The Basic Component of Time?

[venk]

Matter has the atom, some speculate that gravity has gravitons, could time also have a "particle" that determines the specific properties of time in a given area. Could these "Chronotons" be adjusted (say be changing a quantum property such as spin) in a small object, thus pushing it out of temporal cohesion with the rest of the universe? In a more literal sense, if one part of space time were moving significantly faster than another, a tear could occur in the continium causing what we might call a worm hole. If I recall high school physics correctly, we base most of our understanding on the nature of time on the theory of relativity and how time is effected when velocities approach C, but a manipulation of the properties of hypothetical chronton would allow one to slow down, speed up, and possibly reverse time without having to consider the speed of light.


Intresting Stuff, ain't it?

 

[kcthomas]

i always thought of time as something humans made up. its not really real, its just an idea, a measurement.

 

[alienal99]

time is just an idea, with no physical properties. that being said, you can slow it down or speed it up. the faster you go, the slower time goes.....but you cannot "warp" time, or at least nobody knows how to yet as it is not a physical thing

 

[wkwong]

the problem is that we think of time as a linear property. that it can only go forward/backwards (theoretically backwards). now with quantum theory, i picture time as a 3 dimensional unit in itself. we use it as a measurement of duration. but really, i think it's just a state like any other property.

 

[wkwong]

also i think it's probably unlikely that we'll solve any of this anytime soon since our minds can't percieve anything over 3 dimensions visually. we can calculate with multiple dimensions, but who truly understands what those "extra" dimensions are? they just aren't natural to us. humans are dumb, lol.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Time was in fact a sort of creation by the human race. Since it is based on nothing more than the "time" it takes for our planet to completely revolve, and to circle the sun in one full orbit, it is a perspective based measurement which gives it no solid basis in science. Time is a theory at best and more like a hypothesis if taken into a deeper perspective. Our understanding of time is corrupted by our acceptance of it as a true measurement. It is almost like saying 1 hour = 1 liter, when in fact 1 hour = 1 opinion.

 

[mordantmonkey]

time is simply a way to quantify change... it take so long for x to move or disolve or fall... other forces determine how much "time" it takes for these things occur.

 

[venk]

We use hours and minutes to measure time the same way we use cms and grams to mesaure matter. It does not mean matter is made up of grams or that matter only exists relative to our observation of it. Thermodynamics tells us that everythign is moving toward a state of disorder. What causes entropy? pure energy expenditure of all the objects in the universe? Why do we always go toward disorder?

Call the time that your room is clean as A and after Time x it gets messay at point B. If you clean your room perfectly (ie every atom is moved to the exact point it was before it got messy), is the room at point A or at point C? The person who cleaned the room is at point C, but one might argue that the room is back at point A since it is 100%.

Now imagine the same effect on a grand scale, if it were possible to reverse entropy completly on a planetary scale (ie every wave, particle, etc revert back to the previous state), would that essentially be the same as traveling back in time?

 

[wkwong]

I guess so. Since time isn't really a duration, that's just what we use it for. Like I said before, time is just a state of being. If everything was set back in the universe, then essentially it would be travelling back, but how would anyone know?

I don't think we can ever "move" particles in that kind of scale. However, if string theory is true, then you can change yourself and end up in a different universe/time. I'm just babbling, I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

[mordantmonkey]

well if every particle in the universe was moved back to it previous point AND it previous velocity and vector, then there would be no way to tell that you hadn't gone back in time. of course every particle in your brain would be in that state too, so no one would remember anything happened at all... maybe it is happening all the time? if the universe returned to the singularity like before the big bang, then could you say the universe traveled back in time? no? because YOU don't exist anymore.

 

[SunSamurai]

It's not possible to reverce time.

