CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.
Time is nothing more than movement - it is an illusion
Think about it - when you move through time it is just things moving - a football match is just how the ball moves around the moving players. Take a snapshop of time and let things run for 5 minutes. If you could put everything back into that position again then you would have 5 minutes ago. See time does not exist - it is just a representation of how one object or particle is placed against another
There is nothing in time - forget the scientists - go with your gut feeling - everyong tries to overcomplicate things. time travel will never happen simply because time is just movement and nothing else
Time slows down at very fast speeds and when next to very large objects.
Almost undetectable on earth, but just spending a few hours on a plane is enough to actually "time travel" hundreds and hundreds of a second into the future.
Apparently your gut is not the best measure of fact. Perhaps you should try, I don't know, looking stuff up instead.
Thankfully, most people don't share this ideology. Because if we forgot scientists, our life expectancy would be around half of what it is, we wouldn't have most medicine, or cell phones, or any transportation aside from feet and horses. AND you wouldn't be able to post this argument....although that last one might be fore the best.
everyong tries to overcomplicate things.
Life isn't simple just because you are. Some people actually ENJOY figuring out how things work. These people have a higher chance of making life better for all of us, including people like you who cling to the apron strings of advancement while spitting in the face of intellectuals.
time travel will never happen simply because time is just movement and nothing else
Do you realize what you just said? "time TRAVEL"...."just movement"...Travel IS movement, you ignoramus! If it won't happen, it is because time can flow only in one specific direction. But even that concept isn't unanimously accepted.
As expected you cant argue this with any degree of logic so you resort to insults by calling me an ignoramus. What a shame - you are really missing the point. Every time one object moves with respect to another object you have time - i.e that is movement. - if a scambled egg were to suddenly unscrable itself in a isolated universe then in a way the egg has gone back in time - why dont you try to relax and think about things and understand
Actually he was both disproving your point and insulting you. Those things are not mutually exclusive--they often even go hand-in-hand.
And you are changing the definition of time to justify your position, which is provably incorrect.
You are saying that which happens, in this case scrambling eggs, is the cause of time, ie in an isolated universe whereby the eggs unscramble that would be time going backwards, etc etc.
That's not what time is though. Time is a measurement of, motion for instance as you put it, or anything really.
But,
1. Time is affected by outside forces. We can observe this literally through speed and massive objects effect on time. For instance nuclear clocks on satelites orbiting the earth need to be reset regularly (even though they are perfectly accurate) because the speed of satelites causes time to slow for these clocks.
2. It is self-defined, because it is the term we give an observed phenomenon. It can also be relatively and independantly verified. That is if you lock two people in pitch black boxes on the other side of the world from one another for about 1 minute each will have the approximate feeling of "1 minute" passing whilst in the box despite being on the other side of the world and the box being pitch black.
Something that is self-defined, as in we define it, and which also can measurably vary, is not an illusion. If time were an illusion, the two scenarios above would go as follows.
1. We would need to reset nuclear clocks on satelites orbiting earth, but instead of always being precisely the same amount of time off, sometimes they would be fast, sometimes slow, sometimes years off, sometimes right on time. This is not the case though, they are consistantly off by the same, always behind because time has slowed.
2. People would always have wildly different concepts of time, as opposed to relatively similar recounts of time passing. One person in a box for a minute would feel as if they had been there for years, their hair would have grown out, their nails would be long and raggety. While another would think it were a mere blink of an eye. This also is not the case. Two people will have the approximate (though imperfect) concept of time passing.
These things prove beyond any doubt that you don't know what you're talking about, and certainly merit the term "ignoramus".
Every time one object moves with respect to another object you have time - i.e that is movement.
That isn't quite what time is though. The "unilateral entropy" deffintion mentioned on the other side is a bit more accurate, though somewhat simplified.
The theory of relativity helps establish that time is, in fact, a thing. There are two well known ways to change the relative flow of time around an object: with gravity and with speed. If you take two extremly accurate clocks, and perfectly synchronize them, then keep one stationary in a building and put another one on a supersonic jet, they will de-synch a little from each other because the one on the jet is actually traveling through time at a different speed. If time was purely measurement, this wouldn't happen. Other forms of measurement would be identical wherever you put them.
if a scambled egg were to suddenly unscrable itself in a isolated universe then in a way the egg has gone back in time
Nope. The individual molecules within the egg will still age, expressing decay and increased entropy. The so-called arrow of time, the constant increase in entropy of the original particles, will still be ongoing no matter what you do to the particles themselves.
why dont you try to relax and think about things and understand
yeah probably we could walk on water somehow and when we do the church will go berserk! he knows what einstein was talking about because obviously einstein explained himself sometime.
After reading three biographies about Einstein, I don't know what this was in reference to. It is highly unlikely that anybody knows. To say one knows the thoughts of anybody is absurd.
"There is only one man that knows me, even he does not." Georg Hegel
Where is the evidence that the quote was used for anything in particular. Most quotes are used as generalities, until someone proves otherwise. I used it as blanket quote for all of reality, and until evidence proves otherwise it stands.
it clearly states a basic idea of the theory of relativity. that is what einstein is known for right? not to mention einstein was a strong believer in time making an argument against time and using him flawed
Einsteins theory of relativity was actually discovered by a mathematician, Einstein was given credit for it because the other guy couldn't apply it to physics.
As to what Einstein is really famous for, being a pain in the ass to Niels Bohr. Bohr could work years on a theory and in seconds Einstein could find a flaw in it. Something else that aided in his popularity is the fact that he was a comical fellow. Known to be a smart ass and loved to play the part of the absent minded professor that the media deemed him as.
i don't care who first started the theory of relativity. the point is it was a big part in einsteins life and when he made a quote about it you didn't recognize it. then you made a remark about iamdavidh being an atheist when that shouldn't matter to this debate.
