Stopping time

[Takeoverangels]

Is there any type of force or particle scattered about the universe that would cause time to stop in that area? Thank

 

[Dave643]

I have been playing with the idea of time, and that of speed, gravity, and uncertainties, it’s effect on light and how light travels at what we see as the speed of light, with next to know energy ie say a battery torch.

While I like the idea of there being no time, or fixed rate of flow of time. I was looking at it from lights point of view, light moves in what we call time, so for me if there is a thing that we are measuring and calling it time, it’s faster than light. Because at max speed of the flow of time everything would appear to stand still.
To it, it instantly arrived at the end of time but we are slow to catch up, what that end is I have no clue.
My guess is the absence of anything in the universe is the thing that sets the normal flow rate of time everything else, is slower based on mass, energy, and quantum uncertainty. The rate everything move in what we call time is then relative to that instant,


Getting to the asked question.
While I have know actual clue if any of that is remotely right, I don’t think you can stop what we call time with, any type of force or partial. The opposite true the creation of true absence of anything. Is more likely or turning your self into some form of energy with zero mass in our space time, would maybe do it, then traveling at the fastest speed you can to slow your relative flow in time.
The other way to slow your time flow if my theory is even half way correct is take on a massive amount of mass so blackholes are attempts to time travel. Lol. They act as anchors to what we call times flow. The bigger the anchors the longer the universe will last. It’s them that are stretching out what we call time.

I assume the thread owner is writing a sci-fi book?
A machine that puts your body into and out of a black hole or can reduce your mass to zero, and throw your imprint into the instant of time ie the nothing that was before the universe at lets your imprint pop out any when.

 

[David-J-Franks]

Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it. Every event in the Universe happens in sequence. That sequence IS time. Time is defined by its measurement, and the fact that it can be measured proves its existence. Time is a scalar quantity. Without including time, it is not possible to describe things such as acceleration, force, and inertia.

“Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it. Every event in the Universe happens in sequence. That sequence IS time. Time is defined by its measurement, and the fact that it can be measured proves its existence.”

You said most of that in post No.12. If you're just going to repeat that, all I can do is repeat my reply to it, as in post No.14, and repeat my original statement that “there's no such thing as time, there's only movement”. The only way you can convince me otherwise, is to pick apart sentence by sentence the points I made in that reply.

My only addition is:-

“That sequence IS time.”

I suggest - 'That sequence IS due to matter bumping into and interacting with itself in accordance with cause and effect' It's just movement. It happens without the need for you to measure it or give it the name of time. The sequence just 'was', it existed in its own right.

“Time is defined by its measurement, and the fact that it can be measured proves its existence.”

I've already said, in post No.14, clocks don't measure anything, so how are you measuring time?. Your 'time' can't be measured, so you can't prove it's existence that way.

In your post No.12 you said

“We measure that sequence, and the relative frequency and spacing of events, with time.”

In this post, you say

“That sequence IS time.”

It looks to me like your measuring the sequence with itself?

The only new thing you've added here is -

“Without including time, it is not possible to describe things such as acceleration, force, and inertia.”

I don't find this a problem. I'll reply later when I've put it into words.

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

I have been playing with the idea of time, and that of speed, gravity, and uncertainties, it’s effect on light and how light travels at what we see as the speed of light, with next to know energy ie say a battery torch.

While I like the idea of there being no time, or fixed rate of flow of time. I was looking at it from lights point of view, light moves in what we call time, so for me if there is a thing that we are measuring and calling it time, it’s faster than light. Because at max speed of the flow of time everything would appear to stand still.
To it, it instantly arrived at the end of time but we are slow to catch up, what that end is I have no clue.
My guess is the absence of anything in the universe is the thing that sets the normal flow rate of time everything else, is slower based on mass, energy, and quantum uncertainty. The rate everything move in what we call time is then relative to that instant,


Getting to the asked question.
While I have know actual clue if any of that is remotely right, I don’t think you can stop what we call time with, any type of force or partial. The opposite true the creation of true absence of anything. Is more likely or turning your self into some form of energy with zero mass in our space time, would maybe do it, then traveling at the fastest speed you can to slow your relative flow in time.
The other way to slow your time flow if my theory is even half way correct is take on a massive amount of mass so blackholes are attempts to time travel. Lol. They act as anchors to what we call times flow. The bigger the anchors the longer the universe will last. It’s them that are stretching out what we call time.