 

[imported_jb]

that would just be an optical illusion. what about the decay of those particles you moved around? some of them might not even exist by the time you are dones 'cleaning'.

one weird thing about time is that we perceive it as we do because of our speed. it's as if time is a pressure. the faster you go, the more pressure on your particles, the faster time seems to go. (referring to near-lightspeed travel, twin-paradox, etc) go slow, and your 75 year life expectancy on your cells' replication will take 75 years. go fast, and you could live a lot longer.

which reminds me that 'they' do change how long a year is when necessary, when the miliseconds add up. the change in the earth's speed should definately change how fast we are travelling, and so should affect how we perceive time. not that you would notice w/ such small changes. maybe we should research getting the earth spinning faster. we could probably counteract gravity by a few notches and extend time.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: venk
Could these "Chronotons" be adjusted (say be changing a quantum property such as spin) in a small object, thus pushing it out of temporal cohesion with the rest of the universe?

You've been watching way too much scifi shows.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: kcthomas
i always thought of time as something humans made up. its not really real, its just an idea, a measurement.

Exactly.

 

[Jack31081]

Originally posted by: kcthomas
i always thought of time as something humans made up. its not really real, its just an idea, a measurement.

Time is not a measurement. A second...that's a measurement, just like an inch or an ounce is a measurement.

Time is a dimension (or as a property, duration), just like length and mass.

All things that exist have length, height, width, duration and (arguably) mass. Yes, the photon is generally thought of to be without mass, but there are theories that suggest otherwise. Nothing can exist without duration as anything that does exist exists for a nonzero length of time, so I'd think that makes time very real.

 

[Addis]

Why would the photon be seen as having mass? Photons (like all other electromagnetic radiation) are a transverse wave made from electric and magnetic fields perpendicular to each other. Unless they themselves are thought to have mass.

 

[Jack31081]

Originally posted by: Addis
Why would the photon be seen as having mass? Photons (like all other electromagnetic radiation) are a transverse wave made from electric and magnetic fields perpendicular to each other. Unless they themselves are thought to have mass.

From what I remember, light can be affected (bent) by gravity, which only affects objects with mass. i've never read anyone figuring this out using a mass-less photon.

 

[Jack31081]

Whoops. my bad. found this article:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/961102.html

should've known better

 

[Jack31081]

Originally posted by: Pr0d1gy
Time was in fact a sort of creation by the human race. Since it is based on nothing more than the "time" it takes for our planet to completely revolve, and to circle the sun in one full orbit, it is a perspective based measurement which gives it no solid basis in science. Time is a theory at best and more like a hypothesis if taken into a deeper perspective. Our understanding of time is corrupted by our acceptance of it as a true measurement. It is almost like saying 1 hour = 1 liter, when in fact 1 hour = 1 opinion.

As kcthomas before you, you're confusing 'time' with the 'measurement of time'.

1 hour does equate to 1 liter, as both are measurements. Just as time measurement is based on our planet's orbit around the sun, length measurements were originally based on the size of a foot, or the length of an arm. Measurement is all abstract, like numbers. It's just a way to record and quantify things. But that doesn't mean time isn't real. Time existed long before humans came up with a way to measure it.

Time (duration) is just as real as any other dimension.

 

[kotss]

Also lets not forget the most famous of all equations E= M(C^2).
A photon is considered to never be at rest, therefore no rest mass.
What it can have is a mass-energy equivalence given by the famous equation.
Since mass is energy and energy is mass the photon could be considered to have a mass
therefore would be affected by gravity.

 

[harrkev]

I would just like to point out that nobody knows what time is. Most explanations that I have seen involving the direction of time wave theirs hands over entropy as the reason that you cannot go backwards in time.

And the whole "chronoton" thing is just somebody coming up with a name for a particle that:
1) nobody knows if it exists.
2) if it DID exist, nobody knows its properties.
3) is not even predicted in any known theory.

In short, I can describe a monster with two heads, feathers, swims in the ocean, eats carrots, and breathes fire. I dub this monster a "quizzitz." OK. Now, if we ever see one, we know what to call it. And this is about as scientific as any discussion of chronotons. In fact, we have a better description of a quizzitz than we do of a chronoton.

