situation. And you're right, I could have done more to educate, but I also don't have infinite time to give helpful and constructive corrections to every stupid comment on the internet. Sometimes you just make it clear that the comment is stupid, so no one else accidentally takes it as reasonable, and leave.
  - ccozan 12y ago
    Correct. All EM Radiation has a frequency ( spectrum ) . The spectrum is useful because it selects which barionic matter interacts with it. This interaction is what we feel as time due to the statistics of the interations ( less events vs. many more ).
- kruczek 12y ago
  "Make yourself a question, if ALL movement stop (include atoms), will time pass?" That's pretty much asking "If time stops, will time pass?" - which doesn't really answer anything. Stopping all movement is not something we ever see in the universe (well, we couldn't see or experience it anyway). And yet we see movement - we see everything changes. I think time may be a human construct to order these changes, but it is also a property of the universe (whether fundamental or emergent) which allows such change to happen in the first place.
  - lucio 12y ago
    If time is just movement, time is not a particular property of the universe, just a construction of ours as observers. Then the universe is matter, space and movement, and "time" is one useful illusion to ourselves, but it is not a property of the universe.
    - mkr-hn 12y ago
      Everything in human perception is an abstraction of the underlying reality.
    - kruczek 12y ago
      If "time is just movement", then it is an emergent property of the universe (and movement, or more generally - change, would be the fundamental property). Still it wouldn't mean that time is just a construct we created, as it would be firmly rooted in the underlying fundamental property (the movement you mentioned). If on the other hand it is the opposite (and based on the way we experience universe, I'd rather think it is the opposite) - then "movement" would be the emergent property of space and time; and both space and time would be more fundamental properties. In either case I don't think "illusion" is the right word, as it implies something non-existent or unreal. And even if it is an emergent property, it would still emerge from some more fundamental properties and thus would be quite real.
chii 12y ago
but why doesn't that perception feel like time is moving backwards?
- dllthomas 12y ago
  Because we're part of the system, so that might not be possible... and if it is, then because that feeling wouldn't be useful if no causal arrows point that way.

The question that's always in my mind is if the perception of the flow of time is really just entropy. As long as state A is different than state B we have a perception of time.

lucio 12y ago

I concur. But not just for entropy, for all movements. Time is a human construction to order sequences of events. All our "time" measures are based on cyclics movements. Make yourself a question, if ALL movement stop (include atoms), will time pass? will the arrow of time advance?

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Sure. In a cold vacuum with no atoms at all, those conditions are satisfied (no movement of any kind). But the vacuum continues to generate particle pairs and annihilate them; EM radiation continues to propagate. All on a strict clock.
- lucio 12y ago
  if radiation propagate, there are movement. Imagine if even particle generation and radiation propagation stops.
  - wyager 12y ago
    Your premise doesn't make any sense. Those things cannot possibly occur. It is generally not useful to consider the consequence of falsehoods.
    - dllthomas 12y ago
      It is often useful to consider the consequence falsehoods. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment I think this one runs some risk of begging the question, though, so unless we make it significantly more precise we're unlikely to get anything useful out of it.
      - wyager 12y ago
        Thought experiments generally consider the consequence of something that could be true.
        dllthomas 12y ago
        I don't think that's true, depending partly on how we define "could", but we're getting off into the weeds. In this case, we're trying to understand aspects of the laws of physics; getting at the consequences if they differed subtly could be tremendously useful - akin to a proof by contradiction.
        wyager 12y ago
        > getting at the consequences if they differed subtly could be tremendously useful Sure, but that doesn't describe "What if radiation and quantum noise stopped moving?". That's just a dumb question. We can't really derive anything interesting from its consideration. It's along the lines of "What if you dropped a rock and it didn't fall?" What if?
        dllthomas 12y ago
        If you dropped a rock and it didn't fall, you could infer that probably either you are outside an appreciable gravitational field or there's some force counteracting the gravitational field you're in. In any event, I agree that the question is not likely to be useful, but as I said I think that is because it subtly begs the question in a way that isn't likely to be clear without it being stated quite a bit more formally. "That's just a dumb question." While "there are no dumb questions" is an overstatement, I think your tone throughout this has been unnecessarily hostile (not toward me, mind you). You could have done more to educate, you chose to abuse, and in a way that stepped into inaccuracy to boot.
        wyager 12y ago
        >If you dropped a rock and it didn't fall, you could infer that probably either you are outside an appreciable gravitational field or there's some force counteracting the gravitational field you're in. Perhaps my example was not appropriate, because I described something that could happen (which is what might allow us to have a useful thought experiment). I couldn't think of anything to match the irrelevance or off-basedness of the radiation-stopping question. >You could have done more to educate, you chose to abuse "Abuse" is quite hyperbolic in this situation. And you're right, I could have done more to educate, but I also don't have infinite time to give helpful and constructive corrections to every stupid comment on the internet. Sometimes you just make it clear that the comment is stupid, so no one else accidentally takes it as reasonable, and leave.
- ccozan 12y ago
  Correct. All EM Radiation has a frequency ( spectrum ) . The spectrum is useful because it selects which barionic matter interacts with it. This interaction is what we feel as time due to the statistics of the interations ( less events vs. many more ).
kruczek 12y ago
"Make yourself a question, if ALL movement stop (include atoms), will time pass?" That's pretty much asking "If time stops, will time pass?" - which doesn't really answer anything. Stopping all movement is not something we ever see in the universe (well, we couldn't see or experience it anyway). And yet we see movement - we see everything changes. I think time may be a human construct to order these changes, but it is also a property of the universe (whether fundamental or emergent) which allows such change to happen in the first place.
- lucio 12y ago
  If time is just movement, time is not a particular property of the universe, just a construction of ours as observers. Then the universe is matter, space and movement, and "time" is one useful illusion to ourselves, but it is not a property of the universe.
  - mkr-hn 12y ago
    Everything in human perception is an abstraction of the underlying reality.
  - kruczek 12y ago
    If "time is just movement", then it is an emergent property of the universe (and movement, or more generally - change, would be the fundamental property). Still it wouldn't mean that time is just a construct we created, as it would be firmly rooted in the underlying fundamental property (the movement you mentioned). If on the other hand it is the opposite (and based on the way we experience universe, I'd rather think it is the opposite) - then "movement" would be the emergent property of space and time; and both space and time would be more fundamental properties. In either case I don't think "illusion" is the right word, as it implies something non-existent or unreal. And even if it is an emergent property, it would still emerge from some more fundamental properties and thus would be quite real.

chii 12y ago

but why doesn't that perception feel like time is moving backwards?

dllthomas 12y ago
Because we're part of the system, so that might not be possible... and if it is, then because that feeling wouldn't be useful if no causal arrows point that way.