I assume the thread owner is writing a sci-fi book?
A machine that puts your body into and out of a black hole or can reduce your mass to zero, and throw your imprint into the instant of time ie the nothing that was before the universe at lets your imprint pop out any when.

The black hole thinking was what got me started thinking about time.

I hated the math involved with singularities and physics breaking down in a black hole.

I thought could a black hole be a simple thing with no need for an exotic non physics place.
Just a simple place that has lost it's time and it's space and it's quantum activity.
Time in a black hole would go on forever or at least 1 second might take 100 billion years to pass. Or the inability of a black hole to have any area left in space might mean a black hole is a place that experience no time and the reason it can't continue to shrink further.

Both speed and intense gravity are trying to say something about the nature of the universe and that time is probably part of that equation.

Light traveling at the speed it does i think your correct it is something to do with time and space.
One or the other or both won't allow that speed to be any faster.
Maybe it's space that only allows the duality of light the particle or maybe it's simply the same speed as quantum fluctuation happens and the wave can go no faster.

I think if we could create a bubble in space that is a true void no time properties and nasty L speed laws would exist.
Sounds very much like a warp drive to me

 

[Mental Avenger]

You said most of that in post No.12. If you're just going to repeat that, all I can do is repeat my reply to it, as in post No.14, and repeat my original statement etc., etc., etc.

No need for you to be snarky. Long ago, I learned that it is pointless to attempt to change the minds of those with diametrically opposed belief systems in internet discussions. The best that can be done is to counter misinformation and provide reasonable arguments for those readers who may be undecided and/or badly misinformed. I post for those silent onlookers and open minded people who have not yet made up their minds on a subject.

I have neither the inclination nor the obligation to convince anyone of anything. I present the information, and it is up to the reader to agree or disagree, accept or reject, verify or refute, acknowledge or ignore it. I really don't care.

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

No need for you to be snarky. Long ago, I learned that it is pointless to attempt to change the minds of those with diametrically opposed belief systems in internet discussions. The best that can be done is to counter misinformation and provide reasonable arguments for those readers who may be undecided and/or badly misinformed. I post for those silent onlookers and open minded people who have not yet made up their minds on a subject.

I have neither the inclination nor the obligation to convince anyone of anything. I present the information, and it is up to the reader to agree or disagree, accept or reject, verify or refute, acknowledge or ignore it. I really don't care.

I totally agree with the say whatever you think and allow the math to kill or support an idea.
I think we are all misinformed and 100 years from now it's sure to be looked back upon as quaint.
100 years beyond that same thing.

Big trouble now is educated minds locked into camps with little flexibility for new ideas.

Only real thing we can be 100% sure about our universe is our best thoughts will be at best quite a bit wrong and mostly 100% wrong.

 

[David-J-Franks]

Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it. Every event in the Universe happens in sequence. That sequence IS time. Time is defined by its measurement, and the fact that it can be measured proves its existence. Time is a scalar quantity. Without including time, it is not possible to describe things such as acceleration, force, and inertia.

This is where "snarky condescending remarks are contrary to civil discussion" began. You are talking down to me here with the sentence "Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it." That was patronising and condescending. It's that which put me in attack mode, but even then I was only interested in attacking your ideas, not you.

In post28 of this thread, I said: "The only way you can convince me otherwise, is to pick apart sentence by sentence the points I made in that reply." I can see with hindsight that seems a little aggressive. It wasn't meant to be. I was hoping you would try and pick apart my arguments and was disappointed when you didn't. It is indeed one of my main reasons for these discussions, to put my ideas up for scrutiny. Anyway, I'm glad to see you've started picking at them again in the other thread, albeit in an aggressive manner.