On a related note, I have read interpretations of quantum theory which involve photons travelling backwards in time. Remember what Einstein called "spooky action at a distance?" Having an exchange of photons, one going forward in time, and one going backwards, can decribe very neatly many of the characteristics usually involved in "collapsing a wave function." So, I like this from a purely aesthetic sense. Note that this does NOT allow information to be sent backwards in time.

Now, if time travel were actually real, I could control the fate of the universe.

The eventual fate of the universe seems tied to the amount of matter in the universe. A lot of matter = big crunch at the end. Too little matter = expand forever and freeze to death.

Let's assume that time travel were possible, and the universe is going to collapse. Just go around sending entire galaxies a billion years into the future. If you do this enough, the average density of matter in the universe drops, and the universe goes on forever.

On the other hand, assume that the universe is just going to go on forever. Grab a few galaxies and send them back in time a few billion years. If you do this enough, the density increases and the universe crunches in the end.

Of course, this is absurd. The only way around this is to keep the conservation of matter. This means that the "sending" time machine will receive a whole lot of energy (kaboom), and the receiving machine will need a whole lot of energy (more than the world produces) in order to receive anything.

Note that this explanation does not exclude sending DATA back and forth in time. Only matter.

 

[Jack31081]

Originally posted by: harrkev
I would just like to point out that nobody knows what time is. Most explanations that I have seen involving the direction of time wave theirs hands over entropy as the reason that you cannot go backwards in time.

Actually, Einstein's relativity theories state it pretty simply. Nothing can accelerate from a speed less than light to a speed equal to or greater than light. This excludes one way of going back in time.

There are other methods of jumping to various points in time (lining up 50 neutron stars for one), but they're all just on paper...nothing that's actually feasible.

And the whole "chronoton" thing is just somebody coming up with a name for a particle that:
1) nobody knows if it exists.
2) if it DID exist, nobody knows its properties.
3) is not even predicted in any known theory.

In short, I can describe a monster with two heads, feathers, swims in the ocean, eats carrots, and breathes fire. I dub this monster a "quizzitz." OK. Now, if we ever see one, we know what to call it. And this is about as scientific as any discussion of chronotons. In fact, we have a better description of a quizzitz than we do of a chronoton.

You won't get any argument here. This guy just made this stuff up at 6am. He said that.

On a related note, I have read interpretations of quantum theory which involve photons travelling backwards in time. Remember what Einstein called "spooky action at a distance?" Having an exchange of photons, one going forward in time, and one going backwards, can decribe very neatly many of the characteristics usually involved in "collapsing a wave function." So, I like this from a purely aesthetic sense. Note that this does NOT allow information to be sent backwards in time.

There is also the theory that anti-matter is simply regular matter travelling backwards through time. Personally, I like this theory.

Now, if time travel were actually real, I could control the fate of the universe.

The eventual fate of the universe seems tied to the amount of matter in the universe. A lot of matter = big crunch at the end. Too little matter = expand forever and freeze to death.

Let's assume that time travel were possible, and the universe is going to collapse. Just go around sending entire galaxies a billion years into the future. If you do this enough, the average density of matter in the universe drops, and the universe goes on forever.

On the other hand, assume that the universe is just going to go on forever. Grab a few galaxies and send them back in time a few billion years. If you do this enough, the density increases and the universe crunches in the end.

Of course, this is absurd. The only way around this is to keep the conservation of matter. This means that the "sending" time machine will receive a whole lot of energy (kaboom), and the receiving machine will need a whole lot of energy (more than the world produces) in order to receive anything.

Did you read this somewhere, or just think it up yourself? On the face of it, I'd think conservation of matter deals with chunks of matter individually, and not the amount of matter in the universe. The actual matter (galaxies) never ceases to exist, it just changes its place in time. Hell, for all we know, conservation of matter may well apply over time, we just don't have the science to figure that out yet.