



Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place... The Space and Astronomy Agora 
Hold Up...(This Is A Long One Here!)
Forum List  Follow Ups  Post Message  Back to Thread Topics  In Response To Posted by Chris on October 19, 2002 07:44:50 UTC 
To be a firm believer in the arrow of time insists that you don't fully understand the special or general theories of relativity. We have PROVEN, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that time is relative to the observer. An atomic clock on the ground will most definately measure a "longer" time than one on a supersonic jet. We;ve tested this and know it as scientific fact. As YOU approch c, 3.0x10^8 m/s, observation of YOUR time relative to a 3rd party at a fixed point approaches zero, while your perception of time stays exactly the same. Likewise, if you were to somehow reach the speed of light (impossible, since your mass reaches infinity as you accelerate towards c, also a proven fact), time to you would still tick on, however your time relative to a fixed point outside of your system would not measure a time for you. Time for you has effectively stood still, however you still feel as though time is passing. If the time of the universe were to be an "arrow," as you say, then it would be impossible for time to stop. We've tested the theories of special and general relativity so many times that we can take the new laws they present as fact, and it states that time and space form a 4dimentional spacetime, as well as raising the possibility of imaginary time where any and all histories possible are infact definate. That was Feynman's fault :)...The basic idea that Feynman presents is that since Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that you cannot know both the position and the momentum of a particle, you must therefore have to assume that any and all paths between point A and B are indeed travelled. As it turns out, the false paths cancel eachother out and only the true path remains, but we can never measure it. Instead, we measure it in probability terms using a wave formula to decide where a particle MAY be...This idea has been extrapolated to imaginary time, where you deviate to a timeline perpendicular to that of "real time," Where all histories between points A and B are both possible and definate. A history where you batted 1.000 for the 1947 New York Yankees exists in imaginary time, but Feynman's statement shows that if this is not true, it will cancel out a completely reverse history in the same dimension of time. The universe cannot possibly have a single measurement of time, because A) we don't have a way to measure it, B) is negates a tested theory of modern physics, and C) it negates a perfectly plausible theory of imaginary time, combining the proven Uncertainty Principle, Probability Formulas developed by Shroedinger, The timetested (no pun intended, really) theories of special and general reletivity, and Steven Hawkings huge friggin brain (pbrane? ;)). As Einstein stated: "There are no absolutes in the universe." Time is no exception.


Additional Information 

About Astronomy Net  Advertise on Astronomy Net  Contact & Comments  Privacy Policy 
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 19942022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post. "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET" are trademarks of John Huggins 