 

[Mental Avenger]

This is where "snarky condescending remarks are contrary to civil discussion" began. You are talking down to me….

Sure, whatever you say.


"Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it."

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

Sure, whatever you say.


"Sorry to be the one to disillusion you, but time exists. There is nothing you can do about it."

Proof? Send us a theory that makes time a thing of substance and not an artifact of something else

 

[Mental Avenger]

I laugh when non-mainstream people use Mainstream Theories to support their non-Mainstream ideas. The irony seems to be lost on them.

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

I laugh when non-mainstream people use Mainstream Theories to support their non-Mainstream ideas. The irony seems to be lost on them.

If a group of idiots follow an idiot then mainstream is the way to go.
Mainstream is wrong about everything, will be wrong in 50 years and 500 years.
Just a fact you should know and the only thing that is 100% accurate.

As Einstein said math will get you from point A to B, but imagination will solve the universe

 

[Mental Avenger]

I just hate the condescending attitude of someone who believes what they were taught was the reality of everything.

You are wrong. I never said, suggested, insinuate, nor alluded to such a belief. The fact that you made that accusation indicates a deficiency in your reading comprehension, or outright dishonesty. I often employ conditional adjectives to indicate the speculative nature of a given comment or suggestion.

By usual definition in science, mainstream refers to ideas or theories that are regarded as the dominant trend, widely accepted, or most often cited. It does not mean, nor is it intended to mean, reality or proof. Non-mainstream would be the opposite. Therefore, the comment I made regarding non-mainstream people use Mainstream Theories to support their non-Mainstream ideas is quite accurate and applicable to many of comments in those threads by members like you.

It shows a closed mind with no ability to learn and no flexibility to adapt to a new idea unless a bunch of others say it is so.

On the contrary, some of my comments actually showcase my imagination and penchant for considering new and radically different possibilities.

 

[voidpotentialenergy]

It will be wrong, just a fact that the best ideas of today will be wrong.
We simply don't know enough to take more than an educated guess at anything.

Most of those guesses will be 100% wrong.
The remaining guesses will be right until they are 100% wrong.

Look back at physics 50 years ago.
In 50 years will the ideas of today be any more correct?

All I'm saying is don't believe what any camp says, keep an open mind and question even the most dearly held beliefs.

 

[sward]

Hi folks, a reminder to stay on topic and keep things civil in this thread. There is some excellent discussion happening here, lets keep things scientific and examine the thoughts originally put forward. To keep discussion on topic, we've removed some posts from this thread.

 

[Truthseeker007]

Is there any type of force or particle scattered about the universe that would cause time to stop in that area? Thank

Don't time stop at the Bermuda Triangle also?

 

[Truthseeker007]

I totally agree with the say whatever you think and allow the math to kill or support an idea.
I think we are all misinformed and 100 years from now it's sure to be looked back upon as quaint.
100 years beyond that same thing.

Big trouble now is educated minds locked into camps with little flexibility for new ideas.

Only real thing we can be 100% sure about our universe is our best thoughts will be at best quite a bit wrong and mostly 100% wrong.

I totally agree. And it wasn't even that long ago when some said it was impossible for humans to fly. I feel nothing is really impossible. The only thing that is impossible is what we believe to be impossible. I do fully believe that thought creates reality.

It does seem like mainstream science had become a religion in itself. And like you said it has locked itself into this camp with no flexibility or thought of their own.

 

[Truthseeker007]

It will be wrong, just a fact that the best ideas of today will be wrong.
We simply don't know enough to take more than an educated guess at anything.

Most of those guesses will be 100% wrong.
The remaining guesses will be right until they are 100% wrong.

Look back at physics 50 years ago.
In 50 years will the ideas of today be any more correct?

All I'm saying is don't believe what any camp says, keep an open mind and question even the most dearly held beliefs.

I would like to mention though that the great Nicola Tesla was quite ahead of his time. They don't want to use his free energy ideas though because their is no way to make money on that. So here we are still using gas powered vehicles because of greed when we all could already be having free energy.