It's not an atheist that knows the thoughts of people, it's just another person who cared enough to read more about Einstein than the little quotes you find under motivational posters.
Scientists seem to have only created something to help us understand this concept.
But really, are all scientific theories really that? Or has it got nothing to do with science and is just part of nature? The aborigines created Dreamtime stories, have scientists just created science? This is all the matter of what you believe...
Scientists seem to have only created something to help us understand this concept.
Ummm, sort of...except that this is pure observation, not creation. The conversion of observed data to language DOES help us understand, but it isn't a creation so much as a translation.
But really, are all scientific theories really that?
Really what?
Or has it got nothing to do with science and is just part of nature?
Science is the study of nature.
The aborigines created Dreamtime stories, have scientists just created science?
The Dreamtime stories and other spiritual artifacts tend to fill in blanks by supposing fanciful answers to questions, without real evidence or acute observation. Science may involve speculation, but for it to gain and retain credence within the scientific community, it should be supported by empirical data as soon as possible.
This is all the matter of what you believe...
that's the thing, science is intended to circumvent belief as much as humans are able. Things don't become scientific observations, theories, etc. without conforming to the possible and to logical inquiry and (often), experimentation. When you are a scientist, belief plays no role in your reports. You just state what you observed as accurately and subjectively as possible.
Wasn't much to say on this one. You said you didn't understand Bohemian's post, and dismissed it for that reason. My response was a pretty clear indication of my feelings on that approach.
I was a lot more harsh and prickish than I normally try to be, and for that I apologize.
But I see willful ignorance as being one of the worst attitudes a person can have. I am getting tired of suffering fools lightly.
Nope, I'm pretty confident time exists. Time is simply a non spatial continuum in which different events occur in an irreversible order. It's as old as the Big Bang, existed before us, single celled organisms, even complex baryonic structures.
Nice use of scientific words but does not really help. The fact is time is something way beyond our control. Just think about it however - if you could put every single molecure and atom back exactly to the roman times - yes we would have the roman times - i guess what is really good about this is that maybe we could live forever if we could just control the motion of things better
Nice use of scientific words but does not really help.
Well thank you for the compliment, but I do believe it is helpful. It's a basic definition of time, the article Bohemian provided was much more useful, but I see how it could confuse the layman. Nonetheless, I will try to simplify my definition so all can understand. Basically, there are 4 dimensions that we currently know of: 3 of space, and one of time. Space contains time, much like a bucket. Time exists as a result of causality, that is to say, it exists because events happen in space. Time gives these events order, which is irreversible.
So with that definition, it is clear that time does exist, as a result of things happening in space.
if you could put every single molecure and atom back exactly to the roman times - yes we would have the roman times
But what you're suggesting is absolutely impossible. Are you aware of the arrow of time, the reason why many don't believe time travel is possible? I can't be bothered to explain it now, but just look it up. The atoms required have long since been transferred to some other structure.
Using arguments that are absolutely impossible and not applicable to the current universe do not help your case. Please stay relevant and within the laws of physics for now.
I think you may be a little confused between time and the measurement of time. One could definitely argue that the measurement of time is an illusion of sorts. But not time itself.
sorry have to disagree - your problem is that you are refuting my argument by stating that it is impossible. While highly improbable the fact is that in an infinite universe with infinite time on our hand the very particles that make up this universe could one day rearrange themselves to exactly how they were in Roman times - There you go we have time travel of a sorts but all it is at the end of the day is movement
fact is that in an infinite universe with infinite time on our hand
The universe is almost definitely not infinite. Look up Steady State theory, then look up CMB, then tell me how likely an infinite universe is. Even if the universe was infinite, we would not have infinite time on our hands. Humanity would still die out, regardless of how much time we have.
could one day rearrange themselves to exactly how they were in Roman times
I suppose in theory, it is possible. But only in the same way that the flying spaghetti monster, in theory, is possible. There are not enough atoms in the universe to express a number large enough for the odds of that happening to one. Even by some ridiculous fluke, if that happened, you would NOT have the Roman times. You would have a recreation of Roman times.
but why would it be a recreation - that is meaningless - it would be how it was - how it is - it would simply be - you assumption that it would be a recreation is assuming that there is some absolute reference point which I am suggesting may not be there
I'm sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Nonetheless, I will try to analyse it.
but why would it be a recreation - that is meaningless - it would be how it was
No it wouldn't. Think of it like this: if I eat a Big Mac, does that mean that when I next eat a Big Mac, I become a time traveler? No! What I'm eating is a recreation of the original Big Mac.
some absolute reference point
I don't think you're entirely sure what you're referring to here. Please explain in more detail.
Diverse thinkers from ancient times have said and believed that time is an illusion. But I personally believe and think that time is not only real but it is actually the only aspect of reality that we experience directly.
The linear flow of time might be an illusion. Time might not be a line at all (maybe a mesh intertwined with space as both have separation abilities :) ) . So yes, the passing of time is an illusion. But time is real. If it wasn't everything would be 'now'. The fact that you are reading this word now and this word now means you are in fact at two different 'time places'. Given the current reality and the perceptive capacity of our brain, time is real.
have you ever been excited for something happening the next day and lied in bed for hours thinking about it hoping it would happen NOW. no matter what, you had to wait the hours until the event happened. time holds us back. i do however think time travel can never be a reality. i think if we weren't locked in time we could travel through it. could be wrong tho. i try to research physics since i want to be a theoretical physicist but wikipedia is hard to understand!